We Beheld His Glory

In his gospel, John wrote, "And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth" (John 1:14). Really? "We saw His glory"? Yes. John saw it. He was at the Transfiguration (Matt 17:1-8). Peter, James, and John saw His glory. So ... what about us? Where's our "saw His glory"?

In the show, Crossing Jordan, a scientist in the forensics lab who specializes in bugs tells his skeptical buddy that the ganglia of a beetle is enough to prove the existence of God. It's true. Or ... to put it in biblical terms, "Since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse" (Rom 1:20). Or, maybe more succinctly, "The heavens are telling of the glory of God; and their expanse is declaring the work of His hands" (Psa 19:1).

"They saw the glory of God! Where's ours?" Right here. Look around. In creation, in all that exists around us, in the cell and the beetle and the Sun and in the universe and in the human being, His glory is displayed. If you haven't seen it, you're not looking. God's nature, His character, His being, His glory is displayed in everything around us. Don't miss it.

Hollow Man

Hi. My name is Hollow Man. I am not gender-specific. You’ll find me in men and women alike. The specifics may vary, but the underlying characteristics will remain the same. Let me tell you about myself. Who knows? You may know me better than you think.

My primary concern is for the individual. Of course, the individual I primarily have in mind is me. I determine right and wrong, good and bad, worthwhile or a waste of time by what best pleases me. I may take drugs because it makes me feel better or I may refuse to take drugs because it’s bad for me, but, bottom line, my evaluations are based on me. America loves individualism, and I am the personification of individualism. My goals, values, and interests are all oriented to what suits me best.

Older generations had this sense of "selflessness". They were willing to sacrifice personal gain and pleasure for the good of others – family, work, God, and country. I am not plagued with that malady. I know what is important. How I look is important. What I own is important. My comfort level is important. I may realize that what I have isn’t quite enough, so I will continue to strive for more. I am a lover of pleasure. I disdain the notion of delayed gratification and believe that we should seek pleasure wherever we may find it. The old "if it feels good, do it" is a reasonable motto for me. The reverse is also true: if it doesn’t feel good, it’s probably not worth doing.

Some have described me as narcissistic. I may be preoccupied with my own needs and desires, but isn’t self-esteem the number one priority? Some say that truth is important; I ask, "What is truth?" I subscribe to the notion that truth is relative – that there is no such thing as absolute truth – not recognizing that this is a statement of absolute truth. I disdain those who are intolerant and judgmental, not realizing that I am being intolerant and judgmental in this view. I will do all I have to do to obtain what I deserve. I will manipulate my friends, family, even God to get what I think I should have. There is, after all, no one who is more important than I am.

Entertainment is important to me. It comes in many forms. However, I don’t think I need to really do a lot to obtain it. I think that I should be entertained. If the show I’m watching isn’t entertaining, I’ll switch to another. If the game I’m playing isn’t entertaining, I’ll go to another. If baseball isn’t exciting enough, I’ll watch football or basketball. When I get tired of this music group, there’s surely another around the corner that will bring new excitement. I don’t realize, of course, that excitement doesn’t last, and, unfortunately, the things that entertain me today are boring tomorrow. But it isn’t my job to amuse me. It is the job of the entertainers – the media and the musicians and the actors and the sports stars and the amusement parks and . . . well, our society is clearly built on this concept, so it must be true.

Some have tried to push us beyond the here and now, but I understand better than that. The clearest presentation of the world we live in is the senses. Religion may try to impress God on us, and that’s fine as far as it goes, but there’s nothing like science for the truth. Science tests things and proves things and demonstrates things. Pictures are worth a thousand words, so why read if I have the TV? I live in a world tuned to the senses – I should indulge them. What I feel is all that’s ultimately real. To go beyond the senses is to venture into the unknown and unproveable . . . and therefore the irrelevant. The deep thinkers, philosophers, theologians and the like are really unimportant to real life. Fortunately these days there are few of that type.

School may be of some importance to me, but only so far as it gives me a better life. If I can make more money, I might pursue an education, but why do some schools require all that History and English and the like? I might even go so far as a Masters degree if it means a larger income, but you’ll rarely find people like me with more than that because, frankly, it serves no purpose. Reading is not a priority with me, either. If I do read, it will undoubtedly be fiction, since that can provide some form of distraction. Frankly, reading is not entertaining enough, when I can get the images fed to me on the TV or movies screen.

I have been accused of having no heroes, but that’s simply not true. My heroes are the rock stars or the movie stars or the sports stars or the fashion stars of the day. I admire their looks or their abilities or whatever currently strikes my fancy. I am not the least bit concerned about their virtue. Character is not an issue. Good is defined not as that which is virtuous or right, but as that which gives me the most pleasure.

It’s a funny thing with me, but I hate quiet and solitude. I will always have a radio or TV going or be surrounded by friends. I may, for instance, keep myself in good shape (because looking good is important to me), but even while I exercise I’ll have the headset on with music going. A vacation is a good thing not because I can think more, but because I can think less when I vacate. Anything I can do to avoid real contemplation is a good thing. Noise is better than quiet, activity better than rest, and anonymous crowds better than solitude. It is much better to do than to simply be.

I am Hollow Man. Perhaps you know me. Perhaps you are me. I certainly believe my shallow beliefs and pursuits are important, and I will never, never ask "Why?" or "Could I be wrong?" or "Is there more to life than me?" I wonder if you don’t identify with me.

When You Grow Up

It's a popular question for kids. "What do you want to be when you grow up?" You'll get fanciful answers like "fairy princess" or "ballerina" or serious answers like "policeman" or "fireman." Reasons will vary. "I want to be a doctor so I can save people." "I want to be a lawyer because they make a lot of money." No one really takes it seriously, and it's all well and good ... but ... it actually matters. I mean, what you're going to be is a direction you need to take and if you're going to be something, you need to head that direction. My daughter, in high school, said, "I want to be a marine biologist." Well, that's all well and good ... except she was failing most of her classes. She wasn't heading in the direction she wanted to go.

Want do you want to be when you grow up? Scripture says that God causes all things to work together for good for a particular purpose.

But we know that to the ones loving God all things work together for good, to those being called according to purpose; because whom He foreknew, He also predestinated to be conformed to the image of His Son, for Him to be the first-born among many brothers. (Rom 8:28-29)

The "good" for which all things work together is "to be conformed to the image of His Son." Plain and simple. Is that what you want to be when you grow up? Paul wrote, "He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him" (Eph 1:4). "In the image of His Son." "Holy and blameless." Is that what you want to be when you grow up?

