Crystal Clear Delusion

With the continuing debacle at the Crystal Cathedral comes this observation from Craig Huey of Election Forum.

The sad part of this observation is that the Gospel of Christ and the longtime message of Crystal Cathedral Founder Robert Schueller are thought to be the same. Sadly, many others think so, too.

The strong delusion promised by God for those continuing to seek such waywardness abides still, even in the hearts of professing Christians.

The Final Authority

When it comes to life, we all have a final authority. When it comes to Christians or those professing a right relationship with God through His Son, Jesus the Messiah, nothing changes.

The only difference may be in the consistency of someone's professed Final Authority. While many proclaim God and/or His Word to be their Final Authority, the reality is sometimes painfully evident. It usually ends up being the thoughts of men regarding various areas of life which are exalted and practiced. The true Word of God is, somehow, explained away to the point where it negates Truth. All is left is a plethora of conversation and discussion concerning the exalted nature of their pursuit of that which mimics Truth.

Who is Your Final Authorrity? How Truthful are you when it comes to this issue?

Jesus Creed & Truth Intolerance

Months ago, I was blocked from posting of the blog site of Scot McKnight, Jesus Creed. I returned yesterday to see if my blogging presence remained unwelcomed. I am sad to report that nothing has changed.

I posted a comment under the blog post, "White House God 2," which was removed before too long. The comment was in the vein of finding it very interesting that someone who would profess a belief in Christ would, in the name of serving that same Christ in public office, disobey a direct command of Christ by swearing an oath of office.

Being dismissed is really not too surprising in this day of intolerance. I find that the most intolerant people in America are those usually espousing their tolerance of all things, even those things they may disagree with. I have consistently found these people to be disingenuous at best. All piety and platitudes aside, Truth doesn't seem to be the topic of choice, nor do they want to entertain the rigors of examination.

In the case of Scot McKnight and Jesus Creed, I'm not surprised. If you were to begin to join in the dialogue on Jesus Creed, you will find that most of the regular commentors don't desire to contemplate the words of someone who readily works his way through the rhetoric of analysis and gets to the core of an issue. That's too divisive and doesn't tend to unify the readers. So, attempts are regularly made to keep the conversation away from Truth and the consistently logical analysis of that same Truth.

Instead, new thinking is encouraged. New paradigms are sought in order to encourage the faithful rebellion toward most things established. Of course, the aim is a new consensus which does away with old norms by establishing new boundaries through the collective energy and input of everyone.........everyone except those who do not agree with the majority consensus. Those dissenters are not allowed to establish any disagreement. Either they will conform to the consensus or they will be discharged from participation within the consensus. This assures order within the group, or I should say, it assures disorder.......consistent, persistent chaos.

That which has been the same in the past and will continue to remain so in the future are, ultimately, not welcome. Truth is cast out. Lies are welcomed and embraced. Such is the tolerant world of Jesus Creed and the Emerging Brethren.

Jesus Creed, Dialogue & Emerging Submerging

On an earlier post, I mentioned that I have been part of the online conversation at Jesus Creed, the blog for The Emerging Church, The Emerging Movement or Emerging. It is the creation of Scot McKnight, Karl A. Olsson Professor in Religious Studies of North Park University in Chicago, Illinois.

I have found a very interesting phenomenon while participating in the conversation at Jesus Creed. Yes, it is true that eveyone is encouraged to particpate in the online dialogue. But there are limits to this open conversation. It has nothing to do with crossing the boundaries of decorum as in vulgar speech or personal attack. It has to to with the tenor and breadth of conversation actively encouraged and advertised.

No topic is considered taboo and questions are almost considered mandatory. This is because of the supposed openness of questioning anything and everything historically traditional within the realm of Christendom. Biblical texts and all related issues as well as historical settings, subsequent epochs and all recorded actions of personalities of note are fair game.

