Seeker Insensitive

 

As I close out my blog for the year (and decide when or if it comes back in '24), I'll address something that has interested me for a long time: Open-air preaching. This is any preaching/witnessing done outside of an environment typically designed for such (i.e. church, conferences, established missionary work, etc). Usually in a very public setting with the intent on reaching people who have never heard the Gospel. Admittedly, a personal definition for establishing a framework for my points. 

Open-air preaching (OAP to simplify moving forward) is a wonderful thing to behold when done properly (with humility and concern for others). Not so much when it is done to primarily antagonize people (clearly the objective of many, but they would never admit that). While I'm a big fan of the zeal and the message of these people, many of their tactics leave one wondering. Are they really there to glorify God or themselves, are they motivated by love for others or pride, do they have a right understanding of Scripture? I'm not going to fall into their trap of claiming to know the hearts of others by claiming I know their motivation for yelling at people on the streets, but their actions seem to indicate their motives are less than righteous. 

In the interest of total disclosure (and to show I'm not afraid to name names), when talking about those who don't get it right, I'm referring to OAPs such as Jesse Morrell, Kerrigan Skelly, and Ruben Israel (who died suddenly this past June). They mix orthodox biblical theology (for the most part, although sinless perfection seems to be one of their common Achilles heels) with unorthodox and unbiblical tactics. This is an easy conclusion when their tactics are held up against the fruits of the spirit we are commanded to embrace. You can also apply the reference point established by great evangelists such as Hudson Taylor, Amy Carmichael, and David Brainard, who worked with some of the most pagan populations on the planet; yet didn't call them derogatory names or make fun of their religion. In fact, they went to great extremes to show them love and respect (even adopting dress and customs when appropriate), without watering down the Gospel. Admittedly, these examples are the positive extreme, but that's better than the negative extreme exemplified by our modern-day OAPs.

Their negative tactics include amplification, name-calling, bad choice of location, and to a lesser degree; messages printed on signs and clothing. Personally, I'm not a fan of amplification (even used by people I admire), for two reasons: it's simply more noise in a world that is already too loud and if people are truly interested in your message, they'll come close enough to hear (remember the old saying, "...if you really want people to listen, whisper". It's similar to when we would have "stereo wars" in college. Different dorm rooms would crank up the speakers to see who could drown out who. It would just result in a din that nobody could understand (not that anyone actually did listen to the words in the 70's). It's just silly when these guys go to events that have loud music or similar (think Pride parades, festivals, etc.) and blast their message through a megaphone. Add to that people screaming at them or just yelling and celebrating in general and you end up with what sounds like (in a line from the 1951 movie Scrooge) "... an orchestra of scorched cats". All it does is elevate the volume of what is typically a confrontational situation. Even basic crisis intervention techniques promote deescalation, which often begins with bringing down the decibels in your voice (indoor voice, please!). This naturally leads to the second bad tactic: choice of venue. You don't have to be a Rhodes scholar to know showing up at a Pride event condemning homosexuals or yelling at people outside of a popular drinking establishment calling them hell-bound drunkards is not going to go well. Again, I agree with the content of their messages, just not the delivery system. I also think targeting these venues can be a good idea, but tact and compassion need to rule the day; not invective and argument. Work smarter, not dumber! Lastly, printed signs/clothes should follow the same rules of engagement (my one exception to this is as it pertains to abortion, as the goal is to stop the murder of an innocent child, so there is a lot more latitude). 

The "canned" response by those employing these tactics is that if they didn't love people, they wouldn't be out there warning them of judgment. Maybe, maybe not. I personally feel some of these OAPs are more interested in views on their YouTube channel, than the feelings of others. However, I also feel that some of the OAPs are sincere in their concern for others, but obtuse to the counter-active nature of their approach. They often will justify the "mean" methods used (such as name calling) by citing the "name-calling" used by Jesus and Paul as it relates to the Pharisees and the Greeks on Mars Hill respectfully. What they fail to realize is that Jesus and Paul were dealing with sophisticated adults, not college students or generally ignorant people. The Pharisees were religious leaders, well prepared for theological battle (if not anxious). The same could be said for the philosophers in Greece. You could fairly assume their hearts were hardened by years of rejection of the truth. They were more interested in winning a debate than actually learning the Truth. I believe the same cannot be said for the average college student (or average lost person in general). 

The last point as it relates to faulty open-air preaching has to do with Matthew 10:14, when Believers are told to leave anyplace that doesn't receive them. Throw in Proverbs 14:7 and there you go. There is a point where one has to cut bait. When people are throwing things at you, cussing you out, and generally expressing a strong desire for you to go away; that probably falls into the category of not receiving you. Maybe you should go. Go someplace else where maybe the Holy Spirit has prepared some hearts to receive the Good News. At least change your tactics. Most of these guys keep returning to the same places where they have had conflict and come expecting the same. They may even "prepare" with helmets, or goggles or people dedicated to provide "security". Sure can give the impression that one is stirring the pot intentionally.

The job of Christians is to share the Gospel and be ready to give reason for the faith within you. We just scatter seed for God to supply the increase. We're not to jam the seed into rocky ground and scream at it for not sprouting. These days open air preaching at its best is a very delicate situation that only a precious few are fit for. I believe Tony Miano and Ray Comfort are examples of guys that can pull it off. They go anywhere to any audience and don't back down from Christ alone, through faith alone. But they don't sink to the level of mean-spirited reprobates by name calling and relegating them to Hell, broad brush style. They don't define people only by how they look or what they say. They are willing to drill down to know their hearts. I've seen and heard Ruben, Jesse, and Kerrigan call girls whores due to tight fitting clothes, call people drunkards, if they're holding a beer, call men homos if they have long hair, and other examples. It's just idiotic. You don't have to be seeker sensitive in the colloquial sense in your approach to witnessing, but you certainly don't want to be seeker insensitive either.