Paul counted all things that he had formerly counted as gain as loss for the sake of the cross (Php 3:7). He wanted to know Christ and attain the resurrection (Php 3:8-11). And he said, "Not that I have already obtained it or have already become perfect, but I press on so that I may lay hold of that for which also I was laid hold of by Christ Jesus. Brethren, I do not regard myself as having laid hold of it yet; but one thing I do: forgetting what lies behind and reaching forward to what lies ahead, I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus" (Php 3:12-14). "Become perfect." Is that what you want to be when you grow up? If not, you might be misguided. If so, perhaps you should be pressing on toward the upward call. You know, head toward what you want to be.

News Weakly - 10/18/2025

Noteworthy
Hamas appears to have released the last 20 living hostages from the October 7, 2023 attack on Israel. It seems like this ceasefire that Trump at least had a hand in is ... doing something good. That can't be right ... can it?

Consistent
The county of Los Angeles has declared a state of emergency due to ongoing ICE raids. A "sanctuary county," Los Angeles (city and county) flout federal immigration laws. Given their illegal stance and their proximity to the U.S./Mexico border, they have the largest population of illegal immigrants in the country, so obviously federal law enforcement operations are causing troubles in their population. Now the county will be providing tax dollars to aid families in their time of need who have chosen to ignore federal immigration laws. Consistent with their "sanctuary county" status.

Treasonous
Journalists have abandoned the Pentagon after refusing to abide by new rules on the release of information. They wanted the right to release any information they found, classified or not, and the Secretary of Defense required that the release had to be approved. You know ... like any common sense military would. Nope! Journalists won't do it. So they're out. Which doesn't seem like a bad thing, given their intent to commit treason.

By Any Other Name
Another violent pro-Palestinian protest, this time in Barcelona, Spain. Eight were arrested and 20 police injured as the ceasefire is going on. Clearly "peace in Palestine" is not in view. What is? "Eliminate Israel" seems to be the growing consensus. But we won't call it "antisemitism" ... which it clearly is.

A Wolf in Sheep's Clothing
Extremist mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani is trying to sound more right-leaning in his Fox News interview, apologizing to the NYPD for bad things he said about them and telling us that he's willing to work with Trump. He already positioned himself on the extreme left, but understands that he can't win over there, so he's walking back attacks on the police ... which he clearly intended but knows will harm his election bid. A politician, you see.

Your Best Source for Fake News
After the horrible success of the peace process in Gaza, Democrats are demanding that Trump stop fanning the flames of peace, deeply concerned that we're moving further away from World War 3. They'd much prefer our "mostly peaceful" protests like Spain and Berlin and the stuff from antifa, burning and looting neighborhoods near you. Leftists are taking to the streets protesting the end of genocide in Gaza ... you know, the actual genocide of trying to eliminate Israel. They're calling for "another October 7th" (no joke).

Must be true; I read it on the internet.

Why Am I Here?

Back in 2002, Rick Warren wrote an extremely popular book, The Purpose-Driven Life, in which readers were taken on a 40-day spiritual journey to discover the five purposes for human beings: Worship, fellowship, discipleship, ministry, and evangelism. The book built on Warren's previous The Purpose-Driven Church. (As it turns out, the same five purposes were for the church as well.) It is a common question: "What is my purpose in life?" We want to know why we're here. We want to understand what it all means. We don't want to believe that life is meaningless, that everything happens for no reason, and that I personally have no purpose in the grand scheme of things.

When you consider "things", that which is, it comes down to something quite simple. There is Creator and there is the created. That's all. Indeed, the created is a pure product of the Creator, having its very existence supplied and contained in Him. The Creator defines the created and, as the "artist" so to speak, gives the created its purpose. That which is created doesn't get the option to determine its own purpose. That's the sole right of the Creator. What does the Creator say is the purpose of human life? "For by [Christ] all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities -- all things were created through Him and for Him" (Col 1:16). For Him.

There are, I have no doubt, sub-purposes, so to speak. Worship is good. Fellowship, discipleship, all that stuff is good. They are, however, sub-purposes -- beneath a singular, overall, encompassing purpose that the Artist has given to His work. That singular purpose is to glorify Him. We might argue about some "social gospel" or Man's inhumanity to Man. We might debate our dominion over the earth or our "purpose" of saving the planet. We might come up with individual "purposes" where we seek and "find myself" (Where were you hiding?) and what I want to do. All well and good (perhaps), but there is an all-consuming, overarching purpose for human beings, and anything that operates outside of that purpose, as good as it might seem, is a waste at best and a disaster at worst. Despite the creation's best attempts at arguing our own purpose, the Creator is the only one who actually gets to decide. You might want to see if your idea of your purpose in life coincides with His.

The Proof is in the Pudding

A long-time mistaken phrase, the actual phrase is "the proof of the pudding is in the eating." That is, you may not be aware that it's so, but experience will show it. So we come across this somewhat inflammatory claim in Scripture. Is it true? Well ... "the proof of the pudding is in the eating."

The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it? (Jer 17:9)

Is it true?

Well, of course, any Bible-believing Christian will (should ... must) answer, "Yes!", because, obviously, it's in the Bible and the Bible is God's Word. But ... is it true ... demonstrably? Is there proof? Can we taste this metaphorical pudding? I think that's an easy question. It can be seen in our constant human problem with "unintended consequences," where things go wrong seemingly every time we apply a "good action." We are notoriously bad at judging intentions. We are remarkably good at rationalizing sin. We're often oblivious to our own double standards, our own self-contradictory lives where we point fingers at others for doing what we're doing ourselves ... often in pointing fingers at others. We delude ourselves into holding contradictory "truths" as true. We are exclusive in our inclusivity, judgmental in our ... nonjudgmental-ism. We demand tolerance and won't tolerate intolerance. We know God, but refuse to honor Him or thank Him (Rom 1:21). And that rots the brain (Rom 1:22, 28). And the very fact that there is such clear evidence that it's true and we still question it proves ... that we don't understand it.

So we get the next verse, a direct quote from God.

"I, YHWH, search the heart and test the mind, to give every man according to his ways, according to the fruit of his deeds." (Jer 17:10)

And we find ourselves under God's undeceived eye, knowing all truth about our character and depravity. So we stand at the claim and have evidence that it's true. We can even see how bad it is, even if we don't fully grasp how bad it is in our own hearts. And we need a solution. That's God. He searches and tests. And we can ask for help in that (Psa 139:23-24). And we can renew our minds (Rom 12:2). We do it by the Spirit (1 Cor 2:14). We do it by sacrificing self to God (Rom 12:1). We do it by God's Word (John 17:17). We don't do it when we ignore the fact that it's true.

Where Is God When It Hurts?

Philip Yancey wrote Where Is God When It Hurts?, a book examining suffering and pain in the believer's life. A lot of people ask the question in some form or another. It feels like, when things hurt, He's far off. Not paying attention. It feels like He's being capricious or just doesn't care. So ... what does Scripture say?