But their appears to be a few unspoken caveats. Certain conclusions deemed unsuitable to the Emerging modus operandi are not acceptable. However, the only way of ascertaining these boundaries is through the experience of asking questions, participating in the dialogue and, then, drawing conclusions. And certain conclusions are not agreeable to Emerging conclusions. This is true in spite of any claims to the contrary.

One caveat can be found when scrutinizing certain Emerging conclusions. Questions and dialogue are OK as long as absolutes are not taken only from Scripture or from an historically traditional view of Scripture. In some areas, it seems that absolutes are not welcome at all. The area in question remains open to individual thoughts and conclusions.

Another unspoken caveat is ascertained by taking a consistent stand regarding a particular issue and not backing down. This is not respected. To think you are right about that particular issue is unacceptable. You may have others challenge you on various points about that issue, yet, if you remain steadfast, you are considered to be arrogant. This is viewed as an attempt to impose your will on the others in the conversation.

Another Emerging caveat is unveiled more quickly by any thought deemed to put The Emerging Movement in a negative light or to identify Emerging with certain movements outside of Traditional Christianity. For example, if Emerging practices or teachings are said to be the same as those in Eastern Religious practices such as Mysticism, Transcendental Meditation, Spiritism, Spiritualism, etc., the one intimating such thoughts is instantly challenged, if not outright called out on the blog. Receiving rebukes and reprovals by certain ones in the conversation can accumulate quickly.

Of course, the particulars of the dialogue are not put to the strict scrutiny of Scripture. There may be lame attempts of using Scripture outside of context or literal meaning, but strict scrutiny consistently using Scripture is not allowed.

Eventually, the caveats become unashamedly overt. You will be warned and if you do not abide by their strict standards of conduct on the blog, your posts will be removed and your IRL temporarily blocked from further participation in the conversation. Failure to heed the Emerging caveats results in a permanent block. I

have nothing of a personal nature to say against Scot McKnight except to say that there are certain topics he will not allow to be discussed on his blog. This is perfectly fine because, after all, it is his blog. And he is allowed to determine the parameters of conversation; but not when the idea promoted is that the conversation is open.

So, it seems that Emerging is really all about Submerging, submerging Truth, submerging certain Truth. Believe it or not, Emerging types are being led down a path containing the aromatic tinge from below.

Emerging Vacuum

When is Black not black? When is up not up? When is good not good?..........................................................................................................Give Up?

Well, silly you,..............when its Emerging! Anybody should know that!

Please, doubting me about this will do you no amount of good............not that good is really good..........and who are you to determine such things? If I say good is bad, then that's good!

Of course, the most important part of good not being good is the fact that the truth of good being good was questioned. Truth not questioned cannot be truth can it? So we question. And truth begins to take on the bright luster of darkness. Isn't it amazing?

Imagine the new twists and turns available to the one who questions. What you thought to be true is pregnant with the possiblity of falsity. And what you thought to be false blossoms into absolute truth. Reality takes on any number of different dimensions only limited by the amount of questions posed.

Just think. All that past asurance and confidence carries a high probability of being chaos and confusion. How could you have missed the obvious, chaos and confusion being the place of security and vitality?

All I can say is that I am so happy for you and your newfound understanding of Life. Emerging fits you very nicely. You look good! You look confident! You look as if you have everything figured out..........finally! The real you has finally Emerged!

Welcome to a new existence, where everything is exactly as it appears not to be. Otherwise, there's no confidence in your knowledge of nothing. No problem as long as you know the difference betwen nothing in its appearance and nothing in its reality, the essence of Emerging.

The Child of God & Politics - Rome or Jesus?

Below is a post on Jesus Creed by Michael Kruse in which he is responding to statements from me. Also below is my response to his response. I encourage you to read his separate article through the link provided.

I believe you will begin to see a few dividing points between modern politics as practiced by many American Christians and that politics espoused by Christ and His Word.

