News Weakly - 10/5/2024

We Wouldn't Know It If It Hit Us In The Face
California has banned (with 3 other states) "legacy admissions" -- giving priority to admissions of the children of alumni, worrying about favoring "white or wealthy students." I suppose that assumes that no alumni who are minorities are wealthy? And I assume that they'll still give preferential treatment to minority applicants? So it's not preferential treatment or even "white" that is the issue, but the stereotypical "all whites are bad" concept here. Reversing racism doesn't make it any less racist.

(As an aside, my title of this section reminded me of a line. "I saw something hurtling toward me. I wondered what it was. Then it hit me." But ... I digress.)

Ultimate Antisemitic
Iran launched waves of missiles at Israel as a "revenge attack" for Israel killing Hezbollah leaders. Mind you Hezbollah leaders are not Iranians. Mind you, Hezbollah leaders (along with Hamas) have been working hard for the genocide of Israel. Mind you, almost all the missiles were shot down. But, hey, if you have the world on your side in favor of genocide against Israel and you think that gives you the moral high ground, fight on, Iran. It's not true, but ... (And, oh, Iran, that particular enemy has a serious bite ... and their missiles are effective.)

Pushback
A teacher in Virginia, fired for something he didn't say, will receive $575,000 from the school board in compensation. He wouldn't use transgender pronouns because they violated his faith. He couldn't use pronouns that were "inconsistent with the student's sex." And, of course, despite the complaints, the statement is absolutely correct. Our culture confuses "sex" with "gender," but, no matter what you think, sex doesn't change, regardless of what the expression of that sex ("gender") may be. This victory pushes back on the current position that truth is no longer acceptable.

Message Received
Home Depot has an ad out for a fancy thermostat. The tagline is, "Be comfortable in your own home." The wife turns this thermostat to 72°. The husband, sitting in his chair with smartphone in hand, surreptitiously turns it down to 69°. The wife frowns and takes his phone away. The message is clear. "Be comfortable in your own home" ... as long as you're a wise wife who knows what's best and certainly not if you're one of those stupid, useless, "male" types. You're out of luck. Got it. Thanks.

Another Yawn
The VP candidates debated. I couldn't have cared less. We clearly have no more standards of dialog, decency, or honesty. I can't imagine what listening to this banter would tell me.

Fake News You Can Trust
Seriously, I loved this Bee headline. "Idiot Noah Builds An Ark When He Could Have Just Paid More Taxes To Stop Climate Change." Perfect. Spot on. The states hit by Hurricane Helene are apparently out of luck. FEMA is reporting they spent their funding on a sweet PowerPoint presentation about racial equity. And now, it seems, the Ayatollah is frantically googling to find out "how to build one of those Iron Dome thingys ... fast."

Must be true; I read it on the Internet.

Breaking Barriers

Our culture today likes to think that they're breaking barriers. Don't limit people to heterosexual; let (one of the stupidest phrases I can imagine) "love be love." (Stupid because without a clear definition of "love" -- like we have today -- you're enabling all sorts of evil, like pedophilia, bestiality, marrying your pillow ... on and on.) Or, how about how we're throwing off the old (rational, scientific, as-old-as-human-existence) "boys are boys and girls are girls" and substituting ... everything and nothing at all? Or those racial barriers, which we're tearing down by erecting new ones where the white people (all of them without exception) are the bad guys -- just another barrier. Now, if you pay attention, you might begin to see that Jesus was all about breaking barriers, too.

Jesus said, "You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you" (Matt 5:43-44). Now, that is a barrier broken. Jesus said, "You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. It shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be your slave" (Matt 20:25-27). Wow! Talk about tearing down a barrier! Jesus said, "Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven" (Matt 18:3). Bang! Another barrier falls! In fact, Jesus said He came to "give His life as a ransom for many" (Matt 20:28). Jesus came to bring down the barriers between a holy God and sinful Man. Seriously, He took down lots of barriers ... more than we realized He could.

So, Jesus was about tearing down barriers, right? Well, sort of. He was also in favor of erecting them. He said, "If anyone would come after Me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow Me" (Luke 9:23). That's a significant barrier. He told Nicodemus, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God" (John 3:3). Cannot see it? Huge barrier. Jesus ripped down the false judgment of the Pharisees when He said, "He who is without sin cast the first stone" followed immediately by erecting a new barrier by telling her, "Go and sin no more." (John 8:7, 11). So, in fact, Jesus was in the practice of knocking down barriers, but not for the sake of barriers. He was busy redirecting false thinking to true thinking, of removing lies and substituting truth. He tore down walls keeping people from what was actually true and erected walls to block people from the lies they embraced. Unlike our culture, which is busily tearing down walls that were intended to keep us safe and erecting walls to keep us from the truth. So ... not the same thing.

Threat to Democracy

It seems as if this presidential race has run on the "threat to democracy" platform. The left has pounded the drum that Trump is an "existential threat to democracy" for most of this year (and before) (and they were startled when "patriots" tried to eliminate that "existential threat" with assassination). Why? Primarily because Trump questioned the results of the 2020 election. Now, I wouldn't think questioning the results of an election was a "threat to democracy." I mean, Gore did it in 2000 and Hillary did it in 2016 and ... well, a lot of people are doing it ... without being an "existential threat." I would think verifying election results would be in support of democracy. But, no, Trump kept (I think still) saying that the election was rigged. The media (primarily) declared, "There is no evidence for widespread election fraud." Look at that a moment. First, it does not claim "Election fraud was proven false." No, they claim "no evidence." They do it despite the evidence, but the claim is not "proof," but the lack thereof. And then there are those "weasel words." "No evidence" (in their book) of "widespread" (undefined) election fraud. I didn't think anyone was claiming "widespread" fraud. In the 2020 election 3 swing states had a small gap between Trump and Biden. Three states decided the outcome. That's not "widespread" but neither is it insignificant. But they swept the evidence and the question under the rug and call Trump the "threat to democracy."