Who can forget David's bold claim, "Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for You are with me; Your rod and your staff, they comfort me" (Psa 23:4)? Paul wrote, "For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Rom 8:38-39). Hebrews says, "I will never leave you nor forsake you" (Heb 13:5), which is a quote from the Old Testament (Deut 31:6; Josh 1:5; 1 Chron 28:20). It is, in fact, a "double negative," not in the sense of a positive, but in the vein of "never, never." Emphatic. Jesus was called "Immanuel" (Matt 1:23), meaning "God with us," because He's always with us.

You can see, then, a trend. We think that God ... comes and goes. He gets close and then far. He's paying attention and then He's not. It feels that way. It's ... not ... true. He ... never ... leaves. So ... where is God when it hurts? Right there ... right alongside. Never far. Never distant. Never negligent. The sooner we realize this, the better off we'll be. The author of Hebrews says that because He has promised to never, never leave us, "we can confidently say, 'The Lord is my helper; I will not fear; what can man do to me?'" (Heb 13:6). Now isn't that exactly what we need when times are tough? 

Thanks for ... What??

We were driving home and I pointed out an Indiana license plate in Arizona. My wife didn't hesitate. "Indiana wants me ... but I can't go back there." Thanks a lot, dear. Now I have this tune stuck in my head. So I use my standard remedy. Replace it with another. For reasons I don't quite grasp, an old Thanksgiving hymn came to mind. It begins,

We gather together to ask the Lord's blessing;
He chastens and hastens His will to make known;
The wicked oppressing now cease from distressing.
Sing praises to His name; He forgets not His own.

Isn't that odd? I mean ... a Thanksgiving hymn that begins with God chastening. "Thank you"? And ... is it even true? In so many ways? For instance, does He want to make His will known? Yes. His Word is His transcribed will, so to speak. But, doesn't Romans say we don't get it? "Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and how inscrutable His ways! 'For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who has been His counselor?'" (Rom 11:33-34). Sure, we don't understand it, but Paul wrote that He made the mystery of His will known to us (Eph 1:9-10). He does want us to know His will. Maybe not all. Maybe we won't understand. But, He does "hasten" to "make His will known."

But ... hang on ... "He hastens and chastens to make His will known"? Is that true ... and is it good? Should we be thankful for it? Lots of self-identified Christians tell me it's not true. The whole notion of corporal punishment is abhorrent today and psychology has "proven" it's bad, so God won't do it ... will He? Scripture says He will ... and does. "For the Lord disciplines the one He loves, and chastises every son whom He receives.'" (Heb 12:6). The author uses two terms that clarify what he's talking about. He "disciplines." That's teaching, training, anything like that. But the second term makes it clear. He "chastises." ("Chastens" in older English.) The word literally translated is "scourges." No room for error. It says God disciplines those He loves, including His version of corporal punishment. Wait ... it gets worse. "If you are left without discipline, in which all have participated, then you are illegitimate children and not sons" (Heb 12:8). I've had Christians tell me, "He doesn't do that to me." They don't hear what they're saying. It's a bold claim: "I'm not a legitimate child of God." God says He chastises every child of His as a means of training.

So ... it's true ... all of it. He does want to make His will known. He actually works at it ("hastens"). And ... He actually "chastens" to accomplish it. The only remaining question is ... should we be grateful for it? Absolutely. The Hebrews text says it is a product of God's love for us. It is "for our good" ... so that "we may share His holiness" (Heb 12:10)!! So ... yes, it's an excellent thing for which to give thanks, and probably something we rarely do. Now ... let's see ... what was that tune I was trying to forget? Naw ... I'm okay without it.

It Is Well with my Soul -- Reprise

It has been hectic, so I’m reposting a hymn … one of my favorites.
________________

It Is Well With My Soul
Horatio Spafford

When peace, like a river, attendeth my way,
When sorrows like sea billows roll -
Whatever my lot, Thou hast taught me to say,
It is well, it is well with my soul.

Tho' Satan should buffet, tho' trials should come,
Let this blest assurance control,
That Christ hath regarded my helpless estate,
And has shed His own blood for my soul.

My sin - O the bliss of this glorious tho't -
My sin, not in part, but the whole,
Is nailed to the cross, and I bear it no more:
Praise the Lord, praise the Lord, O my soul!

And, Lord, haste the day when my faith shall be sight,
The clouds be rolled back as a scroll:
The trump shall resound and the Lord shall descend,
"Even so" - it is well with my soul.

The hymn has quite a story behind it. Perhaps by understanding some of the events surrounding it, the meaning will be clearer. Horatio Spafford was a lawyer in Chicago in 1871 when the Chicago Fire destroyed his lakeshore real estate and his finances along with it. Having already lost a son to premature death, He decided to take his wife and four daughters on a trip to England to join D.L. Moody on one of their campaigns and to get some much needed rest. Business forced him to delay his departure, so he had his family go on ahead, intending to join them as soon as he could. Soon Spafford received word that the ship had sunk. He waited anxiously for word of survivors and finally received a telegram from his wife that read "Saved alone." Spafford hastened to join her in England, and as he sailed past the spot where his four daughters had drowned, he wrote, "When peace, like a river, attendeth my way, when sorrows like sea billows roll - whatever my lot, Thou hast taught me to say, ‘It is well, it is well with my soul.’"

Horatio Spafford knew God. It could only be an abiding relationship with the Almighty that would enable a man enduring such loss to say, "It is well with my soul." He echoes the words of Paul who says, "I have learned to be content." (Phil. 4:11-13)

What did Spafford know of God that held him in such peace? His second verse tells us. "Let this blest assurance control, that Christ hath regarded my helpless estate and has shed His own blood for my soul." To him, knowing that God loved him enough to die for him was enough. God had no requirement to do so, and the cost to Him was great - His own blood. What greater love could there be?

I think Mr. Spafford tied greater weight to his sin condition than most of us do today. He saw the forgiven state of the Christian as enough from God. His third verse dwells on the bliss of that thought. He saw forgiveness as glorious, and complete. He regarded God's pardon as the end of the question, with sin no longer a concern. "Not in part, but the whole." Paul says the same. We are crucified to sin. "Do not let sin reign." (Rom. 6:12) Praise the Lord, O my soul!

So many Christians today struggle with sin. They see their shortcomings - which are real - as an obstacle to their relationship with God. There is even a sort of superstition mixed in, as if God will curse us if we sin but bless us if we don't. They see God as turning away when they fail Him, and in some cases their large numbers of failures amass such a perceived wall between themselves and the Almighty that they give up and walk away hopeless. But sin - "not in part, but the whole" - has been nailed to the cross. We bear it no more. It is forgiven, past, present, and future. God sees us as clothed in the righteousness of Christ. He stands ready to commune with us at all times. We need merely to confess, for our benefit, our failure to obey, and we can continue the relationship. Would that we saw our sin condition and its collapse at the cross in the same light as this hymn does.