Your thoughts would be appreciated.
***************************************************


Benjamin #40

Jesus taught us to pray “Thy kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.” I don’t take that as a command to set passively by, hoping it will come. I take it as a call to engage the world, always recognizing that the Kingdom will not fully come until Christ returns. We are to be an image of the future New Creation living in the present, giving witness of what is to come.

I wrote a post sometime back called Paul’s Subversion of the Empire. There were no police forces in Greco-Roman. Government entities and voluntary organizations for addressing the needs of the common people did not exist. The fundamental institution for keeping the social order was the household. The paterfamilias (male householder) was to rule over his household and compel order. He theoretically had the power of life and death over the members of the household (though this was changing by NT times.)

Paul introduces a new ethic. There is no longer the slave nor free, Jew nor Gentile, or male and female. We are made one body in Christ. He subverts the Greco-Roman model of order by domination with an ethic other-centered love and mutual submission (see my analysis of Ephesians 5 and 6 in the linked post.) Were this ethic to spread from household to household, the entire political and social power structure of the Empire would have been transformed. Regrettably, initial gains were reversed as the Church allowed itself to become re-infused with the power hierarchies of the age. But the initial implication of Paul’s teaching was deeply subversive and deeply political.

In our present context, we have the opportunity to have direct input into governance that Paul would not have dreamed of. Generally speaking, I think the role of the Church, with regard to the state, is not to compel Christian behavior (regardless of whether that compulsion is from the right or the left.) There is a legitimate role for state use of power. I think it is to restrain evil enough that it “creates room for good things to run wild.” (A little Chesterton there.) The changing of people’s hearts and minds needs to come from the other-centered love of Christians giving birth to more other-centered believers. Eventually society is transformed but never to the utopia that the world will be upon Christ’s return. That is how I see it.

Michael Kruse
******************************************************


Michael,

First of all, Jesus said to pray "Thy Kingdom come." It is a prayer for God to do something, not a command from God to go and bring the kingdom to fruition.

When Jesus said, "The kingdom is among/within you," He's telling us the kingdom was already present. He also dealt with the present reality of the Kingdom when He spoke to the Pharisees in Matthew 21:24 saying, "....The Kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof."

This new nation is nothing more than the distinct dichotmy established with the murder of Abel by his brother Cain. Those who have chosen to obey God in faith have been at odds with those who have chosen to live outside the Presence of YHWH. The standards of both groups have been different and remain so today.

I believe it is a mistake to give the impression that what Paul was saying was completely new and, because of its newness, it was subversive. It wasn't. It was a continuation of the way of God for His People, a way which sinful rebellious man has always found to be contrary to what man wants to do. What is revealed in the NT is no different than what is revealed in the OT. Paul makes that clear with his numerous references to OT Scripture.

It is true that Paul dealt with scenarios in the Greco-Roman world of his day, which we essentially have today, scenarios which needed clarifying in the way they should be dealt with and lived out. But, for the most part, what Paul said was basic OT.

This is true also when Paul deals with the household structure. Your article deals only with one aspect of household relationships in isolation of the remainder of NT passages dealing with the same issues. (I simply point this out, not as a negative. You may deal with it elsewhere.)
You point out that Roman society had worship and voluntary organizations. Though you mentioned none specifically (maybe the synagogue), one was the Ekklesia. Interestingly enough, this was an assembly which called out the men to conduct the official business of the assembly. Though the household relationships of Romans were different (as you mentioned), this particuar Greco-Roman political entity fit perfectly God's structure of the household as well as government on a large scale for His Body. Once again see, see OT.

You also mentioned the exemptions the Jews had under Roman rule from the requirements of these organizations. That's true, but more interestingly, when they reorganized under the captivity from Babylon, they possess the ability to rule themselves, including the execution of sentances against criminal conduct, something they didn't possess under Roman rule. They could try a person, one of their own, then they must deliver that person up to Roman authorities for either the execution of the sentence or the determination & execution of the sentence. This is what happens to Jesus and Paul alludes to this process in 1 Cor. 5, dealing with the man committing fornication.

