8/15/13

From Gary... Testimony from a thumb...





I spent some time and on the net yesterday, looking for pictures and I came across the "Deography" website. The author takes a lot of pictures from Australia and the above pictures of his family are touching.  When my wife was pregnant, we had no idea what the babies were going to be.  We found out when they came out.  I wish we could have known with an ultrasound, as it would have made the whole thing much more enjoyable, but the technology was just not there at that time.  I noticed the ultrasound showed that the baby was sucking its thumb- something that I am sure it did after birth.  And the wonder of it all struck me- and with it, this verse...

Ecclesiastes, Chapter 11
 5 As you don’t know what is the way of the wind, nor how the bones grow in the womb of her who is with child; even so you don’t know the work of God who does all.

Humm, if the child in the womb and the child outside the womb do the same thing, then aren't they the same creature.  To my mind, using labels to change reality is arrogance in the extreme.  A baby is a baby is a baby. You can't make it something else just by calling it by a different name.  Human beings don't know everything (even though some think they do) and some day those whose arrogance have caused the death of the unborn will have to answer for it!!!  I specifically like this passage from the book of Jeremiah:

Jeremiah, Chapter 1
 1 The words of Jeremiah the son of Hilkiah, of the priests who were in Anathoth in the land of Benjamin:  2 to whom Yahweh’s word came in the days of Josiah the son of Amon, king of Judah, in the thirteenth year of his reign.  3 It came also in the days of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah, king of Judah, to the end of the eleventh year of Zedekiah, the son of Josiah, king of Judah, to the carrying away of Jerusalem captive in the fifth month.  4 Now Yahweh’s word came to me, saying,  5 “Before I formed you in the belly, I knew you. Before you came out of the womb, I sanctified you. I have appointed you a prophet to the nations.”  6 Then I said, “Ah, Lord Yahweh! Behold, I don’t know how to speak; for I am a child.” 

  7  But Yahweh said to me, “Don’t say, ‘I am a child;’ for to whoever I shall send you, you shall go, and whatever I shall command you, you shall speak.  8 Don’t be afraid because of them; for I am with you to deliver you,” says Yahweh.  9 Then Yahweh stretched out his hand, and touched my mouth; and Yahweh said to me, “Behold, I have put my words in your mouth.  10 Behold, I have this day set you over the nations and over the kingdoms, to pluck up and to break down and to destroy and to overthrow, to build and to plant.” 

Both passages show that God is at work in the process of the creation of human life and to interfere with what God has ordained (put in order) is to argue with God.  I don't feel brave enough to do that, do you???  If God had a plan for Jeremiah, isn't it possible that God has a plan for you as well?  And if that is true, then how about that one who appears both in the ultrasound and in its mother's arms?  It is a FACT that everyone who supports abortion was once allowed to come to term and live their lives.  Preventing others from having the same God-given blessing is MURDER!!!  BELIEVE IT, BECAUSE ITS TRUE!!!!