I'll tell you what is a threat to democracy. Fascism or a monarchy or a dictatorship or an oligarchy or the like -- those are threats to democracy. An overbearing, over-controlling, over-stepping government -- that's a threat to democracy. You know what else? A republic. You see, America is not a democracy; it is a republic. We vote in representatives and they make the rules ... without concern for the voters'. Their only accountability is "Can I get reelected?", and folks like AOC have demonstrated that that's not an issue. The American political system is a threat to democracy. We have a two-party system. Each party offers a candidate before we decide who will be our leader. So we end up with so many goofballs, none of which should be in office. A democracy would give us a list of names and we vote and the one with the highest number wins, but we don't do that. We don't even want to do that. So we eliminate actual democracy, substitute a two-party system, and then fold in a Republic ... and complain about Trump.

The founding fathers of this nation revolted against their government because, as an example, "No taxation without representation." Well, I can't think of the last time I voted in a representative who represented my views. For most of my life it has been "hold your nose and vote" elections, some slightly better than others. For the 21st century, it seems it has been "Never them" votes, where you're not voting for a candidate, but against an opponent. That's not democracy. It's not even a representative government. So, fine, you want to call Trump an "existential threat to democracy"? Go ahead. I'm no Trump fan. But keep in mind that you are perpetrating "an existential threat to truth" when you do. And that's on you.

How To Dress For Church

I didn't intend it -- it wasn't the point -- but there has been some discussion recently about how we should dress in church. I'm afraid we've missed the point. Oh, I know, people feel one way or another about that, but I don't. They say, "Clothes make the man," but it's simply not true. It's not about what you wear to church. What, then?

The real issue (and I think this was touched on but almost entirely missed in the discussion) is not the clothes. There are no dress codes (or shouldn't be) in churches. Why? Simple. It's not biblical. We aren't told to wear a tie to church. We aren't told that shorts are okay. Clothes are not the point. What are we told? "By those who come near Me I will be treated as holy, and before all the people I will be honored" (Lev 10:3). Easy. Regard God as holy. In Scripture, everyone who had a close encounter with God was terrified. One of my favorite stories was the disciples on the Sea of Galilee in a storm and Jesus was asleep (Mark 4:31-. The disciples woke Him. "Don't you care that we're going to drown???" Jesus rebuked the storm, it halted, and the text says, "They became very much afraid" (Mark 4:35-41). You thought they were scared in a storm? That was nothing to seeing God in the boat with them. That was terrifying. We tend to think of God as a pal, a buddy, our friend. And, in a sense, He is, but we must not lose that "fear" factor. Moses thought of God as a friend when he cried out, "Show me Your glory!" (Exo 33:18). God spared Moses's life not by simply being merciful, but by covering him so he wouldn't die seeing God's glory. God is our friend; He's just not that kind of friend.

We fail to reverence God as we should, and that is a key, biblical problem. Not wearing a tie to church is not. I think of what Peter wrote to wives, "Do not let your adorning be external -- the braiding of hair and the putting on of gold jewelry, or the clothing you wear -- but let your adorning be the hidden person of the heart with the imperishable beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which in God's sight is very precious" (1 Peter 3:3-4). That's the idea. Peter wasn't commanding women to dress (or not dress) a certain way. He was telling them to have a spirit -- a character -- that reflected God. That character would show externally. So, no, what you wear to church is not the issue. Your attitude is. It's just hard to imagine shorts and flip-flops as an outward sign of an inner realization of a holy, holy, holy God. No, the shorts are not the problem, but how much does how we dress say about what's in our hearts? I don't know what's in hearts, so I won't respond to what others are wearing. But I cannot imagine walking into the palace of a king in shorts and flip-flops and a flippant, "Hiya, king" and regarding that as "respectful."

The Older Brother

Few of Jesus's parables are more memorable than the parable of the prodigal son (Luke 15:11-32). (As an aside, did you know "the parable of the prodigal son" is not in the Bible? Oh, the parable is, but nowhere does it mention a "prodigal" son. The word means wasteful and recklessly extravagant, so that's where the name comes from, but nowhere in the text is the word used. And we scarcely use it anywhere else either.) The most obvious character ... wait for it ... is, of course, the prodigal son.



The prodigal son is the main point. He's the "bad guy." He goes to his father and asks for his inheritance to squander it on wild living. Think about that. He is, in essence, wishing his father dead. He rejects his father, his family, his faith. He goes off, wastes all he received, ends up with the pigs, and finally ... I love this phrase ... "came to himself." He woke up. He realized his father's servants were better off than he was. So he repented. He would go tell his father he would be a servant. And, of course, the prodigal son is every one of us. We've sinned. We've rejected the Father. We've discarded "family." We jettisoned "faith." We all have sinned, and fall short of the glory of God (Rom 3:23). We need repentance.

The next character we often mull over is this father. First, he acquiesces to his son's demands. It's not reasonable. It's not right. But he let's the boy go, knowing what was in store for him -- disaster. Then, when the boy comes slinking back with his tail between his legs, the father spies him "a long way off" and ran to him and embraced him. "My son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found." Why was his son "dead"? That kind of rebellion in Jewish culture was "fatal." You know the old, "You're dead to me"? That was the idea. They would often have a funeral for a disowned child. He was dead; he was lost. But the father ran and embraced him, brushed aside his plea for mercy, and threw him a party. If the prodigal son represents all of us sinners, the father clearly represents God, the Father. He lets us squander what He gives us and embraces us when we repent. "I tell you," Jesus said, "there is joy before the angels of God over one sinner who repents" (Luke 15:10).

All these interactions are memorable, but we often let the other guy remain in the shadows. The older brother. He was not pleased. He was angry at his father. (Think aout that for a moment.) He had been the faithful son, and his father never threw him a party. "But when this son of yours came, who has devoured your property with prostitutes, you killed the fattened calf for him!" (Luke 15:30). The father did not deny that his son had been there. He just asked him to rejoice that his brother was home. The text gives no indication that the older brother did. Who is he? The traditional line is the Pharisees. Maybe ... then. Today we have our own "older brother." You find them in "faithful" places like churches. They're warm and friendly to the "forgiven" -- the "in crowd" -- but not so much the soiled. I remember when stories circulated that Jeffrey Dahmer had come to Christ in prison, some were skeptical and some were outraged. "Really? A murderous cannibal?" We don't have to go so far as that to see it, though. "You heard about her, didn't you? She had an abortion." "You know, he cheated on his wife." "Did you know that in his youth he did drugs?" Or, the worst, "She voted for Hillary!" These objects of discussion are believers, forgiven, embraced by the Father. They were pursued and called and saved. Jesus died for them. But ... no ... they're not good enough for us.