Most people don't realize that this has not changed in modern times. American Law gives these exact same exemptions to the true Ekklesia as well as the ability to govern themselves according to God's law, even in matters of criminal behavior among their own. Most of God's people are ignorant of this reality. I wonder why Christian Attorneys don't mention this?

The availability of God's people to live with their distinctives intact is there for us. As Christ said, the World and its citizens will always hate us because they hated Christ first. We are not called to change their society. We are called to live and preach to world citizens the message of reconciliation to a God whose political society is completely different. The most their society will have is reformation, the temporary reformation of sinners. Our political society is one of complete newness in The Eternal Lord of Lords. This is the narrow way of Christ.

Do we choose that narrow way....or......do we choose the broad way of the World?

The Roman Catholic Church, Church Growth & The Papacy

In this account of the reunification of the Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches, an Austrian Priest gives some insight to the real reason that this unforseen possibility is actually in the process of becoming reality. The World Catholic News reports that Cardinal Christoph Schönborn, Archbishop of Vienna, is optimistic that this reunification will overcome the lone obstacle, the role of the Papacy. Other than that, the Catholic and Orthodox beliefs are in accord “on almost every theological issue.”

While many have thought for centuries that the two Churches have distinct theological differences, this quote by the Archbishop is quite revealing. It lets us know that Protestants, as a whole, have the same underlying beliefs as The Roman Catholic Church. After all, Protestants were originally Roman Catholics. They are simply coming back home to Mama, the Mother Church.

By the way, this process is not limited to Orthodox Churches. In fact, according to official Roman Catholic Policy, all Protestants will one day soon be covered by the power of the Pope. It's only a matter of time.

And for those who are not considered Protestants, the same is planned for you and your groups also. The plan is already coming to fruition as we speak. Doctrinal diminuation has occured to the extent that many are truly illiterate when it comes to core Bible Doctrines concerning Jesus Christ and His salvation. Teachings of Mysticism and Spiritualism have pervasively intruded standard teachings of most churches to the extent that these ungodly doctrines and practices are thought to be espoused by Jesus and His Apostles in Scripture.

Apostacy is rampant and many are completely unaware. They are under the delusion that good is evil, right is wrong, black is white, up is down, etc. Power foreign to the Holy Spirit are accepted without so much as a thought that this power could possibly be from anyone other that God. Testing the Spirits according to Scripture is not considered as viable. That would offend certain individuals. Meanwhile shipwrecked lives continue to accumulate on the reef of shallow spirituality.

And the Papacy grows.

The Politics of Fear

The Political Right, The Political Left. The Religious Right, The Religious Left. Republican, Democrat. Red, Blue, Purple, Green.

What are they all about?

Well, if truth be known, they are all about the same thing, though both sides would be loath to admit such a fallacious thought. Instead, they would be intent on informing everyone that would lend an ear that, in spite of what their enemies say, they are advocates for what is right for the American people. And, in order to ensure that all Americans receive what they need, these advocates need political office or the commensurate power thereof.

Campaigns of fear. It's as simple as that. Not so much as creating fear in the hearts of the American populace, but fear that the political power to perpetuate that fear according to their particular party blueprint will not be obtained. In other worlds, they will not be elected.

Sadly, Christians participate in this exercise of vanity. And Christians experience more futility than their secular counterparts. Why?

Because their expectations are misplaced. And being completely unaware of this, they continue to engage in the constant struggle to gain and maintain unnecessary political power. And they continue to acutely feel the hollowness of such struggle. But, for the glory of God, they energetically press on. And as the debris of a disintegrating culture accumulates, fear remains a reality.