From Jim McGuiggan... Lancing a boil again

Lancing a boil again

This piece is too long and rambling. I'm warning you before you start reading it so you can close it down if you're not up to something like that. Should you decide to go ahead and read it anyway, don't look for "answers"—there aren't any. At least none that are specific enough for a Western culture that has six year olds diagnosed with anorexia or bulimia and making television programmes about them. Six year olds for pity's sake! And don't look for balance either. I'm a bit too fed up for balance right now.
It's about the conflicting cultures (if I can use that word for established patterns) I think I can see when I look around me; all of them warped in one way or another and to some degree or another.
You go through periods, I think, when you look at the world (because you're tired of looking at yourself) and you feel like throwing up. You see the poverty and frustration and despair under injustice and oppression that drives people to the brink of insanity and then beyond. You know that anarchy or a bomb isn't the answer but you'll be damned if you know what the answer is.
I have no criticism for the tragically poor and oppressed at home or in foreign lands! I know they're sinners and I know that the plundered can and do plunder their own sometimes. You don't need to be a top-rank theologian or an especially sensitive observer of life to know that; but I'm going to leave it to God to talk to them about moral responsibility on that day when all wrongs will be righted. Being abused is no excuse for abusing others but savage and sustained abuse distorts the soul and it'll take more than a glib, full-bellied, happy Professor of Religion to convince me that that won't be taken into account when Jesus comes to right all wrongs! So I have nothing to say by way of criticism about these people whose world is all excruciating, ceaseless pain or dull deadening hopelessness. They're the centre of their world because they're in too much pain or too stunned by the world's great wrongs against them to get their eyes off themselves. Maybe God can criticize them but if he does he's the only one that knows enough about it to do it—the rest of us aren't fit for the job!
[And if you think I'm planning a ranting match against God, think again. Me, the paragon of virtue and the epitome of selfless devotion to humanity, I'm going to sit in judgment on the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ? Yeah, right! I've been persuaded by the biblical witness to God, a witness that includes the cross and the promise of the resurrected and glorified Jesus—I've been persuaded by that that we haven't seen the end of this human saga. Glory and joy and righteousness are ahead for all who want them! Yeah, yeah, I know, I'm all virtue and submission, a good little Christian who says the right thing; but it's too easy to dismiss the Story with a sneer and, anyway, I'll take Jesus' view of things before I'll swallow the ceaseless river of bilge poured out for our consumption by the media that either give it to us as they get it or puts their own spin on it. I'll throw in my pathetic little ounces with Jesus Christ rather than go along with this gloomy bleating or the smug sniping of "the wise" non-believer. Puddleglum has the right answer for all that stuff. Jesus likes Puddleglum though he likes Paul's gospel better—Romans 8:18-39.]
Then there are millions of thorough-going hedonists—their single driving thought is partying, more partying and partying after the partying. Whatever it takes! Nothing's to get in the way of having a good time; eating the best or the bizarre, drinking whatever, popping or snorting or injecting the next thing handed to them, travelling to the exotic and the exciting, having sex with whoever whenever however. A few coins in the charity baskets, buying tickets for the latest humanitarian gig, loads of criticism for governments, police, war lords, regular protests against war and then as soon as possible back again to the booze and the swinging centres with the deafening music, occasional moments when serious thought's attempted and as soon as the camera is turned off or the survey's been completed—back to the party! There they are, the happy helpers of the world's parasitic drug barons, the dependable support of the reptilian booze industry all, head and pelvis and no chest! "Look, Ma, made it, centre of the world!"
Then again, we have the millions of religious people who simply drift along thinking they've done God a favour by professing faith in him. They wish him well in his work with the world; they hope he'll be able to make the world a little better and a little safer for them and the ones they care about—well, all right, safer for everybody. They hate to hear the news about the awful things that are happening, they attend church frequently but there's no sense of destiny, no sense of mission in life, no conviction that they've been called by God to bless the world. It's all about them getting forgivness and going to heaven when they die. Faith in God must be taken seriously but it's easy, they tell us, to carry things too far and faith becomes toxic, a destroyer of inner peace and "joy" and everyone knows, surely, that God doesn't want us to be unhappy. No, don't let faith in Jesus Christ get in the way of being content and smiling—if it does, it's been distorted, it isn't true faith. "It must be true beyond debate that God wants us healthy and wealthy and wise. See? And I have a handful of verses that prove it."
Don't ask them to engage in their preferred form of outreach (that's bordering on toxicity) but let the government or some influential group try to take away their rights and they'll work harder than Paul did on his missionary journeys. "If you really believe in our Lord Jesus Christ you'll pass this email on to all your friends…"  "You'll write your MP or Senator…" "You'll boycott this or that…" The wrongs of others galvanise them into sustained effort to shore up any government or form of government that's favourable to their understanding of the Christian faith. But it isn't the Christian faith they're defending at the ballot box—they're defending a government that will take up weapons if need be to see to it that they get their rights and that's what Christianity is all about, don't you know. The "rights seekers" with a form of Christianity—the centre of their world!
Then we have that other group of Christian people who, whatever else they do, gaze long in the mirror, always looking for moral improvement, deeper spirituality; always searching for dialogue partners in that kind of endeavour. Some among them have turned the pursuit of holiness into a personal project, as if they lived in complete isolation from the world God has put them in. Inner transformation rather than outgoing righteousness is the order of the day. Often the seekers are disappointed that others aren't as interested as they are in such a quest; and they know they aren't as interested because they're not as religiously involved as they should be; as the seekers are.
But, sometimes, we get the impression that it isn't God they're looking at because they're always talking about and looking at themselves, can't get their eyes off themselves. For a while we admire them for their earnestness but finally it's pretty much a bore. They not only bore others, I'm guessing that subconsciously they bore themselves witless and only compound the initial problem. Now and then—hopefully not too often—we feel like saying, "For heaven's sake shut up about yourself and tell us something about the profound riches of God and his purposes for us all and just leave it at that!" Centre of the world all in the name of a deeper spirituality! [There are those who see their image in terms of a local church and spend their hours, waking and sleeping, trying to build a great church in their own image and dismissing as insignificant the multitude of tiny churches. Oh well.]
Finally, there are some poor souls that are too high-strung and they're sick, made sick by some sustained abuse and made worse by some brand of toxic religion. Much of what they say is understandable even if we shouldn't approve it or agree with it. In cases like these we can't know where sickness and self-centeredness begin and end, if they do at all. I suspect that some of what they say is what they've got into the habit of saying and if they can work to break the habit, so much the better. But having been so badly abused in one way or another and being subjected to a brand of religion that Jesus hates they're forever looking skyward, waiting for a demanding and irritable God to smash them to pieces.
That they feel ill, fed up, down at the mouth, wishing they were dead—all that I can understand, it isn't hard, and God understands it better than we ever can. Is there a cure for these people, in this life? I for one don't know but if there is, it would surely involve getting their eyes on the God who has shown himself in and as Jesus Christ. If reflecting on the meaning of Jesus Christ doesn't persuade them that they're safe with God and if that can't see them through what chance do the words of anyone else have? Why should they believe the words of the experts if they can't believe God's cross? It won't hurt—will it?—if we give them ladles of rich truth about a God who loves them more than the psychologists or this crazy world in general. It won't hurt—will it?—if we make him the centre of their pain-filled world.