Thank You Very Much

 Even though it's a bit cliche to publish a post (albeit passe' to blog at all) on Thanksgiving that expresses one's thankfulness, as I've never turned down a good cliche; here it goes.

In summary, I'm thankful that I'm adopted into a family. This family is a collection of individuals who are striving toward a common goal. This family is comprised of Jesus followers with the common goal of living a holy life in this world, while preparing for their eternal home in Heaven. Just like my earthly family of a wife and two children are a source of serenity and separation from the bedlam of daily life (let's face it, the routine of constantly "bouncing up against" other people in endless interactions can be exhausting) being a member of the larger family of believers comforts me even further. In addition to bolstering me for my personal experiences, it offers me peace of mind in spite of a world that does all it can to fill me with more and more angst. Like film noir with a flashback, let me fill in some details in the following paragraphs.

I'm thankful that the God speaks to us through the Bible. Therefore, we know that if we faithfully spend time in the word; we're always the "smartest guy in the room". We have the answers to all the questions that people ponder the most. For instance: Why are we here? Where did we come from? Where are we going? Why do bad things happen to good people? Even answers to silly party questions like: What came first the chicken or the egg? Did Noah really fit all the animals on the ark? Are there aliens? Even answers to confusing contemporary questions, such as: What is a woman? He tells us history and what the future holds and reminds us, meanwhile, there is nothing new under the sun. Of course, most importantly, He tells us why He sent His son to die on a cross and what we have to do to appropriate it.

I'm thankful for the family of believers that cover the earth. You have the old adage that "misery loves company", but I feel it is a stronger love connecting faith with company. It's so refreshing and encouraging to hear biblical world views expressed by not only those you personally may fellowship with, but from others all over the world. One of the precious few benefits of social media is having the ability to know the hearts and minds of other Believers you would otherwise never cross paths with. With the constant bombardment of the "Vanity Fair" world we are passing through, it's sometimes easy to feel you're out on an island. But hearing from Christians via radio, YouTube, internet, whatever; can be a real shot in the arm (not a Covid shot). 

I'm thankful for the peace that surpasses understanding. In a culture that is so far down toward an Alice in Wonderland existence (up is down, right is wrong) I can still sleep at night. God said we would witness the crazy, perverted times we live in. He also said that ultimately it will "all come out in the wash" (not sure what Bible version that is) and all wrongs will made right. Terrorists in Israel, transgender, homosexual, and almost limitless perversions applauded in all circles of society, environmental nuts, cultural factions, social media, incredible narcissism (see social media); heard enough? If it wasn't for Christ, I might have to start drinking again. Not only can I sleep at night and get up every day in this mess, I know where I stand. There is no wishy-washy, grey area here. These are issues where I can stand firmly opposed. Why? Because "Thus saith the Lord": Men and women he created them, sex is between a married man and woman, worshiping the created instead of the creator (wacky environmentalists), love thy neighbor (cultural factions), covetousness/lack of humility (social media). Some things I may or may not feel strongly toward personally, but that is immaterial. God said it, I believe it, that settles it; ah, how nice to have clarity!

I'm thankful for the giants of the Christian faith. For all the men and woman over the centuries who contributed so much to the "feeding of the sheep". They may have been translators of the Bible, commentary writers, missionaries, evangelists; or the spouses of those who sacrificed so much for the Kingdom. And the current collection of those boldly standing for Christ on the many media platforms. Thank God, the gospel can be heard virtually anytime/anywhere in many parts of the world due to technology. John MacArthur, Voddie Baucham, Paul Washer, Justin Peters, and others who regularly and clearly stand for Biblical standards in our God-hating culture. It's encouraging to know that there are untold numbers not as well-known toiling in like manner in their own circles of influence. I have a special respect for street preachers facing the "slings and arrows" right at ground zero.

Finally, I'm most thankful for what God has "wrought in my heart". My faith has made me a better husband, father, friend, employee, in short, has made me better in total. Not better in "God's eyes", and certainly not in any relation to my salvation as I was completely saved the moment I believed on Jesus Christ. But better in a temporal sense. A better citizen of the world you might say (think of the changes in Scrooge). Being a Christian is not just about fitting oneself for eternity with God, it's also concerned with fitting one to be a light in a dark world. Our joy should shine through everywhere we walk while God gives us life on this planet. Yes, I believe sanctification is technically becoming better as opposed to worse, but it's a different dynamic. Whereas my faith lived out will make me a better person to live with; sanctification is more of a cause than an effect. Growth in sanctification is more closely related to holiness, which may or may not be evident to others. I feel sanctification often pertains to one's vertical relation to God, not so much the horizontal relation to other people (I'm going to turn around before I get too far down this rabbit trail).

Thank you, Lord, for giving me more than I deserve. Let it always be evident that I care more about You, than the things of this dying world. Amen

You Better Get Him!

 I know I'm a little behind the curve on this one but having cut cable (pun intended) out of my life over fifteen years ago, I sometimes (gladly) lag behind what's happening in the media world. Be that as it may, a few nights ago I saw my first He get us ad while watching a college football game at a friend's house. Being a follower of Christ, my ears prick up whenever I hear "Jesus" in public. Whether it's someone using His name in vain (usually the case) or inserted in a television commercial (most unusual). Initially, this could appear to be a very good thing; but not so fast. My natural inclination to assume the worst when anything ostensibly Christian hits the mainstream has served me well... again!

Apparently, a somewhat secretive group of well-heeled so-called Christians thought Jesus Christ and His followers were getting too much bad publicity and decided to engage a company that specializes in branding (or re-branding) products or people. Basically, a PR firm. So, starting a few years ago these ads started showing up in some high-profile broadcasts, especially sports, including the 2022 Super Bowl. You can find them at hegetsus.com or YouTube. Last I knew the only recognizable name that has stepped forward is the head honcho at Hobby Lobby. Which is pretty disappointing as the Green family has always been vocal about their Christianity and I would expect better from them. How these folks came to the conclusions that: a) Jesus needs a PR firm and b) these ads are Biblically aligned, is mystifying. The most gracious take I can offer regarding the "Christians" that are funding this, is that they were bamboozled by the pagans! They were double taken in by slick hucksters. Anyone agreeing with the tenor of these spots is either biblically ignorant or trying to foister another kind of Jesus on us. Which, of course, the Bible warns us about, especially in the last days (and believe me, we are there!).