The parable is really heartwarming. We see the Father, always ready to forgive. Thank God that's Him. We see the son, a truly profligate sinner who truly repents and receives both grace and mercy. Thank God we can, too. It's really, then, in the end, that older brother that is heartbreaking. There is joy in heaven when one sinner repents, but sometimes not so much among the "saved." And that's truly a shame. Don't be that older brother.

Short-Sighted

God told us, "My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways My ways" (Isa 55:80). We seem to have made a practice of proving His point. Consider an easy example. The Old Testament prophets gave all sorts of information about the coming Messiah -- some 300 prophecies. Yet, when the Messiah arrived, the Jews had no idea that He was going to die, or that He was not the Conquering King, and so much more. They had the information and simply missed it. Didn't take it in. Didn't see it. They were short-sighted.

We're really good at that today. We read, "Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God" (Luke 6:20) and think, "Oh, people with less money and food inherit the kingdom." He wasn't talking about that "poor." He was talking about the "poor in spirit" (Matt 5:3). Poor, yes, but not our kind of poor; a spiritual poor. Jesus said He was fulfilling Isaiah's prophecy to "the poor, the captives, the blind, the oppressed" (Luke 4:17-21), and we think of the people we know who are poor, captives, blind, and oppressed. Jesus was talking about the spiritually poor, the spiritual captives, the spiritually blind, the spiritually oppressed. (We know this because He did not solve all those problems when He was here, but He did solve the spiritual problems at the Cross.) We read, "For I know the plans I have for you, declares YHWH, plans for welfare and not for evil, to give you a future and a hope" (Jer 29:11) and think, "Oh, cool, we're going to get rich!!", forgetting His thoughts are not our thoughts and we keep thinking He's like us.

I'd imagine most of us can think of a whole lot more examples of seemingly straightforward things said in Scripture that turn out to clearly be something else ... something more. That's why we need the Spirit. Natural man does not understand the things of God (1 Cor 2:14) and is blinded by the god of this world (2 Cor 4:4). Thinking God's thoughts after Him doesn't come naturally, but we who are born of the Spirit have the Spirit to lead us into all truth. We should be cautious in reading God's Word too simply. It's not hard, but it's not necessarily natural, either. (And isn't it funny that a lot of those who claim the simplest readings of some of these texts also deny the reliability of Scripture?)

How Firm a Foundation

How firm a foundation, ye saints of the Lord,
Is laid for your faith in His excellent Word!
What more can He say than to you He hath said,
To you who for refuge to Jesus have fled?

"Fear not, I am with thee; O be not dismayed,
For I am thy God, and will still give thee aid.
I'll strengthen thee, help thee, and cause thee to stand,
Upheld by My righteous, omnipotent hand."

"When through fiery trials thy pathway shall lie,
My grace, all sufficient, shall be thy supply.
The flame shall not hurt thee; I only design
Thy dross to consume and thy gold to refine."

"The soul that on Jesus hath leaned for repose
I will not, I will not desert to its foes;
That soul, though all hell shall endeavor to shake,
I'll never, no, never, no, never forsake!"

The actual author of this hymn is unknown. It was published in a book of hymns by Dr. John Rippon in 1787. Dr. Rippon was the pastor of Carters Lane Baptist Church in London, England, for 63 years. The hymn has been called "the unofficial hymn textbook for Baptist Churches." Andrew Jackson requested it near the end of his life, and Robert E. Lee asked that it be sung at his funeral service in tribute to his God.

The hymn is actually a sermon. The first verse states the intent, while the following verses present various promises from Scripture. So what is the premise of this hymn-sermon? We saints stand on a firm foundation laid on God's Word. So complete is it that there is nothing more to be said. This is, on the face of it, not a remarkable view, but when we scratch the surface, there is a depth beneath that we may not have seen.

How complete is God's Word for our lives? The author of this hymn believes that in matters of faith, the Bible is complete, lacking nothing. In fact, God has said to us all He needs to say for our lives. Is that what you believe? Modern critics have arisen who claim otherwise. The Bible is no longer considered the infallible Word of God. Most mainline churches and seminaries have altered their statement of beliefs to varying extent to remove that odious claim. After all, what did the authors of old know about us and our culture? How could they possibly have understood our "no-fault" divorce laws, our concepts of living together before marriage to wisely test the waters, so to speak, or our problems with crime, teenage pregnancy, abortion, drugs, etc.? Times have changed. But the hymn-writer claims otherwise. Perhaps he understood the concept of God's omniscience and immutability. He definitely had a larger view of God than our present day does. And it is on the basis of this concept of God that the inerrancy of Scripture is claimed.

Now, if Scripture is the Word of God (no light claim), it must alter the life of anyone who believes that to be true. The views of our society become radically wrong. Rampant divorce in the Church becomes an affront to God. Premarital sex is no longer an option. It is called "sin." Homosexuality is no longer an alternate lifestyle. It is called "sin." Further, our attention to Scripture would necessarily increase if we actually believed that it was words written from the heart of God. It would drive every facet of our lives, transform every set of choices, and radically revise our thinking. "What more can He say than to you He has said?"

Look next at the passages from which our "sermon" comes. The first reference is Isaiah 41:10. It almost comes word for word from the verse. "Fear not," God says, for "I am with you. I am your God, and I will give you the aid you need. I'll strengthen you, help you, and cause you to stand. You are upheld by My righteous, omnipotent hand." Imagine! Our strength is His hand! It is the constant presence of God that makes unbearable circumstances bearable, even joyous. God Himself has promised to walk with us, even in the valley of death. He has the capacity and determination to use our worst experiences for His glory and our best gain. If God is for us, who can be against us?