©2004 Jim McGuiggan. All materials are free to be copied and used as long as money is not being made.

Many thanks to brother Ed Healy, for allowing me to post from his website, the adiding word.com.

From Mark Copeland... The Issue Of The Head Covering (1 Corinthians 11:2-16)


                 "THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS"

                The Issue Of The Head Covering (11:2-16)

INTRODUCTION

1. Paul's first epistle to the Corinthians addresses many issues...
   a. Some related to conduct as Christians in Corinthian society
   b. Others pertained to conduct in the assemblies of the saints

2. One issue involved women praying and prophesying with their heads
   uncovered...
   a. Covered in depth in 1Co 11:2-16
   b. About which brethren have different views regarding its
      application today

3. Views concerning "The Head Covering" generally fall into two camps...
   a. It was a custom of the church - intended for universal and
      permanent application
   b. It was a custom of society - and Paul's instructions were limited
      and temporary in application

[I understand that Paul was addressing a custom of society, not a custom
commanded by God for the church.  Here are reasons why I believe
that...]

I. THE ISSUE PERTAINED TO SOCIETAL CUSTOM

   A. PAUL'S COMMENDATION...
      1. Note carefully Paul's commendation as he begins - cf. 1Co 11:2
      2. "Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things
         and keep the traditions just as I delivered them to you."
      3. If the wearing of a veil while praying or prophesying is
         something required of Christian women because it is God's law
         and not a social custom, it seems strange that he would begin
         by praising them for keeping apostolic traditions when in fact
         they were not!
      -- What they failed to keep was not apostolic tradition, but
         something else

   B. PAUL'S COMMENTS...
      1. Note carefully his comments regarding shame - cf. 1Co 11:5-6
      2. "But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head
         uncovered dishonors her head, for that is one and the same as
         if her head were shaved. For if a woman is not covered, let her
         also be shorn. But if it is shameful for a woman to be shorn or
         shaved, let her be covered."
      3. Paul argues on the basis of "if it is shameful..."
         a. If it was not shameful for a woman to have shorn hair (as is
            the case of some cultures), then Paul's argument here does
            not hold up
         b. He is evidently basing his argument on the cultural
            attitudes of their day, not on what is the revelation of
            God's will on the matter
      -- Paul's argument was contingent on what was considered shameful
         in their society

   C. PAUL'S APPEAL...
      1. Note carefully his appeal to propriety - cf. 1Co 11:13
      2. "Judge among yourselves. Is it proper for a woman to pray to
         God with her head uncovered?"
      3. He asks "Is it proper...?"
         a. Again, he reasoned from a sense of cultural propriety, i.e.,
            what was considered proper or shameful in their culture
         b. When it was a matter of divine will, Paul exercised his
            apostolic authority to command, not ask people to "judge
            among yourselves" - cf. with 1Co 1:10
      -- Paul's appeal was based on their own judgment, not God's will

   D. PAUL'S CONCLUSION...
      1. Now consider his conclusion when all was said and done - cf.
         1Co 11:16
      2. "But if anyone seems to be contentious, we have no such custom,
         nor do the churches of God."
      3. Paul sought to reason with them on the basis of such things as
         what is proper according to their culture - 1Co 11:6,13
      4. He also reasoned on the basis of what is certainly in harmony
         with scriptural principles
         a. E.g., the headship of man - 1Co 11:3-5
         b. E.g., the subjection of angels - 1Co 11:10
      5. But in the final analysis, if anyone one wanted to be
         contentious...
         a. It was not an apostolic or church custom
         b. It was a cultural issue in which Paul sought to give his
            advice
      -- Neither the apostles or the church of God had a custom related
         to the issue at hand

[Thus I believe Paul dealt with a social custom important to the
brethren at Corinth, but limited and temporary in application.  This
understanding is further confirmed by answering this question:

   Were the women prophesying and praying with heads uncovered
   in the assembly of the saints, or in public places such as
   the marketplace?