Like so many of the hymn writers of the past, Spafford looked forward to the coming of the Lord. He longed to be home. While many today aren't sure they want Christ to return just yet, he asked that God "haste the day." When all is said, it is there that peace is finally ours. It is in the knowledge of the transcendent God, the God who is holy and just, who is able to make all things right, the soon and coming King, that we can ultimately rest. His faithfulness is our repose. And His return is our hope. As the hymn alludes, "even so, come quickly." It is God's presence that brings final peace.

We, too, can enjoy this response to difficult circumstances. We can learn, with Paul, to be content in all situations. The truth is simple. If we know the God we serve, "who can be against us?" If God is God (and we are not), what more can we require? We can agree with Spafford and say, "Whatever my lot, Thou hast taught me to say, it is well, it is well with my soul."

Where am I?

Let me preface this with a disclaimer. I'm not approaching this from, "Here are the facts! You're wrong if you disagree." I'm approaching it from a general impression. Just so we're clear.

I'm looking at Isaiah 6. You remember the story. Isaiah saw God (Isa 6:1-7). He saw God in all His holiness ("Holy, Holy, Holy"). And it was enough to undo him. "Woe is me! for I am undone!" (Isa 6:5). Not the expected, "Hey, Big Guy in the Sky!" we imagine. He ... was terrified. So God sent an angel and the angel took care of the problem. Then the text says, "Then I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, 'Whom shall I send, and who will go for Us?' Then I said, 'Here am I. Send me!'" (Isa 6:8). The same guy that was "undone" immediately answers, "Here am I. Send me."

The "Who will go for Us?" part, where God is plural, is interesting, but it's that last phrase that catches my attention. "Here am I." It's not the normal phrase: "Here I am." In fact, a few of the versions actually say, "Here I am." Interestingly, the text literally says, "Behold!" No reference to "am," as in location. So the Literal Translation says, "Behold me." More like a "Yoohoo!" than a personal locator. See, I have a problem with "Here I am" instead of "Here am I." Almost all the sources I examined said they're the same, but I think there's a subtle difference. Consider. "Here" is a location. Both begin with that. Then what? In one, "I" is the primary idea. In the other, "am" is leading. So it seems as if one is pointing to me and the other is pointing to my location. In the normal, "Here I am," I am the important factor. In the unusual, "Here am I," my location is the primary thought. Like "Behold me" might suggest. "God, look in this location. I happen to be here."

I know ... it's just me. It isn't definitive. I won't make it an issue. But ... "Here I am" feels like it's saying, "God, I'm your best bet if you need help" and the other is saying, "Lord, use me if you want." One calls attention to me, and other calls attention to my readiness to be used. In the end, of course, it's not an issue either way, but my primary concern is always, "Who's more important? Me ... or God?" The default for human beings is "Me." Stepping down to "You first" is not natural and not comfortable ... but absolutely correct.

News Weakly - 10/11/2025

Skeptical
The Supreme Court is weighing an argument for "conversion therapy" on the basis of free speech. The news is reporting that the court is "skeptical" of the argument. I'm skeptical that good will come from this debate. How can we protect people if we can't regulate what we determine is good or bad? As if we're good at doing that.

Mostly Peaceful
Thirteen people were arrested and four officers injured in a "mostly peaceful" pro-Palestinian protest in Boston. "Mostly peaceful" in the CNN sense. "Violent" in the news story. You see how it goes. Ironic that a protest for peace was violent.

Too Bad
The Israel-Hamas ceasefire started Friday. The fact that it happened is good. The fact that it was, at least partly, brought about by the Trump administration has to be bad. I mean ... it has his name attached. That makes it evil, right? Or, as the Babylon Bee puts it, "Hitler Brings Peace to Israel." I joked about the collision of "Left" and "Tesla" the other day. Now the "pro-Palestinians" have another dilemma. Is it good ... or is it Trump? Too bad.

Your Best Source for Fake News
Probably in poor taste, the Bee has a piece about New York mayoral candidate, Mandami, paragliding into an October 7 event, an obvious reference to the October 7th attack on Israel. I understand that it was 2 years ago, and complaining voices say Israel should drop it, but part of the ceasefire agreement is the release of the remaining hostages ... which, apparently the rest of the world wants Israel to forget about, too. And in a touching gesture, Letitia James tried to smooth things over with Trump by sending a heartfelt "Sorry I Maliciously Prosecuted You" card. That ought to do it. Finally, Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson has set up "ICE-free" zones hoping they'll work better than his "gun-free zones" did. Everyone knows "gun-free zones" are quite effective.

Must be true; I read it on the internet.

An Obituary for a Lost Father

John Sustacek was my wife's father. He died last week. He would have been 95 years old in December. He lived a full life and died in his sleep. I wrote his obituary, but they opted to use something else, so I'm offering it here.

________

John Emil Sustacek, born on December 27, 1930, in Hutchinson, MN, was sent to his eternal home on Sep. 29, 2025, in Orange, CA. He was the beloved son of Emil and Hattie Sustacek.

John was a shining light in the lives of all who had the privilege of knowing him. His journey on this earth was one marked by love, compassion, and unwavering faith in God. His passing has left a void in the hearts of his family, friends, and many more whose lives were touched by him. We ask that you remember him not for the way his life ended, but for the way it was lived, and for the profound impact it had on the lives of those who had the pleasure of knowing him.

John was preceded in death by his wife, Donna, and is survived by his loving wife, Anna, and his sister, Sharon Maresh. John leaves behind his six children and their spouses, Michelle (Martellotti) and Steve, Margo (Smith) and Stan, Maureen (LaLonde) and Steve, John, Jeff and Angie, and Mindy, and his 14 grandchildren, Lauren (Wright), Kyle Rogers, Holly Pittenridge, Brad Larson, David Smith, Jonathan Smith, Scott LaLonde, Mark LaLonde, Jacob, Joel, Jade, Julia, Deni (Rose), and Laine Biagi and his combined 15 great-grandchildren.

John was born in his family home and grew up on a dairy farm. He married Donna Howe in 1951 and soon after enlisted in the Army to serve in Korea. He returned in 1955. The couple had two children in Minnesota and moved to California in 1956. They lived in Santa Ana, CA, with their six children, then Orange, CA. He worked for McDonnell Douglas Aircraft Company for 35 years, including a three-year stint in Shanghai, China. After Donna passed in 2008, he met Anna and they married in 2020. Her love and care added years to his life.

John was a devout Catholic and best known for his perpetually cheerful attitude. Everyone who knew him enjoyed his company and his infectious laughter. His abiding love for family was displayed in print in the 600-page family genealogy he published, but is best remembered in the hearts of every one of his family as well as all who knew him.

I Love my Wife

A short one today. My wife and I are in California for two weeks ... you know ... the Left coast ... well known for a high concentration of liberals. We've noticed another high concentration ... Teslas. They're everywhere. Because liberals are deeply concerned about the planet and believe that electric cars can save the planet. Or something like it. But I saw one with the sticker that read, "I bought this before we knew Elon was crazy." A reference to Musk, of course. Too ... right wing. And my wife laughed when I mentioned it and said, "Carma." I love my wife.

