My daily Bible reading includes a short section from Psalms each day. Just recently Psalm 19 was the reading. The first six verses were on one day, followed by the end of the Psalm the next. For some reason, I noticed their juxtaposition. This is not “astounding” but it is a curious conjunction. Let me preview it. Verse 1:
The heavens are telling of the glory of God; And their expanse is declaring the work of His hands.
It goes on to tell how the creation praises God. It continues with an explanation that the entire earth is suffused in this knowledge (v. 1-4) and then uses the sun to picture the knowledge being as ubiquitous as the light. (V. 5-6) This is a wonderful explanation of how the knowledge of God permeates the world.
Then verse 7 leads into the next thought.
The law of the Lord is perfect, restoring the soul; The testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple.
Notice the parallel of creation declaring God’s glory and the law of the Lord declaring the beauty and perfection of God’s communications. Law, testimony, precepts, commandment, fear, and judgments are coupled to enhance the experience of God. Imagine the Supreme Creator who restores the soul, makes the simple wise, gives rejoicing to the heart, enlightening the eyes, and lasting forever. On top of all of that the laws are true and righteous.
(Insert: This almost appears to be a preview of Psalm 119 which has over 175 references to God’s laws and their perfection. “O how love I thy law! it is my meditation all the day.” (119:97) This is repeated three more times. (119:113, 163, 165) Psalm 19 fits right in here.)
Back to the topic. They, the laws, are more valuable than gold and sweeter than honey. (V. 10) Then verses 11-13 outline how they intersect with our lives, with a final result of being kept from sins and being forgiven. Is it any wonder that the final phrase is a prayer in which we revere and worship such a great God.
Let the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart Be acceptable in Your sight, O Lord, my rock and my Redeemer.
Let the words just refresh your soul. Ps 19
The heavens are telling of the glory of God; And their expanse is declaring the work of His hands. 2 Day to day pours forth speech, And night to night reveals knowledge. 3 There is no speech, nor are there words; (where) Their voice is not heard. 4 Their line has gone out through all the earth, And their utterances to the end of the world. In them He has placed a tent for the sun, 5 Which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber; It rejoices as a strong man to run his course. 6 Its rising is from one end of the heavens, And its circuit to the other end of them; And there is nothing hidden from its heat.
7 The law of the Lord is perfect, restoring the soul; The testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple. 8 The precepts of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart; The commandment of the Lord is pure, enlightening the eyes. 9 The fear of the Lord is clean, enduring forever; The judgments of the Lord are true; they are righteous altogether.
10 They are more desirable than gold, yes, than much fine gold; Sweeter also than honey and the drippings of the honeycomb. 11 Moreover, by them Your servant is warned; In keeping them there is great reward. 12 Who can discern his errors? Acquit me of hidden faults. 13 Also keep back Your servant from presumptuous sins; Let them not rule over me; Then I will be blameless, And I shall be acquitted of great transgression.
14 Let the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart Be acceptable in Your sight, O Lord, my rock and my Redeemer.
Amen.
Friday, February 16, 2018
Thursday, February 15, 2018
Apologetics 301
Apologetics 101 consists of providing Bible answers to questions, especially ones that claim that there is no Scriptural proof or evidence on a topic. Apologetics 201 involves refuting claims that spuriously quote Scripture as a basis for a deviant theological position. This includes citations of Bible verses taken out of context and incorrectly applied to issues.
Apologetics 301 is involved when the proponents of error or heresy refuse to accept any Scripture or are so committed to incorrect interpretations that they are essentially denying or dismissing any controverting citations. In this situation, using Bible verses to counter their argument is akin to appealing to a dictionary to explain relativity. It certainly has the proper language to explain it, but not until the words are sequenced in proper order.