Most assume that the issue involved conduct of women in church.  I
believe the evidence suggests...]

II. THE ISSUE PERTAINED TO CONDUCT IN PUBLIC

   A. PAUL'S QUESTION...
      1. Note carefully Paul's question later on in his discussion - cf.
         1Co 11:13
      2. "Judge among yourselves. Is it proper for a woman to pray to
         God with her head uncovered?"
      3. This question implies a "no" answer; but if they were being
         asked concerning women in a religious assembly in Corinth, they
         would have answered "yes", for apparently Greek women
         worshipped in the temples with heads uncovered (Nicoll, The
         Expositors' Greek Testament)
      4. However, in Corinth it was a shame to take off the veil in
         public places
      -- The answer ("no") to his question makes sense only if he
         referred to conduct in public places like the market place, and
         not to conduct in a religious assembly

   B. PAUL'S REMARKS...
      1. Note carefully Paul's remarks after concluding his discussion
         - cf. 1Co 11:17-18
      2. "Now in giving these instructions I do not praise you, since
         you come together not for the better but for the worse. For
         first of all, when you come together as a church, I hear that
         there are divisions among you, and in part I believe it."
      3. It is at verse 17 that he begins to discuss matters related to
         the assembly, such as their abuse of the Lord's Supper
         (11:17-34) and the exercise of spiritual gifts (chs. 12-14)
      4. Matters discussed beforehand, such as eating meats sacrificed
         to idols (chs. 8-10) and women prophesying with heads uncovered
         (11:2-16), were issues of conduct outside the assemblies of the
         saints
      -- Paul does not begin discussing matters related to the assembly
         until verse 17

   C. PAUL'S COMMANDMENTS...
      1. Note carefully his commandments concerning women in the
         assembly - cf. 1Co 14:34-37
      2. "Let your women keep silent in the churches, for they are not
         permitted to speak; but they are to be submissive, as the law
         also says. And if they want to learn something, let them ask
         their own husbands at home; for it is shameful for women to
         speak in church. Or did the word of God come originally from
         you? Or was it you only that it reached? If anyone thinks
         himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge that
         the things which I write to you are the commandments of the
         Lord."
      3. Since it was shameful for women to speak in church, it is
         unlikely that Paul in chapter 11 was saying that women could
         prophesy in church as long as they wore the veil
      -- Women could not prophesy in the assembly, whether veiled or not

CONCLUSION

1. As I understand the circumstances that prompted Paul's discussion...
   a. Christian women were taking their veils off in public places to
      pray and prophesy
   b. Perhaps those with the gift of prophesy felt they were free to
      disregard societal norms
   c. While not considered shameful in Corinthian society to do so in a
      religious assembly, it was scandalous for a woman to remove the
      veil in public places like the market place

2. The circumstances in Corinth appear to have been similar to those in
   some Muslim countries...
   a. Where Muslim women will veil their faces when they walk in public
   b. But often remove the veils when they enter a private home, or a
      store that caters to women

3. If my understanding is correct, the issue was...
   a. Not:  "Should women put on the veil to prophesy and pray in
      church?"
   b. But:  "Should women take off the veil to prophesy and pray in
      public?"

4. Paul sought to encourage them to act in harmony with the customs of
   their day...
   a. Customs that were in harmony with the scriptural principles of
      headship and subjection
   b. But he acknowledges that the head covering was not custom of the
      apostles or the church

Thus I take his words regarding women and the head covering per se to be
limited and temporary in application.  But the idea of honoring societal
customs that reflect scriptural principles certainly has universal and
permanent application for Christians who seek to glorify God in this
world.  As Paul wrote in the previous chapter...

   "Therefore, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all
   to the glory of God. Give no offense, either to the Jews or to
   the Greeks or to the church of God, just as I also please all
   men in all things, not seeking my own profit, but the profit of
   many, that they may be saved."
                                                   - 1Co 10:31-33


Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2011

eXTReMe Tracker