Good God

I came across an interesting connection. In Romans we read a somewhat jarring statement: "No one does good, not even one" (Rom 3:12). A direct quote of Psalm 14:3 and Psalm 53:3, it's a stark claim that no one does good. For emphasis, it includes, "Not even one." Now, the standard claim is that "people are basically good" and, even though we agree that "to err is human," it seems obvious that almost anyone might do something good at some point. Apparently, that notion isn't quite right.

I've always contended that the primary problem here is the problem of standards. By whose standard do we measure "good"? God's standard is perfection (Matt 5:48). Are any of the things we do perfect? No. Not naturally. Still, Scripture says things like, "For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them" (Eph 2:10). So there is something good we can do. How do we solve this dilemma?

Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change. (James 1:17)

Look at that! The text claims that every good gift and perfect gift does not originate here. They originate from the Father. Emphasize "every." If that's true, it stands to reason that if we are made for "good works," and every good thing is from above, then every good work we do is from above. Makes sense. So we don't do good ... God does it through us. The actual good we do is God's work in us. Thus, it is not our doing, confirming Romans 3:12 ... leaving us nothing to boast about.

If

"If" is an interesting word. It's the entry into a conditional clause, an indirect question. It is an unknown value. For instance, in programming we have things called "if-thens." That is, "If X, then Y." Which would mean if X occurs, then Y occurs. If X does not occur, no Y. It only gets more complicated from there, like "if-then-else," but you get the idea. We don't know if X occurs until it does. So we have a contingency plan. Our lives are full of contingency plans. We don't know what the weather will be, so we try to guess and prepare. We don't know what the market will do, so we "hedge our bets." Life is full of "ifs," pleasant or unpleasant. "If I win the lottery" is not the same as "If I get hit by a bus," but they're both "if" statements. Because we ... don't ... know.

So, when we read, "God is greater than our heart and knows all things" (1 John 3:20), it can be quite an encouragement. When we read, "Even before there is a word on my tongue, behold, O YHWH, You know it all" (Psa 139:4), it can provide some peace. When the Bible says that God "knows the secrets of the heart" (Psa 44:21), that's really good to know. King David wrote, "Even before I was born, you had written in your book everything I would do." (Psa 139:16). Imagine that! No surprises for God. Scripture is clear ... God knows everything, even in advance (e.g., Matt 6:8). God has ... no contingencies. He has no "ifs." Someone said, "God knows all contingencies, but He knows nothing contingently."

We don't know what tomorrow will bring (James 4:13-15). Just about everything is up for grabs, it seems. We can guess and we can surmise and we can figure some things out. The sun will come out tomorrow ... almost certainly. But we can't know, so we have "ifs" ... plans in place to handle contingencies, like savings accounts and band-aids, insurance and security systems, fire alarms and emergency plans, seatbelts and vaccines. But we know who knows tomorrow, and He has no "ifs" in His view. If you're thinking you might mess up His plans, think again. You're not an "if." If you're thinking that something in your life might catch Him off guard, don't. Your life is not an "if." We live on "ifs." He doesn't need them. "Don't worry," He says, "I've got this."

The Amazing Feather (March, 2013)

I'm in the middle of a family crisis, so to speak, and posting is somewhat difficult right now. So, in keeping with yesterday's post, I'm reposting this one.

________

So, as I've said before, I'm a big bird fan. I'm a big bird fan primarily because these creatures so beautifully display God's handiwork. It's hard for me to see a bird and not think, "Wow! What a marvelous Designer you have!!" Consider with me, just for a moment, the amazing ... feather.

Part of the definition of all birds is that they have feathers. Now, feathers vary, of course, but they have a variety of features in common, too. Feathers provide protection, insulation, and flight capability. feathers are very important and quite unique to birds.

Feathers are structured with a central shaft and vanes radiating from that shaft. These vanes have their own central shafts called barbs with barbules sticking out of the barbs. Barbules are interlocked with a hooking mechanism (barbicels) that links barbule to barbule like Velcro, making a semi-solid but very flexible and very light surface on the feather. When birds preen themselves, one of their primary aims is to pull apart damaged barbules so they can relink.

Feathers are not random on a bird. They are in rows and columns, linear tracts called pterylae. (If you've ever looked at a plucked chicken, you can see the rows and columns of bumps where the feathers used to be.) That, you see, is a product of random chance, mindless design. Right?

There are several types of feathers. The largest are the flight feathers, called remiges. These are broken down further into primary and secondary remiges, where the primaries are on the outer part of the wing and the secondary on the inner part. Together these form large surfaces for flight. Tail feathers are called retrices. These, too, are typically large, providing stabilizer and control surfaces. Smaller feathers called coverts border the edges of the remiges and retrices to provide streamlining of the wing and tail surfaces along with some insulation. Other feathers provide insulation and waterproofing as well as varied specialized purposes.

The central shaft of the feather is hollow, making it very light. In fact, we have that term, don't we? "Light as a feather." Because feathers are, indeed, very light. And, yet, as it turns out, feathers on a bird typically weigh more than the skeletal structure of the bird. Birds, you see, are designed to be fairly strong, but very light. (Oh, there's that "design" word. Hard to avoid.) That central shaft is round and hollow close in to the bird's body, but as it gets farther from the hard mount on the skin, it changes shape. The outside remains round, but the inside takes on a more rectangular shape. You see, a rectangular shape inside a round shape gives incredible strength and enables the flight feather shafts to transmit the lift and drag forces required for flight.

Feathers are shaped in a particular way. Flight feathers have precisely the same shape as your modern aircraft, without, of course, all the metal. The central shaft provides the structure, and the vanes which are shorter on the leading edge than the trailing edge give the surface. Shaped in an arc, these surfaces are designed to provide a solid surface in one direction and an aerodynamic surface in the opposite ... you know ... like you'd want it to be.

I could go on and on. This simple creature, a bird, only starts as a feathered creature. There are so many other features to birds. And don't get me started on individual birds and their characteristics. No, this was just a touch on a single component common to all birds, their feathers. The whole thing screams design, begs for intelligence, demands a Creator. They call it "irreducible complexity", and just the feather of a bird has it. In all sorts of very real ways, the heavens declare the glory of God, including the birds that fly through them. Anything else takes more faith than I have to believe.

Screaming Design

For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. (Rom 1:20)

I looked at a list of the fastest animals on Earth. The top 5 were ... birds. Hard to believe. The peregrine falcon dives at speeds exceeding 200 miles per hour. Golden eagles reach 150 mph. Number 6 is the fastest land animal, the cheetah. He only gets up to 75 mph. How long did it take us to reach 75 mph? I mention the birds in particular because they're amazing animals. The peregrine falcon is so "designed" for his way of life that modern engineers have used aspects of the bird for modern flight technology. Owls have feathers that allow them to fly silently. Feathers themselves are engineering marvels. Then there are hollow bones and wing structures and ... well it goes on and on.