Within this hollowness, there reverberates an echo of Truth which faintly whispers the accurate direction for all soldiers possessing trancsendent power for the proper tasks. These whispers cause searching glances for such latent Truth in the midst of their temporal fight. Quiet considerations lurk in the shadows of vanity, patiently waiting for the exposure and clarity of a pure search for Truth. Only by turning from the path and demanding tasks of world vanity does the construction of God's political realm emerge to guide us into the straight and narrow path of power reserved for those choosing to follow Jesus the Messiah. His political entity awaits our knowledgeable cooperation. Until then, power reserved for those rejecting The Messiah lures the most powerful group residing on planet Earth, a political strip tease so powerful that the only cure for this political fornication is flight. To desparately flee into the extended arms of the politics of reconciliation is the only cure for what ails Christians involved in modern Politics. Only then can the child of God truly know what the World needs and is, at the same time, seeking.

They need and are seeking what they have officially rejected, Jesus their Messiah. We were once as they are, in need of politics, the Politics of Reconcilation.

It's the only cure for the the Politics of Fear.

Christianity & The Real Jesus

When it comes to what we believe about the historical figure Jesus, is our image of this controversail figure accurate? Or do we embrace a caricature? Is the Jesus we allow to be presented to us really the One described for us in the Bible?

For many, to consider this question is deemed ridiculous. To some, it approaches blasphemy. Yet, are we not responsible for the substance of our belief? Is it not our duty to make sure that our beliefs are accurate and not mistaken and misdirected?

Paul tells us to make sure that the Jesus we preach is not "another Jesus", thus "another gospel."

So, regardless of the tenets of any religion or Denomination, we are to study the bible to make sure that our words about the Son of God don't paint a picture of Jesus foreign to what the Bible actually says. The only way to do that is to get into the Word of God. Reading books about the subject may sound like a good idea, but how else are you to know whether the books you read are truthful or not except by comparing it to the Word of God?

It's simple for anyone desiring to know the Truth about the historical Jesus. The only accurate portrayal of God in the flesh is the Bible. We need to make sure we are following the genuine Messiah, not a wolf in sheep's clothing!

Godly Candidates & The Culture War

In this commentary by Janet Folger on World Net Daily, she addresses the issue of having and electing godly candidates for the purpose of winning the war for the culture of the United States of America.

Questions:

1. Where in the Bible are Christians ever commanded or encouraged to conquer any culture of this World on behalf of Christ?
2. Where in the Bible are Christians ever commanded or encouraged to enter the Politics of any culture of this World on behalf of Christ?
3. Where in the Bible are Christians ever commanded or encouraged to pass laws or change policies of any culture of this World on behalf of Christ?
4. Where in the Bible does Jesus ever identify Himself with any culture of this World?
5. Where in the Bible does Jesus ever command or encourage His Disciples or Followers to identify with any culture of this World?
6. Where in the Bible does any true Disciple or Follower identify with any culture of this World?

If Janet is right about "The Lord performing His word," and I believe she is, wouldn't it be a safe thing to make sure that we actually have marching orders from our Commander in Chief (not President Bush) before engaging the enemy, especially on enemy turf? And if there aren't any marching orders, what then? Do we just proceed anyway, trusting in our motivation to serve the Lord to make up for the lack of orders? Are we trusting in our motives to overcome, what could be considered, disobedience? Is this where we are in our service to our King? Do your own thing, as long as it is accomplished on behalf of the King?

I think King Saul might offer us a word of wisdom about this very issue. Are we listening?

Jesus & The Secret: Fulfilling The Law

Well.........now we know. If only Jesus had known! If only Jesus would have, somehow, become privy to this universal Law. Just imagine what Jesus could have accomplished. Just think of how much of His potential, as God, He could have performed for the benefit of mankind. Just think of how much more the Creator could have created.................if only He had known.

What a waste! Just think of all the things in His life that could have been different..........from the very beginning. Why, even as a baby, this law of attraction could have been implemented to, not only secure the positive political affirmation of Herod, but prevent the useless slaughter of innocent babies in Bethlehem. The eternal destiny of Judas could have been altered had He approached the traitor, Judas, differently with the sop. The remainder of His Apostles could have escaped martyrdom, yes, ruled Israel as Jesus had promised. Had this law been aimed toward the religious leaders of His day, they would have realized the attractive nature of His persona and presented Him to the people as the Messiah, instead of trying Him as a criminal. Furthermore, the Roman power despised by many could have been used for the glory of God if He had only woven His tapestral attraction within the mind and heart of Pilate. The guards would have refused to mutilate and mock him. Why, Satan Himself could have been converted back to the eternal fold, forever abandoing personal delusions of deity.