I perused enough of the ads (about all I can stomach) to be able to use a select few as examples of the misinformation, if not outright heresy, that they convey. For instance, there is one on empowered women (notice the woke language) of the Bible, which states that Bathsheba was raped by King David. In all my years of Bible study, I've never heard the story that way. I know about all the arguments ranging from it was a violent, physical, aggressive sex crime (rape), to it was fully consensual; and all the shades of gray between these two extremes. The point is no one knows for sure. Even the Bible with all its translations doesn't settle the issue. For anyone to boldly state that it was rape, they have to be reading into the text; an elementary, but cardinal error in exegesis. The muddle of Jesus somehow being the exemplar of the empowerment of women, in the sense that He is on their "side" in their struggle against men is ridiculous. Another one trumpets how Jesus was no "stick in the mud" and how he "let his hair down", partying with all kinds of people. This, like so many others, has so many silly inferences, one doesn't know where to start. Jesus certainly hung out with all kinds of people, but it was always with the same goal: turn them to Him and away from sin. These ads leave out that little sweetheart. Probably my favorite (my favorite worst ad!?) is the claim that Jesus doesn't want us to be adults. We are to stay like children forever because...wait for it..., they're so INNOCENT! Where have I heard that one before? So much for T in total depravity (a shout out to my Calvinist friends). So, forget all that stuff Jesus says about sanctification. Apparently, as a little child, you're as good as you get. Not only are these people ignorant of theology, they're also in the dark when it comes to anthropology. Just put a bunch of little children together with limited resources when it comes to toys and snacks. You'll find that pretty much all of them are selfish, self-centered, and opportunistic. Ask them about their antics and you'll find you can add liar to the list. 

Of course, the cherry on top of the Sundae for all these spots is the declaration that Jesus is all about love: first, last, only. The message is clearly: to thine own self be true. Live and look like the world, don't judge anyone, and certainly don't claim Jesus is the only way: that's so unloving! Never mind that's actually what the Bible says. Just make sure you accept everyone as they are (their definition of love). The problem is that represents a different Jesus than He that speaks to us through His word. Real love is telling them accepting Jesus as Lord and Savior is the only way to escape Hell. Because we are all born sinners and deserve Hell, but through God's grace He provided the way for us to spend eternity in Heaven with Him. Those who sincerely choose the narrow way will walk, talk, and think different than the world (and different than they used to). Real Believers count the cost and take up their cross daily. You die to self and live to Christ. How popular do you think those ads would be?

A simple summation of these portrayals would be that they elevate man (the human race) and trivialize Jesus. Man is portrayed as inherently loveable from infant to adult. So much so that God is almost compelled to love him. And God's love is perfect as it comes with no conditions. Fear Him, obey his commandments, repent from sin in your life... forget about it! God loves us in our fallen state and has no problem (even prefers) that we stay little children, because they're so innocent! Just be true to self, do a few good deeds, and mention Jesus once in a while; you're good to go.

Of course he gets us... He made us for His own good pleasure. But He didn't make us to do our own thing; He made us to do His thing. Our true God is revealed in the Bible, not in slick, ear tickling commercials.

Christ or Convenience

 There's no doubt that Americans in general and Christians in particular are soft and flabby. Obviously in a physical sense (you can't go anywhere in public without seeing an alarming number of obese people, many of them young) but also as it pertains to a spiritual mindset. They just don't want to stand on principle if it means they have to exert themselves or sacrifice. Case in point is professing Christians who continue to patronize Amazon, Walmart, PayPal etc.; any organization that supports abortion or LGBTQ propaganda. 

The list of companies that support these evil agendas is long; from automakers to sporting goods. It's virtually a who's who of high-profile companies that most people do business with on a regular basis. Admittedly, many people could be ignorant of where a business stands on these issues. But that excuse only goes so far. As Believers it's our responsibility to do a little research. We happen to subscribe to some Christian news sources, so we're usually ahead of the curve (why every Christian doesn't subscribe to one is a good question). However, when we share this information with others at church or elsewhere, the response has been pretty much the same: a non-response. That is, not even indignation, let alone a commitment to end patronizing such organizations.

That's the real disappointment. Not that these places support this junk, Heathen are going to fulfill their job descriptions. And make no mistake about it, these organizations are pagan through and through. Most of them are run by boards that only care about the bottom line. Which is really ironic, because it is costing them money, albeit probably not a lot. But think about it. Before these companies went woke (and trumpeted it) anyone would shop there. Christians, pagans, homosexuals, abortion supporters, pro-life supporters and on and on. You went there to buy stuff you need or want, from a car to chewing gum. Unless you were openly discriminating against certain people, everything was beautiful. But some dopes thought it would be good to politicize these businesses that just existed to sell their stuff. The pagan leadership of these businesses knuckled under to the evil movements and started celebrating right along with the wackos. It makes no sense except when you realize that it's a fallen world and man's heart is desperately wicked.

So, we find ourselves having to wrestle with whether we want to spend our dollars with places that support (if not outright fund) causes and issues antithetical to true Christianity. Sure, it takes a little research and backbone to trod this road, but come-on, this is kid stuff compared to what Believers experienced throughout history (and are still experiencing in some parts of the world). And you don't even half to give up anything physically, I'm not talking about privation. You can still purchase all the useless crud you want (another discussion altogether); you just may have to find a different source. Taking a stand for Christ should take precedence over saving a few dollars or making a few less stops in your air conditioned and heated vehicle (probably heated leather and remote start too). 