Verse three refers to 2 Corinthians 12:9. "My grace is sufficient for you, for My power is perfected in weakness." The hymnist continues with the subject of suffering. (Why do we struggle so much with suffering in our modern world, as if it is a surprise? God has promised it. The writer of this hymn recognized that.) What is God's answer? "My grace is sufficient." It is when we understand the character and intent of God that we can accept this answer. Perfect love casts out fear. When we see that He loves us perfectly, we can begin to see His perfect intentions. He is purifying us, making us lights in a dark world, making us holy, as He is holy. The hymnist puts it much better than I. "The flame shall not hurt thee; I only design thy dross to consume and thy gold to refine." We cling to the dross, almost missing entirely the gold. But God has better ideas in mind for us!

The hymnist seems to have had training in Greek. He displays a real knowledge of Hebrews 13:5 in the final verse. In most Bibles it reads, "I will never leave you, nor will I ever forsake you." However, we lose something in the translation. "Never," in the Greek, is a double intensified word. It is stressed. More accurately, it should read, "I will never, never leave you." The hymn says, "I will not, I will not . . ." The phrase "nor will I ever" is triple intensified in Greek. Perhaps it would read, "I will never, never, never forsake you." The hymnist writes, "I'll never, no, never, no, never forsake!" Now, the writers of the Bible used repetition in much the same way we do today. It was for emphasis. Jesus, for instance, always spoke truth. He was a rabbi. So when He said, "Verily . . .," it caught the disciples' ear. When He said, "Verily, verily . . .," the disciples would have paid utmost attention. This was ultimate and important Truth. So when the author of Hebrews says, "never, never, never," it is a serious statement. Think about that. God, the Creator of the universe, has promised to never, with paramount emphasis, leave us alone or stranded. This is too wonderful to comprehend! God is always with me! What does that do to my view of life? How do I perceive the events of my existence when the Sovereign Lord is always at hand? How does that alter my choices knowing I am always in His company? What does that do to fear and worry?

Paul wrote to the Colossians, "Let the peace of God rule in your hearts." The word "rule" means literally "to arbitrate." In other words, let God's peace in your heart be the arbitrator of your well-being. Do you have a sense of God's peace? If not, it is not a failure on God's part. He is with us. He is sufficient. He will never leave us. What room is there for agitation? Why fret? What could possibly bring any distress? Are you anxious? Let God's peace arbitrate. Recognize that anxiety is your refusal to believe God. Reaffirm your faith. The answer to anxiety is not harder work. It is renewed faith. We need to look hard at our failure to trust the God we claim to have trusted. He is, above all, trustworthy.

News Weakly

Eliminating Parental Rights
A federal judge blocked a Tennessee law that prevented adults from helping minors get abortions without parental permission. Obviously. Because the federal government believes parents should have all the responsibility and none of the rights of being parents. "All of your kids are ours."

I Don't Even ...?
Alabama has decided that a person can get their driver's license changed to reflect their "new gender" ... as long as they sterilize themselves first. I'm not at all happy about the whole anti-science, nonsensical concept of "transgender," but I'm not at all clear about how sterilization makes it better. Mind you, changing sex designations on a driver's license to match gender identity is a crazy thing, but so is this new ruling.

A Threat to Democracy
Robert Kennedy Jr. tried to position himself as the "right candidate" in past months, concerned about truth and justice and all that. As opposed to the Left. As opposed, even, to Trump. But he saw the writing on the wall and dropped out, fighting to have his name removed from ballots on states in which it would dilute the pool. Until now. Now, the candidate who is not running for president is suing to have his name put back on the ballot in New York, not because he hopes to get elected (he's not running), but because it will dilute the Democratic vote in that state. Now, if "democracy" is a numbers game, then however you arrive at your numbers, "democracy" is all well and good, but if it is discovering "the will of the people," this will only eliminate that possibility. Pure political gamesmanship to skew numbers in favor of an outcome. So much for democracy. So much for integrity, Mr. Kennedy.

You Keep Using That Word ...
Two reports are out bemoaning the rise of book banning in schools. "These things," they are crying, "ought not be! It's censorship! It is in direct opposition to the freedom of the press!" Except ... it isn't. No one flinches when they disallow, for instance, Playboy magazines in elementary school libraries. Six-year-old boys don't need porn readily available in their schools. Nor do eight-year-olds need to learn about the mechanics of gay sex. And that's not "censorship" or "book banning" because all that garbage is available elsewhere. It's only "book banning" when the books are banned, not just when they're not allowed in a specific, child-centered venue. Pornography took over this country first via the "free speech" argument. If we keep this up, every six-year-old boy will be able to learn to read from the likes of The Happy Hooker, Fifty Shades of Grey, and The Joys of Gay Sex for the sake of the "free press." And that's not progress.

Kettle, Meet Pot
Harris's campaign has been banging away at "Trump's plan to charge a national sales tax." She is (deceitfully) referring to his (ill-advised) plan to charge tariffs for foreign goods, which, in turn will raise prices on foreign goods sold to the consumer. That part is true, but only foreign goods. Fortunately, Harris's plan is to "raise corporate taxes" ... which, of course, will raise the price of American goods. Is she going to call this her "national sales tax"? Oh, no, never mind. That would make her an honest politician ... something we don't see much of.

Fake News You Can Trust
The Bee has a story about how Democrats are warning that if public libraries are defunded, homeless people will have nowhere to watch porn. They have a point. After California banned "deep fake" political ads (actual story) (although it's still legal to lie boldly in political ads) and limited AI imagery (actual story), the Bee is reporting raids in California seizing over 2,000 memes while Texas Governor Abbott declares Texas a sanctuary state for memers. And the real reason Newsom signed the ban was because he was tricked into thinking a picture of Trump as a merman was real.

I know it's true; I read it on the Internet.

