Quick News Update

One of the issues I've had with Blogger (or, to be more precise, blogspot.com) is its inability to use what are known as "trackbacks." To oversimplify, trackbacks are a mechanism by which one blog can comment on or blog about another blog, and the latter gets notified about it. For example, I intend to comment on something written on another Blogger blog, but I would like for his blog to know about it.

That other blog, the Sarcastic Xtian, uses a different comment system than the standard Blogger one. He uses DISQUS, which does allow trackbacks and reactions.

I've decided to use that here, effective immediately. I mean, it's not like this blog is so busy that it has gotten a lot of comments anyhow, but I'd like that to change. (I know, if I'd post something more often than once every other odd leap year, it would help.)

Some other features of DISQUS are:

• the ability to reply to a comment, and have it come out "threaded." That means that you see replies as replies, near to the original comment.
• the ability to post using a variety of different user IDs, including Facebook, Twitter, Open ID, and more. Each login method also allows echoing back to the service through which you logged in. For example, if you log in through your Twitter account, you can tweet your comment.
• automatic anti-spam and anti-profanity filters.
• the ability to "like" a comment or to "flag" a comment.

There are probably more cool things here that I missed, or am not thinking about at this moment.

Oh, I should add that using DISQUS will require opening up some permissions in your browser. Sadly, I forget right now which ones are required (mainly because I had to fight them for another comment service, Intense Debate, which required me to open up Quantcast, of all places), but I believe they should be obvious to regular users of utilities like NoScript, AdBlock (which shouldn't require any extra handling), and Ghostery (which might need some unblocking).

Taking the Bible Literally

This actually began as a comment for a post, Taking Jesus Literally, on the Spiritual Reflections blog. (The title of this message should be a link to the post, but in case it doesn't come through FeedBurner properly, it's http://revmdavis.blogspot.com/2010/03/taking-jesus-literally.html)

Unlike previous posts here, this is purely my own opinion. Part of me doesn't like that, because my opinion is worth as much, or as less, as anybody else's. On the other hand, what's the title of my blog? Consider This! I'm not going to say this is "right" or that you're going to Hell if you disagree with me. (I do insist that, if you choose to disagree in a comment, to do so agreeably. No personal attacks, no foul language, etc. And, sorry, I have the final say on how that gets defined. Cope.)

I've found that taking the Bible "literally" is the only way to go. The problem is in how you implement that. Obviously, from the term "implement," I'm an engineer by trade and by Godly design (it comes naturally to me, in other words), so that affects my perception of things.

So let's look at taking the Bible "literally." First, there are obvious places in the Bible that are symbolic or poetic. The Song of Solomon, also called the Song of Songs in some translations, is essentially a love poem. The Psalms are songs, not commandments. When you start to get into prophecy, though, the distinction becomes dull, especially when you get into end-times prophecies.

Related to the symbolic and poetic are allegory and idiomatic phrases. For example, when Psalm 50:10 says that the "cattle on a thousand hills" belong to the Lord, you're not going to find hill #1,001 and say that the cattle on that hill doesn't belong to Him. (Actually, you might want to pop the link to that verse open in a separate tab, because he's going to get a lot of mileage in this missive.) Idioms in the Bible are harder to find because the idioms don't translate literally well at all. The often-despised Living Bible translation (which served as the basis for the slightly less paraphrase-like New Living Translation) actually translates one idiomatic phrase as "don't count your chickens before they hatch" (specifically 1 Kings 20:11 ... I'll let you read it in other translations, via the link to Bible Gateway, to see the "better" translation).

The second enemy of literal Bible consideration is precision. We 21^st century "civilized" "educated" fellows want finely detailed numbers. If someone counts 77,000 in one place, then they'd better not claim 77,500 somewhere else, or even 77,005. The problem is, when counting that many soldiers, for example, that are milling about, ready for the battle (and probably vulnerable to attack while standing there), performing a precise to-the-person head count is simply not reasonable. Even then there were methods for estimating a rough count of people; estimation is still used today. For other metrics, there's the law of "significant digits" (which should send some students that were forced to take physics in high school into a shudder). Significant digits basically says that you have to take the precision of measurements into account, and the result can only be that precise, no matter what a calculator says.