Consider the amazing complexity of nature. The octopus is able to solve complex problems. The cuttlefish can mimic its surroundings. Every plant has an ingenious method to reproduce, from the pinecones of the redwoods that burst open in a fire to dandelions that send them airborne to seeds that get eaten by animals and get "planted" in nature's fertilizer (if you catch my drift). It just goes on and on. Oxford refers to it as "the cognitive inexhaustibility of things." "The facts about the things of this world are cognitively inexhaustible." Consider, for instance, the function of ... a single cell. It's mind boggling.

Consider biomimicry. Biomimicry is the practice of looking to nature to design products, processes, and policies that reflect nature's strategies and rules for sustainability. You see, humans have been learning from nature to figure out how to do things. The more we learn from nature, the better we figure out how to do things. Which ... in turn ... screams God, His invisible attributes, His eternal power, and His divine nature. Stephen Hawking said, "I think the universe was spontaneously created out of nothing, according to the laws of science." He was happy with the absolute impossibility of it. I think nature proves the existence of a Designer just about everywhere you look. Well, I just don't think that. I have it on good authority, "because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them" (Rom 1:19). I guess God doesn't believe in atheists.

News Weakly - 10/4/2025

That's a big 10-4, good buddy. (Sorry ... old CB joke.)

Not Really a Surprise
Tens of thousands of protesters took to the streets of Berlin to stand in solidarity against Israel, calling for the end of the Israel-Hamas war. That is, tens of thousands of Germans opposed Jews defending their own territory ... and even existing. I'm thinking this sounds familiar from somewhere else.

The Sky Is Falling!!
The old line ... "The government shut down today. No one noticed." But, of course, the "terrorist media" ... sorry ... news media won't let it go. The federal government "shut down" October 1st because they didn't pass a spending bill. "People are getting furloughed! Military members won't be paid! The sky is falling! The sky is falling!" And, of course, "The Republicans failed to pass the Democrats' spending bill!" Which, being translated, reads, "The Democrats refused to pass the Republicans' spending bill." Both are true. Luckily both sides are standing firm. Sigh. I did 10 years in the military and went through multiple "shutdowns." Months without paychecks. Never even noticed, because the banks knew what we were being paid and put the money in our accounts knowing the government would pay us retroactively. The news even said the furloughed people would get paid retroactively. So ... stop with the panic. I bet the impact will be actually minor but blown gravely out of proportion on all sides.

Why Is This News?
I know this is hard to believe, but gold hit a new high this week. Mind you, prices have been going up for everything for our lifetimes, so almost everything is likely to "hit a new high" as we go, but ... hey ... gold hit a new high, and that's news.

Redefining "Legal"
Apple Corp. conscientiously removed an app from the app store that was designed to track and warn users about ICE presence. Called "ICEBlock," the app used crowdsourcing to locate and alert people so they could avoid or interfere with ICE in their law enforcement operations. The developer promises to fight the move because, clearly, nothing is illegal if you don't get caught, and the Constitution guarantees our right to ... I don't know ... oppose the legal law enforcement actions if we want? Apparently Apple was pressured by the federal government ... just in case you mistakenly thought Apple was trying to be civic-minded.

Your Best Source for Fake News
The Bee had to comment on the government shutdown, of course. The story is about the nation rejoicing as the government shut down. I get it. I liked the story of the Baptist pastor who resigned in shame after old tweets containing the word, "darn," resurfaced. So much for "above reproach" (1 Tim 3:20), eh? Finally, on the attack at the UK synagogue, the Bee reports that the authorities are prosecuting the synagogue for provoking the attacks ... by being Jewish. I'd think that was the obvious trend.

Must be true; I read it on the internet.

The Temple of The Holy Spirit

The text in view is in Paul's first epistle to the church at Corinth. It's that nasty "sexual immorality" section when Paul "inconveniently" refers to "homosexual behavior" as one of the things that would preclude someone from inheriting the kingdom (1 Cor 6:9-10). (Not the point of this post.) Moving on, he goes on to talk about "All things are lawful for me" (1 Cor 6:12), but warns that not all things are profitable. In that part, he warns believers not to be joined to a prostitute. He says that the sexual union is actually a special union ... "One flesh" (1 Cor 6:15-16), and "your bodies are members of Christ," so ... "Flee sexual immorality" (1 Cor 6:18). "Or," he goes on to say (noting that the "or" is significant), "do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and that you are not your own? For you have been bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body" (1 Cor 6:19-20). The text has been used to argue against smoking ... or even more. Logically, if your physical body is the temple of the Holy Spirit, it's not simply wise to take care of it. It's mandatory. That is, smoking, eating poorly, failing to exercise ... anything that is detrimental to your physical body would need to be classified as sin. Is that what Paul is saying?

I don't think he is. Why? You decide, but here's what I see. Paul wrote that "you are a temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you" (1 Cor 3:16), but that "temple of God" refers to the body of Christ, where that "you" is plural ... "All you believers." In chapter 5, Paul was concerned about protecting the Church from sexual immorality. In Ephesians, Paul wrote about the "the holy temple" that is the Lord's "in whom you also are being built together into a dwelling of God in the Spirit" (Eph 2:19-22). The suggestion throughout Scripture is that there is one temple of God, not multiple temples. The "multiple temples" concept was purely a product of the pagan world with multiple gods. I would argue, then, that the "temple of the Holy Spirit" in 1 Cor 6:9 is a reference to the "one temple," and, therefore, that the "body" in view there is the body of Christ and the concern is the glorification of God in the body of Christ. The subject in the text is temple prostitutes. I think this is a reference to damage to the body of Christ by merging those in the body of Christ with idolatry.

I could be mistaken, but there seems to be other problems if we're going to say that our physical, temporal, short-term bodies are the temple of the Holy Spirit. First, it puts an emphasis on the physical when the whole aim is ... to stop being physical someday. That is, "the flesh" is typically sinful and we're supposed to move on from that. Second, if it is a reference to our individual physical bodies, we're looking at a serious problem. We shouldn't be eating Twinkies, failing to exercise, or doing anything physically detrimental, not as a suggestion or a matter of health, but as a problem of sin. Every overweight believer is sinning. You know what? It's probably a sin to go skydiving or other risky ventures as well. Maybe that's hyperbole, but you get the idea. It's not "smoking" ... it's anything that is not healthy, and anything that is not healthy is sin. Do we need to be concerned about personal piety? Absolutely! We are stones in the building. Should we take care of our health? Of course! Our bodies are ours as a stewardship, not a possession. But repeatedly Scripture is concerned about the heart more than the body, and it seems to me that this line of thinking that makes our bodies actual temples of the Holy Spirit turns that notion on its head.