More desperate people could have been fed, healed, clothed, set free, mended, unified...............if only............if only.............Jesus could have been more attractive.

But, alas, we are left with a Savior who was defeated on the cross in death. Yes, There is the issue of raising from the dead. It does have a certain quality about it that speaks of a certain amount of uniqueness, but attractive? No, at least, not to enough people of the World. For those to whom it is attractive, like President Bush, the attraction lies in the fact that Jesus makes one feel loved, not guilty. Factor in the fact that the guilt of mankind's sin was the reason for His death and one might understand how this feature of the Gospel of Repentance and Faith, is not viewed as attractive enough as "The Secret."

No, in hindsight it must be admitted. Christ had no idea of what He was doing. As God in human flesh, He had the right motives in trying to elevate the status of man, but His omniscient methodology, while crude and accomplishing far more than most would have thought possible, was lacking in its political adaptability to the current demands of the World.

No, it's time to admit that, had Jesus known this secret, life as we know it would be completely different. It's time that Jesus found out what He's been missing all this time. If you see Him, please bring Him up to date.

God will be so glad you did!

Emerging Direction: Which Way Do We Go?

After 15 seconds of meditative meandering, I have decided that the definition of up needs to be modified. No, I'm not going to redefine it, just adjust it to the point where other people can legitimately question the reality of up and feel good about themselves in the process. That way, no one has to feel guilty about not understanding the true nature of up.

Is up really up? Or is there more to Up than we first thought? Maybe up is really made simple by understanding that up is simply not down. Or, it could be not as down as directly down. It is less down. It could be sideways or sorta sideways. Or it could be East, presuming East is not as down as any other direction. But we are not to exclude any other direction. Let's not let our lack of exactness lead us toward inexactness, regardless of our direction. We must be sure, even in our doubt. As long as we doubt not our doubt and are sure of our lack of direction. If there's anyone I hate, it's the person who is sure he's lost.

Maybe up is best defined by the person is is consistently living life on an arc. So, while he's currently in a state of down, he's headed toward up, which means he's headed toward down. Of course, our new definition, I mean modification, of up must be taken into consideration when dealing with such pinpoint accuracy, seeing that such pinpoint accuracy is constantly in a state of flux, which means that the arc possesses flexibility not unknown to the life of meandering reality.

Welcone to Emerging, where everthing is open to question and conversation, but bound to get lost in the pursuit, seeing that the pursuit of Truth is the reason for conversation and dialogue. For if we actually arrive at and grasp Truth in any shape, manner or form, the conversation and dialogue are, then, ended. So................we keep talking........and pursuing the multitudinous facets of non graspable Truth..........or, at least someone's perception of it.

Do I detect the odor of Brimstone? Let's converse!

Compassionate Conservative Collapse

With the conviction of Scooter Libby, the mounting pressure on Carl Rove and Vice President Dick Cheney, the continuing problems in Iraq and the Middle East and the domestic failures of conservative organizations, it seems the collapse of Compassionate Conservatism is slowly progressing.

Who do the conservatives look to now? Who will be the next conservative Savior for Evangelical Christians?

Well, if your Jay Sekulow, Founder of American Center for Law and Justice, the next man to rally behind is Mitt Romney. A Christian and a Mormon. Will someone please explain this?

And James Dobson is actually considering supporting Romney also? And this is good for families and Americans in general????

Brimstone Emerging.................................