An example of the last situation can be illustrated by an examination of the blog that I posted on January 28. (Sunday, January 28, 2018 Elusive Truth http://reflectionsfromjim.blogspot.com/2018/01/elusive-truth.html) I do not normally link to articles that contain egregious error, but in this instance I will do so, in lieu of reproducing the entirety of the article here. (https://www.tennessean.com/story/opinion/2018/01/23/christians-can-agree-disagree-key-issues/105536568/)
This editorial purports to explain and justify the adoption of a position of acceptance of homosexuality and same sex marriage by the PC(USA). This opinion was written by a clergyman of this denomination. As I explained in my response, I did not quote a single Scripture, though the temptation to do so was overwhelming. (101 and 201) But, although the arguments, explicitly raised and implied, were not new, nor compelling, it seemed that any appeal to correct doctrine would be futile. It would not carry any probative force, for the author anyway, because he is so completely committed to his aberrant position.
I am unaware of his personal experience, but that is irrelevant to the discussion. Scripture that is counter to “his” interpretation or translation would be dismissed or ignored. So the key to a refutation is to probe the basic, fundamental position. There is an unstated, but accepted presupposition to which an effective response must appeal. This will not always convince the party of their error, but that is the only way to undermine the structure of their reasoning.
In this instance, I appealed to his understanding of and appreciation for the attributes of God. God is immutable. He does not change.* In order for the obvious statements in the Old Testament which condemn homosexual activities to be condoned or even approved in the New Testament would involve a change of mind on the part of God. This change would be a fundamental violation of His nature which would immediately reveal Him as an impostor and not God at all.
An admitted atheist or a practical atheist would not be convinced by this tactic. If there is not really a God, then proving that He does not exist would not be counter to his belief system. But a theist would have to cope with a complete world view upheaval in order to accept this premise. Note that the acceptance or rejection of the existence of God does not affect the truth, but it does expose the fundamental presupposition from which a person argues. The pastor may not overtly accept the argument, but the germ of an idea has been planted.
There are three reasons for becoming involved in such controversies. First, an interested third party may see it and be moved toward belief in Christ. Second, as noted above, the “raw materials” for conversion or correction have been introduced into the thinking process of the protagonist. And third, even if no change occurs, I am a firm believer in the Holy Spirit. He is able to take the ideas, even ones which were rejected, and mold them into a persuasive pressure to move the erring one toward the light.
I do not save nor convince people. My purpose is to present the truth and let the Holy Spirit weave it into their souls. As Paul said in 1 Corinthians 3:6. One sows, another waters, but God gives the increase.
Don’t grow tired or give up in fighting the good fight.
* Other Verses
Psalm 55:19 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm+55:19&version=NASB)
Malachi 3:6 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Malachi+3:6&version=NASB)
Hebrews 7:21 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews+7:21&version=NASB)
Apologetics 301 is involved when the proponents of error or heresy refuse to accept any Scripture or are so committed to incorrect interpretations that they are essentially denying or dismissing any controverting citations. In this situation, using Bible verses to counter their argument is akin to appealing to a dictionary to explain relativity. It certainly has the proper language to explain it, but not until the words are sequenced in proper order.
An example of the last situation can be illustrated by an examination of the blog that I posted on January 28. (Sunday, January 28, 2018 Elusive Truth http://reflectionsfromjim.blogspot.com/2018/01/elusive-truth.html) I do not normally link to articles that contain egregious error, but in this instance I will do so, in lieu of reproducing the entirety of the article here. (https://www.tennessean.com/story/opinion/2018/01/23/christians-can-agree-disagree-key-issues/105536568/)
This editorial purports to explain and justify the adoption of a position of acceptance of homosexuality and same sex marriage by the PC(USA). This opinion was written by a clergyman of this denomination. As I explained in my response, I did not quote a single Scripture, though the temptation to do so was overwhelming. (101 and 201) But, although the arguments, explicitly raised and implied, were not new, nor compelling, it seemed that any appeal to correct doctrine would be futile. It would not carry any probative force, for the author anyway, because he is so completely committed to his aberrant position.
I am unaware of his personal experience, but that is irrelevant to the discussion. Scripture that is counter to “his” interpretation or translation would be dismissed or ignored. So the key to a refutation is to probe the basic, fundamental position. There is an unstated, but accepted presupposition to which an effective response must appeal. This will not always convince the party of their error, but that is the only way to undermine the structure of their reasoning.