I'm aware of the objections (I've formulated some of them myself) like what about the Christian who works at one of these places? It's always the "little guy/gal" who feels the pinch first. Some of the larger organizations will never be hurt by losing the "Christian" business, but some poor minimum wage cashier may lose their job; how loving is that? Or they take in millions, so my little contribution isn't going to fund anything; good or bad. Scenarios like these are certainly possible, but it has to be looked at from a proper angle. That is, on judgment day what are you going to say when asked about any stand you took for Christ. Certainly not patronizing any organization that reflects God hating practices or stances, regardless of peripheral issues or personal inconvenience, is standing for Christ. Quite frankly, I'm not concerned about individual employees on the balance. Especially if they are not followers of Christ. If they are followers, they should ask if they should be taking a wage from such an organization. If they honor God, He will honor them, and they will land on their feet. 

Another troubling aspect of this discussion is Christian organizations that utilize the services of the afore mentioned entities. They will offer payment options, sell merchandise, and otherwise patronize the very businesses in question. I've even seen it with the more conservative even "fundamental" websites. Unfortunately, our own church has members who clearly don't think this is a big deal and that we're overthinking it. I'm not positive, but I believe church funds are also spent at these places without any concern. Trying to address this issue I feel would be about as well received as a sermon on divorce or the horrors of Hell (Jesus talked about them, but then again, he wasn't worried about losing any church attendees). But, as we are living (again) in an era of lukewarm churches, it shouldn't be a surprise there are so many lukewarm Believers. I'm not saying it's a salvation issue, but certainly an obedience issue.

What's a body to do? Spend some time and effort to see where your money is going ultimately. You don't have to get crazy and ferret out business meeting minutes or click endlessly around websites to find all you need to know. Many are blatantly behind perverted agendas and are proud to display it on their sites or promote it in the media (think Home Depot, Target, Ben & Jerry's etc.). To find the rest of the weasels just go to one of the many watchdog websites that will list those businesses that are behind the woke agenda in general and abortion, homosexual, LGBTQ, trans in particular. Just type in the search bar: companies that support ______. Even easier, subscribe to American Family Association or One Million Moms. They do all the work for you. All you have to do is read/listen and act. You'll also discover there are many more options than you ever knew for living life without Amazon, Walmart, Sam's and on and on. It can actually be fun to be creative as you take a stand for Christ.

Where Were You When...?

 Many of us can remember where we were and/or what we were doing during special moments in history. This, of course, will vary depending on a person's age. Myself, I remember playing outside in the summer of '69 when we first landed on the moon. I remember listening to the live broadcast of the Challenger disaster as I was driving across Michigan. And I remember just arriving home from my overnight shift at the county jail and watching 9/11 unfold. But, ironically to some, I can't remember the exact moment of my conversion/salvation/justification, whichever descriptive you want to use. And, as my wife and I were discussing, to some in Christian circles this appears to be the unforgivable sin. I surely don't know why some seem to feel that if you can't pinpoint that moment in time, maybe it never happened. 

There is certainly nothing in scripture that supports that view. The important thing is to believe on the Lord Jesus and repent and you will be made a new creature. Nothing is said about recording the time and place in your diary. For some people, you may as well ask them at what point did they stop being a child and become a man or a woman (as for me and my readers, we know what a woman and a man are). It just isn't that cut and dried. I feel that much of the confusion results  from assuming we become saved the moment we declare our belief in Jesus as our Lord and Savior, when in fact, perhaps that is only part of the process of coming to saving faith. In a sense, we may be talking the talk, but not walking the walk (yet). At least, I think this was my experience. Lest anyone think I'm straying from Grace alone, through Faith alone, due to Christ alone; in the words of Luther Heggs as portrayed by the great Don Knotts, "...let me elaborate."

As represented by John MacArthur and others, justification is instantaneous and sanctification is a process. Those actually reading this post (let alone paying attention), might feel that I just contradicted what I said in the previous paragraph when I used the words process and salvation in the same sentence. Ah, but contraire, listen closely and you will hear. What I actually was doing was drawing a contrast between when we ask to be saved and when Jesus accomplishes that. The process I alluded to is the drawing of the Holy Spirit. For me (and others) asking Jesus to forgive a lowly sinner and make us into new creations is clear evidence that we are responding to the drawing of the Holy Spirit (we are seeking after Him). And I can tell you exactly when and where I made that request, but I don't equate that with my moment of salvation...here's why. 

The amount of time between my essentially saying the "sinner's prayer" and actually understanding  and living a Jesus honoring life was about 15 years. Clearly, I was not a new creation in Christ initially. Apparently, the Holy Spirit had some more "drawing" to do. I believe that when I "accepted" Christ it was just another building block towards my moment of salvation (which I cannot pinpoint, heck, it might have happened while I slept). We can't say salvation is all of God and not also give Him the sovereignty to pick the time and place, and even our awareness (or lack of) the moment it occurred. This may sound somewhat contradictory at first blush, but I think not. I believe God saved me (as He can others) when He knew I was ready. Following Jesus became the most important thing in my life and was manifested in my thoughts and actions. This happened and was a reality going forward even though I didn't "hear the starter's gun". An analogy from a male's standpoint would be the moment he started "liking" girls. Some young boys find girls disgusting, or at least annoying, certainly not necessary (sounds like how many people initially feel toward Jesus). Most guys come around to appreciating the fairer sex and can even tell you the moment it happened (maybe a grade school dance where you were forced to dance with one of them!). But I don't remember exactly when, even though my beautiful wife is proof that it happened! 

This whole concept runs parallel to assurance in my opinion. Just as it is clear that many people who think or assume they are saved are actually not, many authentic Christians feel lost due to a lack of assurance. But, of course our salvation or lack thereof is not dependent on our feelings or emotions. With these realities in mind, I think it's a lot less of a leap to understanding that God can be working in our lives without our full realization. Not against our will, as we have been actively seeking Him. It doesn't matter on this side of Glory when we gave our life to the Lord, or that we remember when; just that it is a reality. 