Brazen Hussies

Among the list of "evils" perpetrated by people, a popular one is women who braid their hair. Oh, you didn't know that one? Yep. Right there in Scripture. "Likewise, I want women to adorn themselves with proper clothing, modestly and discreetly, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly garments, but rather by means of good works, as is proper for women making a claim to godliness" (1 Tim 2:9-10). "Oh, come on. That's just Paul." Oh? "In the same way, you wives, be submissive to your own husbands so that even if any of them are disobedient to the word, they may be won without a word by the behavior of their wives, as they observe your chaste and respectful behavior. Your adornment must not be merely external—braiding the hair, and wearing gold jewelry, or putting on dresses; but let it be the hidden person of the heart, with the imperishable quality of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is precious in the sight of God" (1 Peter 3:1-4). It's repeated. Apparently wearing gold and pearls and expensive clothes is a sin, and women who do it are sinning. Right?

Clearly the text says it, but ... does it? Let's look at context. Paul urges prayer (1 Tim 2:1-7}. Then he tells men specific instructions. Pray without wrath and dissension (1 Tim 2:8). Then women (1 Tim 2:9-10). Read what he says carefully. "Likewise." As people pray and men avoid wrath and dissension ... what should women do? He urges them to adorn themselves ... "by means of good works." Why? It's proper for godliness. We have the "not with braided hair" and so on, but I don't think it's a ban, but a redirection. "I want you to adorn yourselves properly for godliness. No, I'm not talking about dressing well, but with good works." Surely, proper clothing, modesty, and discretion are suitable for godliness. But the real beauty is in character, not clothes ... good works, not good looks. Not convinced? Look at Peter's text. Peter wrote regarding submitting to authority (1 Peter 2:13-25). "In the same way," he says, wives are to submit to husbands. He urges them win their husbands by submission via chaste and respectful behavior. He says it's not external. It's "the hidden person of the heart." The NAS adds "merely" there to make the point that the point is not a prohibition, but, like Paul, a redirection. "I know society tells you looking good is important. Don't believe it. Adorn yourselves in character. Dress yourselves in a gentle and quiet spirit." Neither is banning this stuff. They're asking women not to focus on externals and pay more attention to character. Don't be calling attention to yourselves (especially by how you look), but to your Lord by having character that reflects Him.

God told Samuel, "God sees not as man sees, for man looks at the outward appearance, but YHWH looks at the heart" (1 Sam 16:7). Jesus said, "The things that proceed out of the mouth come from the heart, and those defile the man. For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, slanders" (Matt 15:18-19). The problem is always the heart. God's concern isn't mere appearance. He wants a heart that reflects Him. So many have tried to make these texts say it's a sin to wear jewelry. That's looking on the outward appearance. Look at the heart. Let's not make rules that aren't there. Let's look at what it's actually saying. Women ... everyone ... needs to reflect Christ, not our own appearance. Our adornment isn't about looks, but character. Proverbs says, "Charm is deceitful and beauty is vain, but a woman who fears YHWH, she shall be praised" (Prov 31:30). That is the point.

What Do You Need?

Written by Annie S. Hawks (1872), it's a well known hymn. I Need Thee Every Hour was written primarily on her own "sense of nearness" to the Master.

I need Thee every hour,
Most gracious Lord;
No tender voice like Thine
Can peace afford.

I need Thee, oh, I need Thee;
Every hour I need Thee;
Oh, bless me now, my Savior!
I come to Thee.

It has been rewritten and revamped up until modern days. Joey+Rory did it, the Winans, the Gaithers, Selah. It's a personal and touching song. But ... is it true?

There are two aspects in answering that question. The first is "Do I really need Him?" The deists (or the practical deists) might say, "No. We've got this. We can do most of it. I might need Him sometimes, but ... 'every hour'? Not really." But is it true? Scripture says, "In Him all things hold together" (Col 1:17). Scripture says, "From Him and through Him and to Him are all things" (Rom 11:36). At the very least, "Every good thing given and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shifting shadow" (James 1:17). We all need good things, right? Jesus said, "Apart from Me you can do nothing" (John 15:5). Nothing. So ... actually ... yes. The statement is indeed true. We do need Him at all times because only in Him do all things hold together and only with Him can we do anything of any value.

That leaves us with the other side of the question, "Is it true?" Yes, we do need Him ... every hour. The hymn says He alone affords peace, that near Him temptations lose their power, that without Him life is vain. All true. So the other side of that question is ... is it true ... for you? Do you know that you need Him "every hour"? Are you deeply aware of your desperate and ongoing need for His presence at every moment? I would guess that most of us aren't. I would suggest that this should not be the case.

Bad Math

Everybody loves Deuteronomy. Okay, maybe not. It's primarily God, through Moses, reminding the people about what was going on before they go into the Promised Land. In Deuteronomy 4 and following, he talks about the 10 Commandments. He says, "For what great nation is there that has a god so near to it as is YHWH our God whenever we call on Him? Or what great nation is there that has statutes and judgments as righteous as this whole law which I am setting before you today?" (Deut 4:7-8). It was good stuff. On the subject of God's statutes and judgments, he says, "You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you, nor take away from it, that you may keep the commandments of YHWH your God which I command you" (Deut 4:2). He's not talking about all of God's Word here. He's talking about God's commands. Don't add, and don't take away. Okay. Sure. Except ... we do this all the time, don't we?

We're good at adding, amazingly enough. The first person to do this was Eve. When Satan asked if God said they couldn't eat from a tree, she replied, "From the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat; but from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, 'You shall not eat from it or touch it, or you will die'" (Gen 3:2-3). Except ... He didn't. He said nothing about touching it. Eve ... added that. The Pharisees were good at it, adding how many steps constituted "work" on the Sabbath and such. One source said that to the original 613 laws God gave, they added thousands of new ones. The New Testament legalists added "circumcision" to grace. The Roman Catholics were great at this, like praying to Mary and purgatory and indulgences and "the seven deadly sins." In my day it was "No dancing and no drinking and no movies and no playing cards." Not in there. We learned to "bow our heads and close our eyes" to pray. No such command. I'm sure you can think of your own. We're good at adding.

We're equally good at subtracting. We "stand on the Word" and then ignore what we don't like. It says that sex outside of marriage is sin ... unless we want to. It says that women must not teach or exercise authority of men ... except, of course, if we allow it. God hates divorce. Us? Not so much. And, seriously, love your enemies? Who does that? I bet you can find a whole bunch of those ... that others are doing. But ... how many of us love God with all our hearts? How many of us love like Jesus loved? I'd bet that we all suffer from this subtraction. And it's not good. "Don't do it," Moses warned. Don't add. Don't subtract. Apparently we are really bad at math.

So?