All to God's Glory

There are some surprisingly sweeping statements in Scripture that are sometimes hard to fathom. We read, for instance, "No one does good, not even one" (Rom 3:12; Psa 53:3). No one does good? Not even one? That's a sweeping claim. We are told to "love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind" (Matt 22:37). All your heart, soul, and mind? That's a sweeping command. There are many of these. But one that is striking is the command Paul gives in his first epistle to the church at Corinth.

So, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God. (1 Cor 10:31)

The basic command is "Do all to the glory of God." Our tendency might be to think something like, "Anything spiritual I do needs to be to the glory of God" or something like it. "Anything really important." Something like that. But this command is "all." And to make the point, Paul specifies (because of the context) "whether you eat or drink" along with "whatever you do." That is, eating and drinking falls under the command to do all to the glory of God. Now, let me ask you, how do you eat or drink to the glory of God?

The whole notion is daunting, to tell the truth. I'm supposed to do my work to the glory of God. I'm supposed to love my wife to the glory of God. I'm supposed to get dressed to the glory of God. If I talk with friends, I'm supposed to do it to the glory of God. If I play a game, I'm supposed to do it to the glory of God. If I "sits and thinks," I'm supposed to do it to the glory of God. Whatever I do, I'm supposed to do it to the glory of God. Whatever. Do I? Not even close.

The sad thing, of course, is that not only do we fail to do this, but we fail to even think about it. Do we ask, "How will I glorify God when I stop at Starbucks for a cup of coffee"? Do we wonder, "Does my playing video games glorify God in any way?" Women might stereotypically ask, "Does this dress make me look fat?" but who asks, "Will this dress glorify God?" Like loving God with all that we are, we fall so far short of glorifying God in all we do. And, honestly, that's to be expected this side of eternity; we are people in process. Still, shouldn't it bother us? A little? Shouldn't we want to do better?

Unsung Heroes

A hero is defined, according to the dictionary, as "a person noted for courageous acts or nobility of character." I think sometimes we throw the word around a little too loosely. Someone we admire, for instance, might be termed "my hero," but "courageous acts" or "nobility of character" may not really be in view. And we will use the term, "unsung hero," in a similar way, possibly referring to someone who didn't get the fame or celebrity status we think they should. Genuine heroes, though, I think are often unsung. They do great deeds of courage and character and go unnoticed. And, of course, that's partly because a person of truly noble character will be humble.

I think of the wife who submits to her husband as to the Lord even when he is disobedient to the Word (Eph 5:22-24; 1 Peter 3:1-4). These women are few and far between. If they are noticed, the typical response is ridicule, not appreciation. But the faith this takes, trusting God over all else, is courageous, bespeaking a real nobility of character. I think of the husband who sacrifices self to love His wife without regard for his own wants or wishes (Eph 5:25-27). It's not human. As one Christian counselor told me, "That's crazy." Because it is in direct opposition to basic human nature, an ongoing act of real bravery in the face of self and society. I think of parents who love their children above "stuff" and status and the world. Fathers bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord (Eph 6:4). Who does that anymore? Most leave it to public school devoid of God and to Sunday School teachers and to their peers and the rest. These parents are as rare as can be, but they are courageous and noble and are unsung heroes in my book.

Just a few examples. If a real hero is to have a noble character, it requires that they have a functioning relationship with Christ. If a true hero is to be courageous, it requires that they have a vibrant and solid faith in the God who supplies. These people are not common. We don't encounter too many. Most are unassuming, quiet, and gentle, but not wavering. They don't do it for the accolades, which is good, because there are precious few for this kind of hero -- a sincere follower of Christ, dying to self daily and seeking to serve Him and His people at every turn. Unsung heroes.

Command and Conquer

St. Augustine is known for some pretty deep theology, but sometimes you have to wonder. One of his famous statements comes from his spiritual autobiography, The Confessions. In it he prays, "Command what You will, and give what You command." Wait ... what? Augustine told God to be God -- "command what You will" -- perhaps something we don't allow from God at times. "What, me? Submit? Oh, no." That sort of thing. But if God is God, that's our problem, not God's. The real issue here is the second phrase. "Give what You command." The idea here is "By all means, God, tell me to do whatever you want. I only ask that You carry it out in me." Is that a thing? Is that even possible? I mean, it sounds like an abrogation of my own free will. And it sounds like I'm expecting God to make me obedient. I mean, didn't Augustine realize that God does not want robots, that love is only love when it's given freely?

I would like to point out that nowhere in the pages of Scripture do we find either of those claims -- God doesn't want robots, and love is only love when it's given freely. So let's pause a moment. First, what do we know about free will? Free will is the ability to make choices without coercion. Some like to expand it, but always to places that make no sense. And the truth is we don't have absolute free will. That is, I cannot simply choose, for instance, to flap my arms and fly to the moon. We have limitations. We are limited by our natures. We always choose according to our strongest inclination. So when Augustine asked God to give him what He commanded, it was a simple request to "change my 'want to'," so to speak. "Change my strongest inclinations." Is there anything that would make us think God does that? Why, yes, there is! Paul wrote a command -- "work out your salvation with fear and trembling" (Php 2:12) -- followed by the description of how that is accomplished.

... for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure. (Php 2:13)

Isn't that interesting? Our free will is determined by that which we desire most. Paul here says that God is at work in you and me. What is He doing? He is bringing about the desire (will) and the power to do what He commands. Is that not, then, exactly what Augustine prayed? "Lord, command what You will, and that thing that Paul said -- at work in me to will and to do -- do that in me."

My dream is to someday become God's robot, God's perfect "following machine," doing whatever He says without question or faltering. We're supposed to surrender everything to Him, and I want to surrender my will to Him. I want to love Him without variation or effort, but just all in all. The common wisdom tells me that these are not compatible, that God doesn't want that. Well, I do. And I pray, "Command what You will, and give what You command." Because I can't be relied upon to do that myself every time. And I want to do what He commands.

Full of Grace

Now, everyone knows that Mary, the mother of Jesus, was "full of grace." Says so right there in the "Hail Mary." Except, of course, that's not in Scripture. There is a reference to a biblical character being "full of grace." Stephen, one of the first deacons (Acts 6:1-5), is described as "full of grace and power" (Acts 6:8). As a refresher, what is grace? Grace is unmerited favor (Rom 11:6). It is favor that is not deserved or earned. So just what does a follower of Christ who is full of grace look like?