Clearly, some people do remember the actual moment. I don't dispute that, but I also don't think it indicates a "stronger" or more "authentic" conversion, any more than "dramatic" conversions are more real than "mundane" conversions (as I write this I am realizing that mundane conversion is an oxymoron. What is mundane about the best thing that can happen to anyone?). The Bible indicates that God doesn't concern Himself about such things; why should we? Today is the day of Salvation, yes! Calling on the Lord can be the Alpha or the Omega of your seeking after Him, either way, don't let it slip away.

Cold As Ice

 One of the little conundrums (of which there are many) associated with walking a life pleasing to Jesus is: how should I feel about those who reject the gospel? One's reaction will probably vary based on factors such as:  corporate (the unsaved generally) vs personal (those you have actually shared the gospel with), and whether you have an affinity toward someone (let's face it, some we witness to are likeable; some aren't).

Any of us who have read of heroes of the faith have undoubtedly come across those who describe intense sadness at the thought of lost souls. Those saints whose "hearts ache or weep" at the thought of those heading to perdition. While any Believer (at least this one) could not find fault with such intense passion, they (at least this one) could find themselves feeling a bit lacking. I'm reluctant (but that's never stopped me before) to try to measure this emotion but let me try an illustration such as a thermometer. 100 degrees being a burning passion for lost souls; 32 degrees, not so much. I'm not saying that I have a heart of ice in this regard, but I would probably need at least a hoodie. My wife could probably get by in a polo, and some of the most passionate in this arena would need 24/7 a/c as they are burning so hot for the lost. Of course, as Believers we have many views and non-essential theological issues where we converge and diverge. At the end of the day, we are still different at the human level based on nature and nurture, so we need not panic. More reassuringly, the Bible doesn't demand we feel a certain way toward reprobates (that lets me off the hook). Of course, we are to behave a certain way; with love.

Saying we are to behave lovingly doesn't negate some pretty strong directives when it comes to those who reject your offer to share the Good News (i.e., "I don't want to even hear it. Do your Bible beating somewhere else"), or let you share, then reject the actual Gospel. Either way, it's "my bad" on them! We're told to shake the dirt from our sandals, have no association with darkness, and other such passages that reflect the tenor of Matthew 7:6. This is not license to ridicule or generally be unkind, but I believe it frees us from going around in sackcloth and ashes for those who reject the free offer of Christ. On an intellectual level I feel authentic pity for them, and, if truth be told (redundant for this blog), there is emotional distress when kith or kin I feel affectionate toward harden their hearts. However, I also can feel amazed and angry. Amazed that anyone would not seriously consider and accept Christ's offer. Angry that they are an enemy of God. Choose this day who you will serve. If you don't choose Christ, directly or indirectly you have chose Baal; we are now in separate camps and mortal (and eternal) enemies. 

Another reality that takes the edge off my angst toward those who reject Christ is that they did it to their own dang self! Calvinism aside (where it should stay), salvation is all of God; damnation is all of us. Most importantly, no one is elected to damnation. Whosoever means just what any clear-thinking person (saved or not) thinks it means: ANYONE. All are called. Not all heed the call. So, it's kind of hard for me to get worked up over those who get what they want. They don't want God now, tomorrow, or ever. Okay, a loving God does not force anyone against their will to love Him in return. So, in a weird, distorted way (often my trump card), one could argue that one should be happy that reprobates are getting what they desire, life apart from God and his constraints. It's as though our feeble human emotions of happiness and sadness shouldn't even apply when it comes to salvation and damnation. There isn't a happiness strong enough to apply to eternity with God, and there isn't a sadness strong enough to apply to the converse. Maybe it's a protective measure for me to just stay in the realm of facts in this situation; try to stay emotionally detached. I can certainly relish the joy that comes with the realization of my salvation, and that of my immediate family (it actually can be a selling point when sharing the Gospel) as it highlights that in addition to eternity with Christ, you can have your best life now (pun totally intended).

Similarly, as in trying to reconcile God's sovereignty and human freewill; I have to just let it go. My finite mind will never understand how the knowledge of untold numbers of people eternally damned doesn't make one crazy with worry or lament, especially when it's inevitable that some of them will be people you had fond feelings for in this life. I guess part of the reason we can cope with these realities is that God loves all of us and would have none go astray. But his love compels Him to allow us to reciprocate or reject this love. Forced love is an oxymoron. For those that are turned into "emotional wrecks" at the thought of the perishing sinner; I suppose that is their cross to bear. Conversely, maybe some of them are made more fervent witnesses because of this trait and they can be admired for it. But, not everyone is wired to withstand that load. Thankfully, God seems to find a niche for all who say, "Here am I Lord...", and all of us can contribute to the Kingdom in our small way.

Feel the Burn!

 The great body builder Ronnie Coleman once said, "Everybody wants to be a bodybuilder, but nobody wants to lift no heavy-ass weights". Well, in a similar vein I've found that everybody wants to be a Christian, but nobody wants to talk about no judgmental Jesus. It may be a bit of an overstatement, but certainly true to a degree. Especially as it applies to "celebrity Christians" (almost an oxymoron in my book) such as athletes and Hollywood types. They are quick to thank God (sometimes even Jesus) for their success and acknowledge how "blessed" they are (am I the only one who finds "Blessed" t-shirts highly annoying?). But, don't hold your breath waiting for them to condemn the sinful lifestyles and attitudes rampant in their respective industries. That's not surprising emanating from those living the lifestyles of the rich and famous, as it is virtually impossible to attain those wordly trifles without compromising your faith.