In this instance, I appealed to his understanding of and appreciation for the attributes of God. God is immutable. He does not change.* In order for the obvious statements in the Old Testament which condemn homosexual activities to be condoned or even approved in the New Testament would involve a change of mind on the part of God. This change would be a fundamental violation of His nature which would immediately reveal Him as an impostor and not God at all.
An admitted atheist or a practical atheist would not be convinced by this tactic. If there is not really a God, then proving that He does not exist would not be counter to his belief system. But a theist would have to cope with a complete world view upheaval in order to accept this premise. Note that the acceptance or rejection of the existence of God does not affect the truth, but it does expose the fundamental presupposition from which a person argues. The pastor may not overtly accept the argument, but the germ of an idea has been planted.
There are three reasons for becoming involved in such controversies. First, an interested third party may see it and be moved toward belief in Christ. Second, as noted above, the “raw materials” for conversion or correction have been introduced into the thinking process of the protagonist. And third, even if no change occurs, I am a firm believer in the Holy Spirit. He is able to take the ideas, even ones which were rejected, and mold them into a persuasive pressure to move the erring one toward the light.
I do not save nor convince people. My purpose is to present the truth and let the Holy Spirit weave it into their souls. As Paul said in 1 Corinthians 3:6. One sows, another waters, but God gives the increase.
Don’t grow tired or give up in fighting the good fight.
* Other Verses
Psalm 55:19 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm+55:19&version=NASB)
Malachi 3:6 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Malachi+3:6&version=NASB)
Hebrews 7:21 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews+7:21&version=NASB)
Wednesday, February 14, 2018
With No Apologies to the Cocoon
In Ruminations on a Funeral we explored 1 Corinthians 15:50-58. Now we want to take a little side trail (or rabbit trail) and think about this a little differently and in some different contexts.
1 Corinthians 15:53 describes what happens both now, at death, and in the future when Jesus will come back and get “those who remain.” (1 Thessalonians 4:15)
For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.
As we stand before an open coffin, we view the first step in this process. Here are more details.
In order for us to put on incorruption, we must put off corruption. And to put on immortality, we have to give up mortality. That is the picture in the coffin. I have noticed that some viewers reach out and touch the body, like a last caress. Others, myself included, do not. I know that it will not matter to Grandad, or whoever, and I do not need to be reminded that “he” is not there. He is gone. (I will use the generic personal, Grandad.)
And there is some sorrow involved. This “cutting” the ties of earth includes our personal attachments to Grandad. He has put off the mortal and corruptible. And he has a much better body waiting. Both the living and the dead, (those who sleep) will all be changed when the Lord comes back. (1 Corinthians 15:51) But those who have gone on before have severed ties with “those who remain.” There is nothing wrong with mourning this loss.
Jesus, in fact mourned Lazarus in John 11. I do not think that Jesus was mourning because Lazarus had died, because He would raise His friend from the dead in a couple of minutes. Jesus mourned that Lazarus, and all of mankind, had to suffer such a separation from the body and family. This was not how creation was to end. (We will not discuss the dichotomy of what could have been versus what was, or God’s how sovereignty is involved in all of this.) Man chose to sever the relationship with God by disobeying and this is the inevitable consequence. So all must die, because of sin. That is a “tear worthy” thought.
It hurts to lose a loved one. That is not debatable nor should it be denied or condemned. We recognize that in order for change to occur, some things have to change. Corruptible does not mix with incorruptible. Mortal does not coexist with immortality. We give up the lesser, in exchange for the greater.
An illustration occurred to me. A caterpillar spins a cocoon about its worm body and undergoes a metamorphosis. The cocoon is a snug, supporting structure, but in order to emerge as a butterfly the former worm has to “cut a few strings.” If the cocoon retains its integrity, the butterfly will die.
Our lives here are like that, both in death, and even in events of our lives. We have to cut some strings to leave, what Shakespear called, “this mortal coil,” and move on to our new home. Those who are left suffer bereavement from separation. Other events in our lives often require that we cut some ties or strings to existing people, places, and things.