Stephen's primary job was taking care of people (Acts 6:2). Stephen was "doing great wonders and signs" (Acts 6:8), although there's no reason that all who are "full of grace" do that. But Stephen ran up against the religious unbelievers of his day, and that's not unlikely for people pursuing grace. Stephen went on trial for false accusations (Acts 6:10-14). In the Council chambers, he spoke his only recorded sermon -- 52 verses long (Acts 7:2-53). He gave a rundown of Israel's history from Abraham on, explaining Israel's history of rebellion. He told them, "The Most High does not dwell in houses made by human hands" (Acts 7:48). You can be confident that got their dander up. And then he did what all those who are full of grace do; he accused them of being stiff-necked, uncircumcised in the heart, and resisting the Holy Spirit. "Now, hang on," we might want to retort, "doesn't 'full of grace' mean we don't point out others' wrongs?" No, that would more likely be "full of mercy," where justice is set aside. Grace gives favor to those who don't deserve it, and pointing out sin is simply pointing out "they don't deserve it."

The crowd, of course, took it well. Okay, no, they rushed at him, dragged him out of the city, and stoned him to death. But note Stephen's response. As they were stoning him, he called on the Lord: "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit!" (Acts 7:59). And then he prayed, "Lord, do not hold this sin against them!" (Acts 7:60). And he died. That, dear reader, is "full of grace." He served others. He did God's work. He faced false accusations with "the face of an angel" (Acts 6:15). He did point out their sin because it was the issue -- he spoke the truth in love -- and he prayed for their forgiveness ... while they murdered him. Being full of grace, you see, doesn't mean turning a blind eye to sin or not speaking up about the truth when it's required. It pursues the truth in love and seeks the best for those who don't deserve it, sometimes at great cost to self. Grace is not ignoring sin; grace is the solution to sin.

Heteronyms and Homophones

English can get tricky, can't it? Take, for instance, two categories of words: heteronyms and homophones. Heteronyms are words that are spelled the same, but are pronounced differently. Homophones are words that are pronounced the same, but spelled differently.

In the heteronym category, you might have a guide lead you to a lead mine. It's hard to play a bass fiddle while fishing for bass. You will, however, need a permit to permit you to fish. Some lab workers wanted it in their contract that they wouldn't contract any diseases. At Christmas we frequently present presents. We all know that deer would have does for mothers, but so does the baby rabbit. Just because a person is an invalid doesn't mean his ideas are invalid. Heteronymns.

Homophones are, perhaps, better known. "They're going to their home over there." "You two can go to your home, too." "Swiss cheese isn't holy, but it is wholly holey." "We didn't want to err when we let the heir go for some air." And, of course, we all remember NSync's hit, Buy, By, Bye.

It's all very confusing (and amusing). Like my favorite longest sentence using one word: "Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo." Since "buffalo" can mean a city (Buffalo, NY) as an adjective (someone from Buffalo), an animal (a buffalo or bison) as a noun, or the attempt to intimidate (to buffalo) as a verb, this is a grammatically correct sentence. That is, buffalo from Buffalo that buffalo from Buffalo intimidate (buffalo) also intimidate (buffalo) buffalo from Buffalo. Ouch! No one ever said English was easy.

All the Way My Savior Leads Me

All the Way My Savior Leads Me
Fanny Crosby

All the way my Savior leads me–
What have I to ask beside?
Can I doubt His tender mercy,
Who through life has been my guide?
Heav'nly peace, divinest comfort,
Here by faith in Him to dwell!
For I know, whate’er befall me,
Jesus doeth all things well;
For I know, whate’er befall me,
Jesus doeth all things well.

All the way my Savior leads me–
Cheers each winding path I tread,
Gives me grace for ev'ry trial,
Feeds me with the living bread.
Though my weary steps may falter
And my soul athirst may be,
Gushing from the rock before me,
Lo! a spring of joy I see;
Gushing from the rock before me,
Lo! A spring of joy I see.

All the way my Savior leads me–
Oh, the fullness of His love!
Perfect rest to me is promised
In my Father's house above.
When my spirit, clothed immortal,
Wings its flight to realms of day,
This my song through endless ages:
Jesus led me all the way;
This my song through endless ages:
Jesus led me all the way.

Written in 1875 by famed hymn writer, Fanny Crosby, this was her first hymn to be set to music. The hymn reflects Fanny's life experiences. She was born of a mother and father who were related, a source of embarrassment all her life, and, at six weeks old, contracted an inflammation of the eyes that resulted in blindness. All this to say that Fanny Crosby may have been the least likely ... or, perhaps, the most likely to speak this way of her Savior.

You see, I hope, with this information about Crosby, just how touching that first verse is -- the blind woman whose Savior is her guide. Someone might ask, "Fanny, how can you not doubt His tender mercy ... since you're blind," but she speaks from experience. Her Savior, through life, has been her guide. So she says with a confidence few of us possess, "I know, whate’er befall me, Jesus doeth all things well." It's the theme of her song. Gives grace for every trial. Feeds with living bread. The fullness of His love.

One more thing to consider. Fanny Crosby was blind, but she knew the day would come when she would see Him face to face. Her spirit would be clothed in immortality. Her song through endless ages would be the praise that Jesus led her all the way. The outcome is known. Experience has proved it ... day by day, she has experienced it. And she knows there will be a day when blindness is no more and Christ would be all in all. I wonder. Would we be so joyful in her shoes?

News Weakly - 9/21/2024

Enemies of Life
Enemies of life in the womb have really ratcheted up their campaigns, haven't they? Especially in states that have tried to ban abortion or limit it severely. Now the ACLU is suing Florida for "misinformation" on abortion because "Safe abortion is a human right." Not a baby human's life, apparently. "Abortion doesn't threaten women's safety," they claim, although "threaten women's safety" is ambiguous if you include the mental, emotional, and spiritual long-term damage it does. The ACLU, again, is anxious to deprive the unborn of their American civil liberties in the name of American civil liberties. Go figure.