A third issue when dealing with literal interpretation of the Bible is audience. Now, I'm not a dispensationalist, even though I happen to agree with many views that are often labeled "dispensationalist." Dealing with the parts I cannot agree with will take this post too far off-base. I will say, though, that there are commands that were given to the Israelites that don't apply to the Gentiles (Acts dealt with an early form of this), there are commands given to certain individuals that aren't necessarily for everybody, and there are issues that aren't an issue for one group that are for another (such as the "eating meat offered to idols" discussed in 1 Corinthians).

In order to know the audience, usually you need another important factor for interpretation: context. Again this can take a post of its own, but there are very few verses of the Bible that we can take by themselves and get a clear picture. Psalm 50:10 provides a good example of this as well. Reading even the rest of the verse makes it clear that you don't have to count hills to determine where cattle that aren't God's exist; it starts out with saying that all critters are His. The remainder of Psalm 50 should give you an even greater idea of what's going on. Many, many false teachings have been generated by taking a verse or two out of context and using it to "prove" some flake-generated idea.

There's one vital component, though, of literal Bible interpretation that too many people miss: the Holy Spirit! Although some people will take this as heresy, it's true: the Bible is merely words on paper without the indwelling Spirit of God as a part of your life. No, I'm not saying you need to speak in tongues or fall backwards when touched on the head. I'm simply talking about the Holy Author of the Holy Bible dwelling within you! If you have not turned over your life to Jesus Christ, don't even bother with Biblical interpretation at all. It won't make sense!

Scared for Nothing!

The Yahweh's Yarn in a Year for January 2 was from Joshua 1-5. This section begins the time when the next generation of Israelites prepared to enter & conquer the Promised Land. Reading Genesis through Deuteronomy, you'll discover that God had promised Abraham and his descendants that land, but when the whole mob left Egypt, they were afraid of the people in the land they were about to enter. Of the 12 spies they sent in, only two — Joshua (the guy the book's named after, and now the leader of the Israelites) and Caleb — had the faith to believe God was going to give them the land. As a result, the people were told to go back into the wilderness and wander around there for 40 years, in the wilderness that took them a year to get through.

There's quite a bit of stuff to look at here, but here's what hit me in the face this time. This comes from the story of the scouting party investigating Jericho. You can find this in Joshua 2:1-11. Rahab, a prostitute and flax handler of some sort, had hidden the spies from the guards that were looking for them. She explained that the city was scared of the Israelites. Why? Because of all the stuff that happened 40 years ago!

Consider †his: 40 years ago the Israelites wimped out, even after being miraculously rescued from the Egyptians by tons of … well, miracles! Through it all, they got scared of the people in the land beyond the Jordan river. But those people heard about it, too … and were even more scared of the Israelites and their God Who fought for them! They didn't just get scared now. They were scared 40 years ago, when Israel was just as scared. For forty years the people of Jericho lived under the threat of the Israelites coming in and taking them out. For forty years, though, the feared Israelites were themselves fearful, so much that they had to spend a time-out in the desert until that generation was gone.

Now Consider †his: isn't God just as much for the child of God today as He was for the children of Israel then? The world is scared of God today. Why do you think there's so much of a push to get rid of Christmas, but not the false Kwanzaa, or the real Hanukkah, Ramadan, or other holidays? As one person put it, "it's because it's got Christ in it, and after 2,000 years He's still intimidating people." You, Christian, are intimidating, too. If you have Christ in you, you're just as intimidating. Obviously the point isn't to make people fear you, but don't be afraid of what happens around you when Christ is in you.

More Than Who Can Handle?

One verse that Christians like to use to comfort themselves and each other is 1 Corinthians 10:13. We find comfort in the thought that God “won’t give us more than we can bear.”

Recently I’ve been reading a couple of Charles Stanley’s books. One in particular is How to Handle Adversity. I found it curious that it wasn’t titled “How to Overcome Adversity.” Indeed, the book isn’t about how to battle adversity and come out the victor; rather, it’s about how to understand what God may be saying, or not saying, during difficult times.

The book led me to think back to the 1 Corinthians verse. I like to take things in context, so here it is with some of the surrounding material:

¹For I do not want you to be ignorant of the fact, brothers and sisters, that our ancestors were all under the cloud and that they all passed through the sea. ²They were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea. ³They all ate the same spiritual food ⁴and drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the same spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ. ⁵Nevertheless, God was not pleased with most of them; their bodies were scattered in the wilderness.