And like our butterfly, and Grandad, what lies beyond far exceeds what is left behind. Does the butterfly mourn for its decimated cocoon? It fulfilled a crucial role in its development, but once it is airborne, I doubt that its erstwhile home is mourned or even remembered. We are a “little” higher order than our Lepidoptera friend, but the cutting of strings is just as critical in our development as it was to him. Our memories can retain the connections, but a physical retention would cripple us just as surely as some uncut strands of the cocoon would doom the butterfly.
Changing circumstances usually call for a “cutting” of former ties in order to progress to another, often higher plane. With the promise of God sustaining us, we revel in the opportunity to watch Him “weave” a new home for us in the execution of His perfect will.
I would posit the proposition that the butterfly does not regret his “loss.” Speaking anthropomorphically, he never gives it a second thought. He engaged the change, in fact participated in it, and enthusiastically flew into the future. Grandad did the same. So can we as we follow the Lord’s leading. With, and in, this confidence, we face the future.
Bid the cocoon, “Goodbye.”
1 Corinthians 15:53 describes what happens both now, at death, and in the future when Jesus will come back and get “those who remain.” (1 Thessalonians 4:15)
For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.
As we stand before an open coffin, we view the first step in this process. Here are more details.
In order for us to put on incorruption, we must put off corruption. And to put on immortality, we have to give up mortality. That is the picture in the coffin. I have noticed that some viewers reach out and touch the body, like a last caress. Others, myself included, do not. I know that it will not matter to Grandad, or whoever, and I do not need to be reminded that “he” is not there. He is gone. (I will use the generic personal, Grandad.)
And there is some sorrow involved. This “cutting” the ties of earth includes our personal attachments to Grandad. He has put off the mortal and corruptible. And he has a much better body waiting. Both the living and the dead, (those who sleep) will all be changed when the Lord comes back. (1 Corinthians 15:51) But those who have gone on before have severed ties with “those who remain.” There is nothing wrong with mourning this loss.
Jesus, in fact mourned Lazarus in John 11. I do not think that Jesus was mourning because Lazarus had died, because He would raise His friend from the dead in a couple of minutes. Jesus mourned that Lazarus, and all of mankind, had to suffer such a separation from the body and family. This was not how creation was to end. (We will not discuss the dichotomy of what could have been versus what was, or God’s how sovereignty is involved in all of this.) Man chose to sever the relationship with God by disobeying and this is the inevitable consequence. So all must die, because of sin. That is a “tear worthy” thought.
It hurts to lose a loved one. That is not debatable nor should it be denied or condemned. We recognize that in order for change to occur, some things have to change. Corruptible does not mix with incorruptible. Mortal does not coexist with immortality. We give up the lesser, in exchange for the greater.
An illustration occurred to me. A caterpillar spins a cocoon about its worm body and undergoes a metamorphosis. The cocoon is a snug, supporting structure, but in order to emerge as a butterfly the former worm has to “cut a few strings.” If the cocoon retains its integrity, the butterfly will die.
Our lives here are like that, both in death, and even in events of our lives. We have to cut some strings to leave, what Shakespear called, “this mortal coil,” and move on to our new home. Those who are left suffer bereavement from separation. Other events in our lives often require that we cut some ties or strings to existing people, places, and things.
And like our butterfly, and Grandad, what lies beyond far exceeds what is left behind. Does the butterfly mourn for its decimated cocoon? It fulfilled a crucial role in its development, but once it is airborne, I doubt that its erstwhile home is mourned or even remembered. We are a “little” higher order than our Lepidoptera friend, but the cutting of strings is just as critical in our development as it was to him. Our memories can retain the connections, but a physical retention would cripple us just as surely as some uncut strands of the cocoon would doom the butterfly.
Changing circumstances usually call for a “cutting” of former ties in order to progress to another, often higher plane. With the promise of God sustaining us, we revel in the opportunity to watch Him “weave” a new home for us in the execution of His perfect will.
I would posit the proposition that the butterfly does not regret his “loss.” Speaking anthropomorphically, he never gives it a second thought. He engaged the change, in fact participated in it, and enthusiastically flew into the future. Grandad did the same. So can we as we follow the Lord’s leading. With, and in, this confidence, we face the future.
Bid the cocoon, “Goodbye.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)