No Justice, No Peace
Because of her great regard for the law, District Attorney Fani Willis failed to appear at a hearing that was about her investigation. "I decide when a subpoena is valid, and any subpoena issued to me is not." Apparently. But, trust her, she's all about the law and justice ... except where it involves her.

Another Patriot
You're all aware that there was a 2nd assassination attempt on Trump over the weekend. I'm sure the shooter was a patriot because he was doing his part to defend American democracy from the existential threat of tyranny that is Donald Trump. We know this because the loud-and-long Dems and their mainstream-media lackeys keep telling us so. Along with things like "Project 2025 is Donald Trump's attempt to ban abortion" and the like. You know ... lies and slander. Or, as I like to call it, politics as usual.

Filed Under "What Could Go Wrong?"
The U.S. Navy has commissioned their first "co-ed" submarine where males and females (or whatever, I guess) serve side by side. Given the longstanding, well-known history of military males in general and sailors in particular in regards to women, I can't imagine why anyone would think this was a bad idea. Because diversity in combat is integral to a good fighting machine. Sorry. Could not say that with a straight face.

News You Can't Trust
The headline: "Disney trips meant for homeless students went to NYC school employees' kids." The cads! The bounders! What a corrupt system!! Well, now, hang on. Turns out it was 6 of them -- six corrupt NYC school employees. Out of ... what ... thousands? Yes, that was bad. No, it's not widespread. And this illustrates the central problem of "news." We hear the headline and think. "The world is coming to an end!!" (Think "Child kidnapped from park" or "School shooting!" or "COVID" ... news stories that have shaped our lives even though they were in the extreme minority.)

As I Was Saying
So, as it turns out, another "conspiracy theory" has been confirmed. A recent study has linked the COVID pandemic with a market in Wuhan, China ... like so many were saying and so many "better informed" were dismissing. Because if there is anything we can trust in this world, it's the news media and science. Oh, and politicians. Definitely politicians.

The World Turns
In an expected and disappointing resolution, the UN has declared itself "antisemitic," essentially agreeing with the pro-Palestinian "from the river to the sea" mantra. They have decided that the defenders need to withdraw from the aggressors, that Israel needs to get out of Palestine. Israel needs to withdraw so Hamas can recover and return to their prior efforts of the genocide of Israel. Now they can do it with the UN's blessing. (In what way is that "united" nations?)

And now the Bee Side
Lots of news about the latest assassination attempt. The media is worried that these constant attempts might distract from the plight of illegal immigrants. On the other hand, Biden has assured the nation that the next assassin will be a woman of color. In an unrelated story, it appears that Rashida Tlaib was uninjured after her pager mysteriously exploded. That's odd.

Must be true; I read it on the Internet.

Spiritual Gifts

I've been a Christian a long time. When the family went on vacation, we'd visit churches wherever we went. I was in the Air Force for 10 years and lived in lots of places, experiencing lots of churches. Each is individual, but a common thread was the constant problem of exclusiveness. No, not "Christ is the only way." I've noted for a long time that it's generally hard to break into a church. They are so often established and, therefore, not quick to embrace new people, to fold them into the fold, so to speak. Discipleship is a rarity and connection can often be difficult, even in otherwise very good churches. I think, in fact, that this is the draw of megachurches for some. People can attend without being involved, connected, accountable.

It's jarring, then, to read about spiritual gifts. In his first epistle to the church at Corinth, Paul addresses the topic ... for several chapters. He establishes the concept in chapter 12.

Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; and there are varieties of service, but the same Lord; and there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God who empowers them all in everyone. To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. (1 Cor 12:4-7)

What do we know? The gifts are provided by the Spirit. They're not inborn talents, acquired skills, trained actions, or anything that we produce. Further, each of us have at least one. No one is without a spiritual gift. Finally, the purpose of these spiritual gifts is "the common good." They're not for you; they're for the Body of Christ. Paul gives a sample list of gifts (1 Cor 12:8-10) (as in "varieties of gifts"), but he reiterates "All these are empowered by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as He wills" (1 Cor 12:11). He wills who gets what; not us.

Paul draws word pictures after that of the function of gifts in the Body by using the human body (1 Cor 12:12-26). No parts are without purpose; no parts are better than any other. Your gift is just as important as anyone else. Your gift is not more important than anyone else. All are individual. All are from the Spirit. All are necessary.

Which brings us to the modern "favored" category of "the Nones." These are people who consider themselves "spiritual" but not "religious." Self-identified Christians often tout this category. "Yes, I believe in Jesus, but I don't need some gathering of people to believe in Jesus." If it's not that far out, it's often more like, "Sure, I go to church; I just am not really involved." "Once a month or so." "At least on Christmas and Easter." We've grown, perhaps as an exercise in "American liberty," to disconnect "Christian" with "church." Go for a good sermon if you must, but let's not get too connected, you know? We've got enough going on in life; we don't need more "stuff" to do.

To every true believer, please let me be clear. That is not a biblical concept. Every true believer is part of the Body of Christ. Every true believer is gifted specifically to function in that Body. You've been given something from God (the Spirit) that you are supposed to share with other believers. It's not for you; it's for them. You can't function properly in the Body by disassociating yourself ... from the Body. And that includes emotionally disassociating yourself. "Oh, I'm there; I just don't want to be too connected." The Spirit gives us each a purpose and a gift to meet that purpose and if we simply ignore it, what does that say about our relationship with God? "Yeah, You're all right with me ... just don't ask me to do too much." Good luck with that.

Sojourners and Exiles

Jeremiah was the prophet of God to Judah warning of the coming Babylonian exile and after. In chapter 29, Jeremiah gave instructions to the exiles. We all know that amazing, "'I know the plans that I have for you,' declares YHWH, 'plans for welfare and not for calamity to give you a future and a hope. Then you will call upon Me and come and pray to Me, and I will listen to you'" (Jer 29:11-12). Good stuff. The rather odd stuff, then, is what came before.