⁶Now these things occurred as examples to keep us from setting our hearts on evil things as they did. ⁷Do not be idolaters, as some of them were; as it is written, “The people sat down to eat and drink and got up to indulge in revelry.” ⁸We should not commit sexual immorality, as some of them did – and in one day twenty-three thousand of them died. ⁹We should not test Christ, as some of them did – and were killed by snakes. ¹⁰And do not grumble, as some of them did – and were killed by the destroying angel.

¹¹These things happened to them as examples and were written down as warnings for us, on whom the culmination of the ages has come. ¹²So, if you think you are standing firm, be careful that you don’t fall! ¹³No temptation has overtaken you except what is common to us all. And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear. But when you are tempted, he will also provide a way out so that you can endure it.

¹⁴Therefore, my dear friends, flee from idolatry. [1 Corinthians 1:1-14, Today’s NIV]

There are tons of things that could be brought forth from just that little smidgen of Paul’s letter to the church at Corinth, but let’s stay focused here. The famous “beyond what you can bear” verse deals with temptation, not adversity. Surprised? Granted, much adversity can come from the consequences of our sin, as Paul wrote earlier. Adversity, though, can come for other reasons; consider Job as the most famous example of one who suffered extreme adversity that wasn’t caused by sin. The blind man mentioned in John 9 was born blind, but not due to sin, but so that God’s glory could shine forth (John 9:3).

So where is our hope in adversity? Consider This: God’s still there, and God still cares. When Joshua was ready to take Jericho in the name of the Lord, God told him numerous times to “be strong and courageous,” because God was with them. We might not be able to bear the suffering, but God can, if we cast all our cares on Him (1 Peter 5:6-11).

One pastor, in his “Faith Engineer” blog at http://www.faithengineer.com/2008/01/god-wont-give-you-more-than-you-can.html, cited another pastor dealing with this. Quoting that other pastor: “It does not imply that God won’t let you be stressed beyond what you can bear. Or challenged beyond your ability. Or pushed beyond your threshold. In reality, God gives you more than you can bear all the time. On purpose. It’s only when you can’t bear the load that the strength of Christ kicks in… and He becomes everything you need and more.”

REAL Love

Happy Valentine's Day, everybody.

Earlier this evening I confessed to a friend that I had forgotten that today was the day where too many guys will get tons of grief from their "significant other" because they, too, forgot the day. My friend, a young lady who recently got engaged, asked if if my wife and I even celebrate the day. I told her we did, after a fashion. I told her that I recently heard someone on the radio mention that today was when many girls and women receive stuff out of obligation. I asked, "what's the romance in that?"

Love should never be restricted to a single day of the year (or two, if you also include the mysterious "Sweetest Day" in the fall). True love is even more than a lifestyle. True love is something that's so much a part of you that it just won't let go.

What is this true love? 1 Corinthians 13 in the Bible describes it. The NIV renders it thusly:

¹If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. ²If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. ³If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames, but have not love, I gain nothing.

⁴Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. ⁵It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered. It keeps no record of wrongs. ⁶Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. ⁷It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

⁸Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. ⁹For we know in part and we prophesy in part, ¹⁰but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears. ¹¹When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me. ¹²Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

¹³And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.

I know of nobody on this planet who lives up to that definition. I certainly don't. this past week showed me that I'm a far way off from that kind of love. That kind of unconditional perfect love comes from only one source: God!

This Valentine's Day, and every day, Consider This: God sets the example and empowers us to love. Instead of obligating or being obligated just because it's a particular calendar day, simply show and live love!

I have a question about "tongues"

This time I've got a question for folks reading this. So far I haven't found any good source of information, although I haven't exhausted all possibilities.

The question is: What Biblical support is there for the "prayer language" form of "tongues?"

First, let me tell you what I've heard and don't find adequate.

The biggest support I've heard is found in 1 Corinthians 13:1: "If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gone or a clanging cymbal." (emphasis mine) The phrase bridges a discourse Paul gives about spiritual gifts, specifically speaking in tongues or unknown languages, and the famous definition of love. The Corinthian church had focused all too heavily on the spiritual gifts (not to mention following the teachings of men), and not enough on Christ.