I noticed this the other day in a text in John's Gospel. You remember the story. Lazarus was Mary and Martha's brother. He was ill, so they did the very best thing. They asked Jesus. Jesus said, "It doesn't lead to death" (John 11:4). Then, the text says,

Now Jesus loved Martha and her sister and Lazarus. So when He heard that he was sick, He then stayed two days longer in the place where He was. (John 11:5-6)

All well and good ... except ... that word, "so." In this context, the word is a "therefore," an effect from a cause. It says, "He stayed two days longer in the place where He was." That "so" indicates a reason for Him staying. For what reason did Christ stay longer? "Jesus loved Martha and her sister and Lazarus." See that? Because He loved them, He stayed away ... until He knew Lazarus was dead (John 11:11).

We see this in our lives all the time. We encounter a problem. We pray. God doesn't answer. (Or, at least, says "No" or "Wait.") And we're left hanging. "If You had only been here, Lord ..." (John 11:21). We're disappointed, distressed, maybe even angry. He let us down. He messed up. It's one of the biggest reasons for people to question Christianity. God ... didn't ... answer. What's wrong with God? But ... in this story, because Jesus loved them, He ... didn't answer. How does that work? Well, the story, in this case, gives us the answer. Jesus did go later and did make Lazarus well again ... in a very spectacular manner. He says in His prayer, "Father, I thank You that You have heard Me. I knew that You always hear Me; but because of the people standing around I said it, so that they may believe that You sent Me" (John 11:41-42). Jesus used this tragic event, and the delay He caused because of love, to show in an irrefutable, mighty way that He was sent from God. It was "for the glory of God, so that the Son of God may be glorified by it" (John 11:4). It was exceedingly good.

When Job encountered horrible tragedy, he responded, "YHWH gave and YHWH has taken away. Blessed be the name of YHWH" (Job 1:21). Not "Where is God??!!" After Joseph's brothers tried to kill him, threw him in a pit, then sold him into slavery, he said, "You meant evil against me, but God meant it for good in order to bring about this present result, to preserve many people alive" (Gen 50:20). Not "God failed me!!" Paul says, "We know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose" (Rom 8:28). So when you think He's not listening, when you feel like He let you down, when you wonder if God may not even like you, remember. He does what He does because He loves you and it's always for good.

Abundance

Jesus famously said, "I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly" (John 10:10). In a vacuum, you might think He was contrasting "life" with "abundant life," but He wasn't. He was saying that "The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy," so He was contrasting "life" with "not life." We know what "life" is, but ... what is this "abundant life"? Well, "abundant" in the text refers to "superabundant" either in quantity or quality. It could be "excessive" or "superior." It is "beyond measure." In what sense is this "life" Jesus brings "beyond measure"?

The subject is "the sheep" that Jesus cared for. He was "the door" (John 10:7-10) and "the good shepherd" (John 10:11-15). He assured us, "I have other sheep, which are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will hear My voice; and they will become one flock with one shepherd" (John 10:16). Paul describes the "new life" in Christ in Ephesians.

In reference to your former manner of life, you lay aside the old self, which is being corrupted in accordance with the lusts of deceit, and that you be renewed in the spirit of your mind, and put on the new self, which in the likeness of God has been created in righteousness and holiness of the truth. (Eph 4:22-24)

Scripture talks about "newness of life"(Rom 6:4). It's always tied to our connection with Christ. Like the blessings from Ephesians 1 (Eph 1:3-14).

We shouldn't think, then, that "abundant life" refers to "really, really happy." It doesn't mean "lots of comforts." It's an excess ... of Christ. Like, "He who did not spare His own Son, but delivered Him over for us all, how will He not also with Him freely give us all things?" (Rom 8:32). The God who supplies for all needs (Php 4:19) and "works all things after the counsel of His will" (Eph 1:11) and "works all things together for good" (Rom 8:28-30). It stands to reason, then, that we might be experiencing this "superior, excessive, superabundant" life without even knowing it ... because we're looking in the wrong place. Not an abundant life of worldly pleasures and happy feelings, but a life fully powered and supplied by Christ.

News Weakly - 9/27/2025

Nightmare!
According to the CDC, "nightmare" drug-resistant bacteria cases are rising ... 70% between 2019 and 2023. What is that in real numbers? In 2023 there were 4,341 cases, with special attention to 1,831 of real concern. Or, it went from 2 per 100,000 people in 2019 to 3 per 100,000 people in 2023. The real danger, they say, is that "Its likely many people are unrecognized carriers of the drug-resistant bacteria, which could lead to community spread." So ... another crisis. Another panic. Except ... if "many people are unrecognized carriers" of this thing and only 3 in 100,000 are infected, how much of a problem is this thing, really? Are we looking at a real problem, or a "terrorist attack" where Big Pharma and the CDC and the media are the terrorists? Now that is a nightmare.

Really ... We Have Principles
Microsoft disabled some services used by a unit in the Israel Ministry of Defense because apparently they were using it to watch Gaza and the West Bank. I suppose that's Microsoft's call. I'm hoping they'll shut down every single user that is using their products for illegal or immoral reasons and ... oh ... okay ... that won't happen. It smells a lot more like anti-Semitism rather than "principle."

The New New York?
Zohran Mamdani is currently the leading candidate for Mayor of New York City. Mamdani is a proud Shia Muslim, considered "more radical than the radical left," and associated with anti-Israel and pro-socialist principles. He's running on increased taxes, big government, and increased minimum wages. I guess this explains how AOC keeps getting reelected.

No Bias Here
The media is reporting on the indictment of James Comey on two counts ... one of making false statements and the other on obstruction of justice. As it is not remotely possible that he did either or that the Justice Department is correct in this, and since the left has happily used the Justice Department as its own weapon against Trump, the media is reporting the story as "marking a major escalation in President Trump's efforts to target his political opponents and use the Justice Department as part of his campaign to seek retribution against his most ardent critics." Maybe. But now we've arrived at "We can do it but he can't," "If Trump's involved, it's wrong," and "There is no justice" ... and it's not a pleasant or safe place to be.

Seeing Reason
Jimmy Kimmel was reinstated after being shut down for his remarks about Charlie Kirk's assassination. Apparently, ABC saw the light. The real question is ... what light? Did they change their minds, or ... did the light from the bullet holes at their ABC10 studio from a radical left protester change their minds? Well, that can't be it. Only the Right is violent ...

Your Best Source for Fake News
The week has been a field day for the Bee. Just on the violence and reactions to it from the Left on the last couple weeks, we have the story of Hamas calling on Democrats to tone down the violence. We have Hillary telling us to stop pointing fingers. We all know it's the Republicans to blame. Then, the "Days Since Leftist Terrorist Attack" counter got set back to zero ... again. And the Democrats have boldly changed their logo to show the donkey carrying a sniper rifle.

Must be true; I read it on the internet.