Thus says YHWH of hosts, the God of Israel, to all the exiles whom I have sent into exile from Jerusalem to Babylon, "Build houses and live in them; and plant gardens and eat their produce. 'Take wives and become the fathers of sons and daughters, and take wives for your sons and give your daughters to husbands, that they may bear sons and daughters; and multiply there and do not decrease. Seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to YHWH on its behalf; for in its welfare you will have welfare." (Jer 29:4-7)

Seems really strange, doesn't it? We're talking about their assailants, their captors. "Live among them. Make a life." More strange, though, was that last. "Seek the welfare of the city" and "pray to YHWH on its behalf." Umm, they're the enemy. Why would the Jewish exiles do that? Well, God answers that. "In its welfare, you will have welfare." "Okay. I guess. Seems strange to seek the welfare of those who destroyed your homes and carried you off into captivity, but ... if that's what He says, that's what we should do."

At this highly-charged time in our nation -- politically emotionally, morally, etc. -- it's worth a consideration for believers here. We know that "If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him" (1 John 2:15). We know that we are "sojourners and exiles" here (1 Peter 2:11). We are not of the world (John 17:16), but simply ambassadors (2 Cor 5:20). So what is our duty to this world system, this political existence, this place where we temporarily reside? I would argue that Jeremiah's words are applicable to each Christian today. "Seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to God on its behalf; for in its welfare you will have welfare." Our allegiance is not to family first or Republicans first or America first, but to Christ. As such, our primary concern is not politics or party, but Christ. Still, we must not simply withdraw, as some are tempted to do. We must involve ourselves in our surrounding world for its well-being until we are released to go home. In the well-being of the place we live we will find (temporary) well-being. In fact, our relationship with Christ supplies us with both the best source for well-being and the best definition for well-being (and it's not what the world thinks). It only makes sense.

Paul Meanders

So then do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is. And do not get drunk with wine, for that is dissipation, but be filled with the Spirit, speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody with your heart to the Lord; always giving thanks for all things in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ to God, even the Father; and be subject to one another in the fear of Christ. (Eph 5:17-21)

It's an interesting text, actually, because it doesn't seem to go where we'd think it would go. First, there is "Don't be foolish." Sure, okay. What is the opposite of foolish? "Understand what the will of the Lord is." Now, that's something. Don't simply know God's will; understand it. Which puts "foolish" in the category of sinfulness rather than simple error. To us, "foolish" is lacking good sense. To Scripture, it is refusing to understand God's will. The next verse, then, expands on the concept ... in a new direction. Don't get drunk -- that's just excess without reason. No, if you want to avoid being foolish -- want to understand the will of the Lord -- instead be filled with the Spirit. Okay, now we may not have seen that coming, but it makes sense. That word there, "be filled," is in a continuous tense. "Be being filled." It means to cram, to make replete, to fill to overflowing. Don't stop with "have the Holy Spirit" -- "fill 'er up!" Get yourself so stuffed full of the Spirit that there's no room for you. That's not dissipation; that's reasonable excess. What does that look like? It changes how we speak to each other. It includes songs, making melody, always giving thanks for all things.

One more turn on this surprising walk from "foolish" to "understand the will of God." Be subject to one another. "Wait ... what?" You and I may not see it, but Paul saw it as perfectly in line with "understand the will of God." Be subject to one another. In fact, Eph 5:22-6:9 are multiple examples of "be subject to one another from both sides. A wife to a husband and a husband to a wife. A child to parents and a father to his child. A slave to his master and a master to his slave. (All of which requires you understand what "subject" means, and it's not "devalued".) Because, you see, we are called to be humble, to give self up (Php 2:5-8). That is the will of the Lord. It shows itself in behavior and in speech and in attitude -- an attitude of gratitude. Turns out, it's a pretty tall order.

I Need You

Why do we pray? We pray to make our requests known to God (Php 4:6). We pray because we are commanded to (1 Thess 5:17). We pray because it's a good idea. We pray because prayer changes things. No, not God, but things. Especially us. Still, if God is Sovereign and always does what He intends and always accomplishes His plans, why pray?

Prayer is, first and foremost, communication with God. And you all nod and agree, but think about that for a moment. The King of kings and Lord of lords asks you to communicate with Him. To talk to Him. To tell Him what's on your heart. What Sovereign does that? That's stunning. So we do. We praise Him and we thank Him and we confess our sin to Him and we make supplications to Him. Sure, partly because we're commanded to, but, more importantly, because He wants us to and we need to.

Prayer, in its basic form, is a deep and certain acknowledgment that we need Him. We can't do it ourselves. We aren't enough. We don't have what it takes. We don't ask someone else for what we can provide, right? No, prayer is, at its core, a plea that begins, "I need You," voiced or not. Which is very much where we need to start, stay, and end.

A Prayer for Every Believer

The hymn, Be Thou My Vision, is from 6th century Ireland, but translated from Gaelic into English in the late 1800's. You can imagine, then, that it has old English. And it does. The second line is, "Naught be all else to me, save that Thou art." Right. What did he say?

I have to analyze that to figure it out. Let's see ... "naught" ... that's an archaic English word for "nothing." The "Let" is implied, so we have "Let nothing be all else to me." Stop. "Be all else to me"? That would be "everything." Or, more precisely, "everything but You." "Let nothing be everything to me ..." Okay, so far, so good. That word, "save," is old English for "except" (as opposed to "save"). "Let nothing be everything to me except ..." So what does the hymn pray will be everything to me? "That Thou art." If the intent was that nothing would mean as much to me as You do, then "what" seems like it would have been the right word. "Save what Thou art." But this word is "that." It seems to be saying, "Let nothing be as important to me as the fact that You are." Not "what You are," but "that You are." Interesting.

Maybe not. Maybe that "that" is an old English expression and the prayer is that nothing would be more important to me than He is. Nothing. And that's quite a prayer. Instead of me looking anywhere else, Father, You be my vision. You be where I look. You be my "best thought." You be my light. You be my "true Word." You be my treasure, my inheritance. You be first in my heart. "Whatever befall, still be Thou my vision, O Ruler of all." A great prayer for every believer.