Emerging Conversation: Rifles Not Allowed

I mentioned on an earlier post that I had been involved in the conversation on Jesus Creed, an Emerging Church website moderated by Scot McKnight. I also mentioned that


Emerging is publicly against much of, what they consider to be, the negative aspects of Traditional Christianity. If you listen for awhile, you begin to realize that what they are really upset about is not being allowed to participate in Traditional Christianity. They have been marginalized. Why? Because they are new, innovative, hip, tolerant and outside the Evangelical Box. In other words, they are modern hippies (not always in looks) who don't fit in and don't really want to fit in. They don't want to conform to the standards of worship and ministry tradition handed down within their respective faith families because, many times, those standards require one to look, be and act different from the world.

So, in the spirit of the age, they have rebelled and launched out into the deep on their own in order to create their own autonomous bodies, usually in the most unexpected places. That way they can be close to the ones they are attempting to minister to, which means that they get to create an atmosphere which makes them feel comfortable as well as those they are attempting to reach with the good news of Jesus. And did I mention they get to have fun at the same time? That may not be the most important aspect, but is surely mentioned alot.

As stated before, one of the hallmarks of Emerging is Conversation. By encouraging participation in conversation by as many as possible, all are included to the best extent possible. Inclusiveness within Community is also another major hallmark of Emerging.

One problem with this conversation emerges, though. Addressing particulars within a conversation tends to exclude a certain number of participants because of the various levels of expertise and experience within the body of available conversants. Another problem emerges when there are so many opinions and thoughts about a given particular that the only conclusion among the conversants is that there are many opinions among the various conversants. That's because arriving at objective truth is not the aim of conversation, conversation is the aim of conversation.

So when somone attempts to focus on a particular and refuses to let it go, this is not considered a positive within the immediate conversant community. After all, a person who refuses to let go of a particular point is considered to view himself as right about that point. That is not a positive either, especially if it conflicts with the consensus of the conversant community.

It's rather amusing to watch members of Emerging react to people in the same manner with which they have been treated in the past. You would think that they would be a little more sensitive to someone in a similar plight as their own, that of not being accepted by the group.

But when you bring a rifle to an outing when everyone else has brought shotguns, the disparity is obvious. And so is the discomfort.

Do the Heathen "Trust in God?"

"In God We Trust." The official National Motto of the United States is an anchor which many in this country rely on, at least partially, as proof that America is a Christian nation uniquely founded for the benefit of Christians. And with the constant barrage of legal and moral attacks upon foundations once thought impregnable over the past five decades, more and more people resort to its religious foundation in the hopes of stemming the tide of cultural changes seen during that time.

In light of that special place, many consider it a secondary blessing to the enemies of liberty that they also get to enjoy the benefits of freedom under God. So, if you hate certain things about this country, your freedom under God allows you to voice your concerns publicly, if need be. Many other freedoms similar to this are also enjoyed by those not agreeing with official U.S. Policy.

But have you ever considered the other side of that "Trust in God" coin? The other side? "What other side," you may be asking.

Have you ever considered the possibility that the motto "Trust in God" is primarily for the benefit of those who have specifically chosen to remain outside the eternal blessing of God in a redemptive relationship with Him through faith in Jesus Christ. In other words, they have chosen to officially reject God while acknowledging Him, His attributes and creative works. And at the same time, they exercise delegated authority from that same God they eternally reject. And if, during the exercise of that authority, they are molested, they have God's permission to act in retribution seven fold.

If that's the deal with God, would you not "Trust in God," also?

Here's an example from the Bible. God, because of the wickedness of the His People, Israel, was going to bring judgment on them using a powerful pagan nation. Through His Prophet, God says, "have I not ordained them [heathen nation] to execute judgment?" It is significant that God Himself says that He "ordained" this pagan nation to carry out God's orders, to execute God's judgment. He says exactly the same thing in Romans chapter 13.

So, if you knew that God had ordained you to execute certain authority on His behalf, wouldn't you also "trust God" to back you up when exercising such authority, even if you hated that same God? Would this not add a completely new dimension to the notion of Trusting God?

So, what does one have to do to be odained by God into this elite group? Ahh, that's another topic for another post!!!!!