But, my concern and experience has demonstrated that we, the "common folk" display many of the same tendencies (myself included). Having gone to Protestant churches for over 20 years has exposed me to pathetically few deep theological discussions; especially as it relates to the wrath of God. I take some responsibility here for not at least broaching the subject when there was opportunity, or not putting myself in more situations where I may have heard such discussion. Typically, the small talk at church was no different than anywhere else. Sure, you wouldn't here profanity or God's name taken in vain (no small thing), but the content was pretty much the same rhetoric concerning weather, politics, sports, health; you name it. Additionally, often enough a complaining tone was heard, as opposed to that of an Overcomer. Just a Clearplay version of wordlings around the water cooler. 

I imagine that's a big reason why I've never been a fan of "small talk". I'm that way by nature, but it has only become more ingrained the longer I walk with the Lord. Sure, there is a time and place for small talk, but it seems for many, all the time and anyplace is appropriate. Especially if the same folks are playing the same "broken record" every time you cross paths. I'm not down on them or judging them, but don't mistake my disinterest as rudeness. I will smile and greet you, but respect my choice to not stand around talking just to talk. On the other hand, I'm always willing to have deeper discussions about meatier issues, but this can't be done in 10 second sound bites. And society by and large lives on 10 second sound bites (even the church) as we've been programmed by Twitter and others to "spit it out" and move on. Again, I recognize my role in this and realize I have to up my game. Too often, even in "Christian" circles I'm afraid to come across as "holier than thou", so I don't even attempt it. Or, I assume that the parties won't be interested. Maybe like me, they're waiting for someone else to get the ball rolling. 

The old adage is to keep the peace you never discuss sex, politics, or religion. Ironically, we Christians need to discuss these things; peace or no peace. With the definition of a woman confounding so many, Biden and his freak show in the White House, and our own Downgrade Controversy in the contemporary church; how is there time to talk about anything else?! I want to know where others in church around me stand on these issues; I don't much care about their stance on sports or vacation spots. I want to know where they stand on adultery, fornication, homosexuality, alcohol, gambling, repentance, holiness. Not because I'm waiting to judge them (God has already done that; He knows), but because how I relate to them depends on whether they are sheep or goats. Of course, sermons that feed the sheep and cause the goats to squirm are helpful. We attend a good church with expository preaching that appears to be theologically sound (I say appears, as we have only been there a couple years and that isn't always enough time to be sure). For sure, an increased emphasis on repentance and the evidence of sanctification would "thin out the herd" a bit on Sundays. So be it. 

I'll never be a small talk guy, for sure. But I'm definitely more comfortable pulling it off with those who take the Word of God seriously and live their lives accordingly. I realize I need to put a couple more "plates" on the weight bar of my witness and push through to some of these topics. I'll never be a Ronnie Coleman when it comes to weights and I'll never be a John MacArthur when it comes to Bible teaching, but I can challenge myself to be the best Christian man I can. Just as more iron in the weight room spurs on muscle growth; iron sharpening iron in the discussion room, spurs on spiritual growth.

Tiptoe through the T.U.L.I.P.

 For various reasons, I never intended to write on Calvinism. One of the biggest reasons is that I refused to accept the premise that Calvinism is a thing. It's not so weird when you consider that Spurgeon himself did not like the label as he was uncomfortable putting a "label" on what was simply what the Bible says. I have always felt similar. Why use a man's (no less a sinner than the rest of us) name on Biblical truth. If it's in the Bible it needs no such "adornment", if it's not, call it anything you like, because it doesn't concern us. Also, while I'm name dropping, Spurgeon also stated that he felt there was no doubt that he would meet John Wesley in heaven in spite of their polar opposite views on Calvinism and Arminianism. So, what does that tell us? Well, it tells me that far too many people, waste far too much time and energy debating these issues. I would venture to say that Spurgeon's attitude toward Wesley is a tacit admission of the folly of it all! If either of these giants of the faith felt a proper understanding of these issues was crucial to one's salvation; they would have not been timid to say so. I know Spurgeon never did, and I don't think Wesley did either.

A recent epiphany compels me to break my silence on the subject, especially as it relates to the U and L in TULIP; unconditional election/limited atonement. As most Christians, I can get on board with the other letters in the acronym, to a greater or lesser degree, but unconditional election (salvation not available for all) and limited atonement (Christ only died for the elect) are not only the most disagreeable concepts; I'm not convinced they're scripturally without question. I'm not disputing election is in the Bible, the problem comes when knowing when to apply the term properly (i.e., who are the elect). In addition, even if you settle this question in your mind; there is another one just as pondersome: can only the elect be saved? That is to say, you have elect and you have saved; and all elect people are saved, but not all saved people are elect. For instance, if you interpret Israel as the elect, then clearly one doesn't have to be elect to be saved (the Gentiles grafted in, right?).

So, here's the epiphany: if only the elect can be saved, what do you do with the "unelect" who assume they can't be saved and are bound for Hell? Pay close attention. I understand as Believers we are not to assume someone's election or not and share our faith to all. I'm looking at this from a different perspective then I've ever heard. The perspective of the other person's assumption of the state of their relationship to God. If unconditional election/limited atonement are facts, Biblically and otherwise (like gravity), then a reprobate could justify living in willful sin, even to the degree of harming others. Why? Because they could (due to their heinous lifestyle) assume that they're not elect and bound for Hell anyway, so why not do as they please? You might state that not many people know much about Calvinism, let alone TULIP, but there are a lot of unsaved people who have been in enough churches to pick up just enough information to muddle things. Someone who has heard the concept of unconditional election/limited atonement (especially in a passing or superficial manner) could easily fall into a pretty hopeless state. If great minds like Spurgeon and Wesley (amongst many others) can't reach a consensus on this, how can we expect those not as gifted (me and most of the population) to be able convince someone that their stance is wrong? If unconditional election/limited atonement is a thing, it applies to someone; maybe me. The best way to avoid that hindrance to salvation is to not teach it. If you think John 3:16; it's easy.

Going through TULIP, let me illustrate why U and L are problematic over-complications of the Gospel.