The problem I have with using this as "proof" of the gift of tongues including a private "prayer language" that does not correspond to any existing language (and, therefore, does not require an interpreter, as seen in 1 Corinthians 12) is that the notion of "tongues of angels" just pops up out of the clear blue, and really isn't supported elsewhere in context. I see this as more of a form of exaggeration, as though Paul is saying, "hey, look. I don't care what you think about speaking in languages you haven't learned. That's not important. Even if somebody were to claim to speak some language direct from Heaven, if that person doesn't have love, it's no good!"

I've also heard all the supposition about the "unknown prayer language" being a sort of "code" between your spirit and the Holy Spirit that allows communication that Satan cannot intercept or interpret. Sorry, but if Satan was one of the highest angels who still has free contact with God (as seen in the book of Job), I cannot see how this is supported by Scripture. Even if Satan does hear our prayers, God is greater and still in charge ... who cares if he hears or not?

Sometimes peole will refer to this "prayer language" as being the "groanings that cannot be uttered" mentioned in Romans 8:26. Sorry, but what I hear referred to as "prayer language" has more sounds than mere groans. Besides, prayer language is uttered, or spoken.

For the record, I do accept the notion of speaking in tongues, and the interpretation thereof. I witnessed one lady doing this, and while I could not interpret, I did recognize a grammatical structure. I also accept the story, published in Guideposts several years ago, about the woman who ministered to a German widow, all the time speaking and hearing German, even though she did not know German, nor realized she was doing it at the time. Although I've studied French, it came to me fairly quickly, and I can still hold my own, even when out of practice (although my vocabulary fails at times ... as I tell people, "je me souviens un peu des mots Français"). I do not accept the notion that one is not saved or has the Holy Spirit dwelling within them unless they "speak in tongues" of either type.

I would appreciate any references folks can supply.

Why did God make homosexuals?

One question I've seen in numerous places is "why did God make homosexuals?" The question often presumes that (a) homosexuals are "made" that way, so (b) God must have made them that way, so (c) why does He hold that against them?

It's a legitimate question from that point of view. Let's start with the last one first, or at least some form of it. Does God consider homosexuality a sin? Yes. Nave's Topical Bible lists numerous verses for "Sodomy," which is what "Homosexuality" links to. Obviously one of those verses is Genesis 19:5-8, which deals with Lot in Sodom. The men of the town wanted to come in and "know" (in the proverbial "Biblical sense") Lot's visitors, who were angels sent to get Lot and his family to safety before God destroyed the whole place. Other verses include Leviticus 18:22-23; 20:13, 15-16; Romans 1:24-27; 1 Corinthians 6:9, and many, many more.

So, if God made them that way, then He's not fair, right? Isn't that the whole point of the question?

Consider this: God made each and every one of us the way we are. We are all sinners in one way or another (Romans 3:23). God didn't so much "make us that way" as He made us with the right and responsibility to choose. Like it or not, we are given the ability to choose whether to follow His commands or not; we are also given the responsibility to choose correctly.

Is God being cruel? Give me a break! If God sent His only Son to die for you (John 3:16-18), why do you think he'd be cruel? Because He doesn't let you do what you want? Actually, He does let you do what you want, even if it's the worst, most stupid thing you could do to yourself. He tells us what to do and what not to do to warn us not to do the stuff that would harm us.

That includes homosexual behavior. In one sense it's not that much different from being "straight." It's not best for me or my wife for me to get the hots for another woman, or to follow through with that desire. Why would it be any different if I had the hots for another man, or she for another woman?

We still keep thinking that there are "heavy" sins and "light" sins, sins that aren't quite as bad as another. Consider this: the whole world was cursed with death simply because Adam ate a fruit from a tree he wasn't allowed to. That's it! How much "lighter" is that than murder? Then again, he murdered himself, his family, and every single person ever to live on this accursed planet! His decision was indirectly responsible for the death of Jesus, the Christ! (Don't give old Adam much grief, though; you and I are just as responsible.)

God "made" homosexuals, perverts, murderers, smugglers, lyers, cheats, theives, politicians ... and you and me. All of us have a choice.

So what choice are you going to make? Are you going to choose the wrong way, and keep damaging yourself and people you may never meet? Or are you going to choose God's way, and surrender your life to Christ? Yeah, you may have to give up some stuff, but it's like giving up poison ... it really is a good idea.