Your Own Jesus: A Fresh Look at Truth

In this day and age of oneupmanship and 15 seconds of fame, sometimes you come across something or someone who brings a personality and outlook unlike any you've experienced before. When this newness is refreshing and solid, the 15 seconds seem to stretch. When it stretches into months without having lost the inital freshness, you can be sure that you've found something special.

Such is the case with David Beck and his site Catholicist Nation. I've immensely enjoyed his articles since I first was directed to him by Tupper Saussy. His commentary continues to uplift and magnify the only viable option for anyone seeking the Way, substantial Truth or meaningful Life.

If you come to know this Way, Truth & Life, existence is given its true significance. Life on this earth is then lived under the guidance of the only One Who knows the end from the beginning. Every area of life is seen from His Perspective and nothing is the same again.

Davis Beck writes from this perspective and I hope you find it as exhilarating as I do. Visit his site and let him know!

Emerging Direction & The Broad Way

In the Emerging Church, a religious movement of no mean proportion, much is made of identifying with the mission of Jesus.

Which Jesus?

Whose Jesus?

Are we talking about the Jesus of the Bible? Or is this Jesus a construct of the genuis of man? Or does the image and idea of this Jesus have more sinister origins? Or is this Jesus simply left up to the mind of the individual to construct according to personal whim?

If it seems easy to become confused in such an atmosphere, consider your assessment as accurate. The forward march of Emerging is based on the broadly consistent and shadowy search for absolute Truth, a search never quite consumated with anything definitive except the search itself. Therein lies the sacredness of Emerging, the absolute, ever learning journey.

Meanwhile the Absolute Jesus of Holy Writ remains accessible on His narrow path.

Emerging Conversation: The Limits of Friendly Dialogue

I've been visiting the well known and popular Emerging Blog named Jesus Creed, moderated by Scot McKnight, Professor of Religious Studies at North Park University in Chicago, Illinois. Other emerging Leaders are Brian McLaren, Alan Hirsch, Dan Kimball, Mark Driscoll, D. A. Carson, Leonard Sweet, Doug Pagitt, Ed Stetzer, John Burke, Scott A. Bessenecker, and Dennis M. Doyle.

Actually, I've been participating in the conversation for awhile. I've found it interesting, thought provoking, frustrating, enlightening and most of all, revealing. Emerging or The Emerging Church Movement is a major religious movement which has made a major impact in many parts of the world, not the least of which is the United States. The American Evangelical Church, otherwise know as Protestants and other non Roman Catholic churches have been impacted greatly by this movement over the last 10-15 years. In fact the impact has been so great that most have not known exactly how to respond to the Emerging refusal to go along with the traditional religious life of Evangelicals. They have increasingly put pressure on leadership to, not only listen to their complaints and suggestions, but to agree with their complaints and implement their suggestions. Otherwise, they will leave to start their own ministries. And they have. And Evangelicals are suffering because of it. As I said, Evangelicals don't know how to respond to prevent or counteract their influence.

One of the hallmarks of Emerging is Conversation. They will talk about anything, anywhere at anytime. Open and honest dialogue is encouraged among all. No question is considered taboo. Answers are provided in high quantity. If you disagree, that's OK! Simply verbalize your disagreement. You are accepted in spite of any disagreement you or anyone else may have. But conversing about that disagreement is guaranteed which means your participation in the conversation is also guaranteed. This is one area where Emerging frustrates Evangelicals. Emerging provides a forum as well as acceptance for the religiously downtrodden, marginalized and rejected. In other words, those not traditionally accepted by Evangelicals for various reasons, legitimate and not so legitimate.

But I found out today that their friendly dialogue has its limits. Yes, their are certain things they will not talk about.

I wonder if others have encountered this outer limit of Emerging Dialogue. If you have, tell me about it.

Would you care to hazard a guess as to what the subject matter could possibly be to so suddenly send Emerging types into a blatantly silent refusal to acknowledge reality?