Total Depravity: for my money, the most undeniable concept that is supported by the Bible. We're all born hopelessly lost due to Adam's fall. But I tend to side with those that don't equate total depravity with an inability to respond to the Holy Spirit.

Unconditional Election: kind of a mixed bag on this one. God showers us with unmerited Grace; not based on any conditions we meet. However, the Arminian view that God through his omniscience knows who will choose and therefore they are elect (conditional) is plausible.

Limited Atonement: Don't buy that God's atonement is limited in any way (intent or effect). He intended it for all and it's effectual for all, but you have to accept the gift.

Irresistible Grace: Again, can go either way depending on definitions, but lean toward ability to reject God.

Perseverance of Saints: If total depravity is the one I'm most convinced of, this is the one where I'm most ambivalent, because either God keeps us or we "run the race" to the end, and we're good. It's a win/win.

The common denominator between T,I,and P is that they don't question God's love for all mankind as U and L do (strictly interpreted). We're all totally depraved (T), so we start from the same point. No favoritism here. Whether God's Grace is irresistible (I) or not is also universal. It's one or the other for everyone. However, if God's Grace is irresistible, we can only be referring to particular grace (elect). If common grace were irresistible, all would be saved (universalism). Based on these observations; grace is resistible. Perseverance (P) is another easy one in my view. If you're a true Believer, God will "automatically" keep you unto salvation, or if a Believer must work out their salvation (works/fruit required) I'm okay with that as any true convert who loves the Lord will keep his commandments. But unconditional election and limited atonement are two sides of the same coin and are at odds with the "whosoever" of John 3:16. And, if you're not one of the "whosoever", T,I, and P are moot. If you're not elect (saved as part of those atoned for, limited), then it doesn't matter whether you're depraved, able to resist Grace, or persevere. Essentially, the only concepts that are worth debating are U/L, because if they are true, then the others are just superfluous fluff. Even if they aren't true TIP are really still more word games or mental gymnastics, then solid Biblical essentials one must accept totally. One could take the view that man is mostly depraved, able to resist God's offer, and could lose their salvation; and still believe that Jesus "so loves the world". Accepting U/L makes believing in a loving God a tough sell, especially focusing on L. U is more palatable if you believe that the saved can be classified into two categories: the elect, and the non-elect; which I do based on the following copied verbatim from a comparison chart on Calvinism/Arminianism:

Irresistible Grace or Effectual Calling - in addition to the outward general call to salvation which is made to everyone who hears the gospel, the Holy Spirit extends to the elect a special inward call that inevitably brings them to salvation. The external call (which is made to all without distinction, can be, and often is, rejected; whereas the internal call (which is made only to the elect) cannot be rejected: it always results in conversion. By means of this special call the spirit irresistibly draws sinners to Christ.

Did you notice the word, often, above? Stating that external calling often is rejected, is also saying, sometimes it is accepted. Ipso facto, you have two categories of saved people; those who must respond to inward calling (elect), and those who choose to respond to external calling (saved, but not elect).

So, there it is: my two-cents worth on Calvinism. Which, like anything else I've read on the subject, is over-priced. It seems like so much fool's gold, as these views are everywhere and seem pretty worthless. It's not enough that everyone who follows Jesus just can't be called those of the Way, or Christians, or anything that labels them as hearers and doers of the Word of God. So we have Lutherans, Protestants, Baptists, etc. If that's not bad enough, we have to further divide along other lines such as Calvinism/Arminianism, and others. Anything that distracts from realizing you are a lost sinner in need of Jesus, who died on the Cross and will

save anyone who believes and repents, is a win for Satan.

In the words of Ferris Bueller, "...isms, in my opinion, are not good". I concur wholeheartedly, especially as it relates to Calvinism/Arminianism.

There Ought to be a Law

 How do we combat the homosexual, LGBTQ+, non-binary, trans, etc. culture we live in? In the words of a character in one of my favorite Gomer Pyle episodes, "...I'm glad you asked me that!" Just reinstate and enforce laws that were once on the books in most of the country. Sodomy and laws forbidding cross-dressing once were the norm (ah, the good old days). Heck, as recently as 2011 a man technically violated the law if he dressed as a woman. Of course, the predicted response is who can really define gender specific dress? Well, they were able to do it in the 1800's (but then again, they could define what a woman was also). Let's be honest about this. Most of the trouble is being caused by men acting like women (especially in athletics), not the other way around. Admittedly, a woman can get away with wearing jeans and a plaid shirt much easier than a man can get away with wearing an evening gown (as it should be). So, that is where my focus shall stay; on trans-gender woman.

The fact that these discussions are actually occurring is troubling enough. That some people actually believe that there are more genders than what God created, or that it's ok to let others pretend to be anyone or anything they want; is a sure indication of us living in the new "Dark Ages". These perversions have always been around, but were kept in check by the mores of normal society. Normal society being those with some semblance of Judeo-Christian values; those values derived from God's commandments. Although, there are always those who misuse these values as an excuse to torment those practicing these sinful lifestyles, that is not reason to jettison proper objection. What is "proper" objection: any righteous indignation based on behavior that is antithetical to the Word of God.

Someone (not a believer) asked me what I thought about men competing as women in athletics. What do I think? What does anyone with even a minimum of commonsense think? Are there actually people (other than perverts) who believe this is ok? As I know there must be; the question is rhetorical (but no less troubling)! This is just considering the general population. For this to even be asked in Christian circles is surreal (I don't know for a fact, but with the state of the church these days, I'm sure there are self-described Christians who think transgender issues are non-essential, and we should just agree to disagree). I disagree (pun intended). But, as there are "Christians" who vote Democrat; nothing shocks me. 

All sexual deviants (homos, trans, pedophiles, etc.) are by definition, immoral as they pursue their desires outside of the only way God designed sexual expression; between a married man and woman. And no immoral person shall inherit Heaven. Which means they will go to Hell if they don't repent. When's the last time you heard a sermon to that effect...I'm waiting. But of course these days you are more likely to see these sinners celebrated than chastised. Instead of being afraid to say the emperor isn't wearing any clothes, too many are afraid to say the emperor is a man wearing woman's clothes! 

Instead of these people being rightly marginalized in society, they're being not only tolerated, in many spheres they're being celebrated as heroes or victims of the "unenlightened". Which is especially ironic, as Christians are always painted with this brush, when we're the only truly "lightened" ones. Like so many words bandied about in the culture wars, marginalized is misunderstood and often perceived in only a negative light. Merriam-Webster defines it: to remove or keep in a position without influence in a society or group. This is a positive, not a negative. You don't want those with perverted world views in positions of influence (think Biden's cabinet). If you don't agree that homosexuals and gender mixers hold perverted world views, you are either ignorant or such a sinner yourself that you don't want to be a hypocrite. Unfortunately, many confuse the meanings of marginalization and persecution. Often these same people confuse tolerance and affirmation or racism and prejudice (probably say laxidaisical instead of lackadaisical, but I digress). But I'm not here to tutor those too lazy to learn basic English.  I'm not advocating for the mistreatment of anyone living a perverted lifestyle. I am advocating for keeping them from promoting their sinful lifestyle. Put it back in the "closet" where it belongs; better yet, accept Christ and repent.

We watch a lot of old movies and TV shows, as since the 60's, there has been an exponential "downgrade" (never enough Spurgeon references) in viewing choices. Things have moved from wholesome, to unwholesome, to downright offensive; and that's putting it mildly. Of course people were just as sinful then and many of the stars of those eras were just as screwed up as Hollywood stars these days. But the big difference is that they produced things that promoted virtuous (if not Christian) lifestyles. Yeah, some of the film noir might take the long way around to get there, but they got there. It was clear that adultery, stealing, cheating, reprobate living and many other vices were bad. They may flourish for a season, but in these stories, there was always a price to pay for bad choices. There really is a moral to the story. In contrast, so much current "entertainment"  lauds every kind of dysfunctional lifestyle; from murder to homosexuality. At the very least, many of these degenerates are portrayed as deserving sympathy and understanding. Most are often romanticized as essentially "good" people who just made poor decisions; they're the real victims. What a bunch of hooey! Of course, there are basically good folks who make poor decisions, but sexual perverts aren't that. They willingly and continually live a debauched lifestyle with no regard for God's wrath. Worse than that, they now want to force everyone to affirm (not tolerate, we already do that) their sin. In addition, they want to indoctrinate young impressionable minds with their poisonous beliefs. They're not content rolling around in the mire by themselves, they want to drag as many others as they can with them.

Here's a thought: Short of renouncing their agenda and demands of being treated as a special class of discriminated against citizens, we ship them off to the big Party Ball in the sky. Hear me correctly: Those who want to continue their perversion "in the privacy of their own homes" are not part of the equation. Their lifestyle is no less sinful (anymore than heterosexual fornicators, drug users, etc.), but that's between them and God. But those who keep it in the closet or red light districts and don't try to justify or promote it will be tolerated. The problem is trying to coerce moral society to accept your behavior as normal or positive. In the infamous words of that woman who achieved her fifteen minutes of fame, "...ain't nobody got time for that". Elon Musk seems to have more rockets than he knows what to do with. Load up a few of them and blast them to their own colony on the moon. I even have a name for it: New Sodom; kind of catchy isn't it.

How's Your Vertical?

 

No, I'm not referring to your ability to play in the NBA, but to your ability to prioritize God over all others. It seems virtually all people (including a disturbing number of professing Believers) are more concerned with how others, rather than God perceive them. Being held in "high esteem" by others is of paramount importance. Of course, Christians have their geometry all wrong with this approach. We need to relegate the horizontal relationships to being contingent on establishing a proper vertical perspective.

This post was spawned by a discussion in our adult small group at church. As Christians so much emphasis is placed on the horizontal activities in the form of ministries, volunteering, hospitality, evangelism and general kindness and concern for others. I am by no means disparaging these things, but I am minimizing them to a degree. But, before you just dismiss me as a curmudgeon (or even Amish) here me out. 

It's not hard to convey an authentic holiness (holy defined: set apart for God) by performing any of the above-mentioned activities. But that holiness could be more perception than reality. For example, many people other than Christians would agree to the positive nature of these activities without having any particular religious views at all. There are even atheists who would affirm the "inherent goodness" of helping your fellow man. So, although it could be said that all true Christians would (should) abound in the horizontal behaviors, the reverse in the form of all people who volunteer, are kind, are hospitable, etc. are Christians; is not a true statement. I would go further and say that Believers can (and do) perform these activities together with the "world" (think Civil Rights Movement of the 60's). So we (Christians) can work in tandem with unbelievers in a myriad of causes displaying kindness and general charity, but let me show you where the fissure occurs.

It occurs when the vertical is introduced. Essentially, when Jesus and his exclusivity is introduced. Believers are as welcome as anyone else when it comes to saving baby Harp Seals, but I'm not sure how many Greenpeace folks want to hear "... the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom." Unfortunately, there are many professing Christians who don't want to hear that (but that's another post for another day). Yes, if we love the Lord, we are going to love others and manifest that love. But we must demonstrate our vertical love first and make it as consistent as any ministry involvement we might have. We need to emphasize the things we do for God that are not in the "limelight". Prayer, personal Bible reading, quiet time with God just meditating on His blessings or maybe His creation through a peaceful walk, confession, evangelism, defending the faith and calling sin out; are all ways that demonstrate a vertical "fear of the Lord".

Another way of explaining the vertical would be considering it a form of personal worship. Worship can only be vertical, as there is only One worthy of worship. I am not referring (only) to church attendance. In my opinion, that is only a small percentage of worship. The vast majority of worship is self-initiated and can be summed up in a word: holiness. I defined it as being set apart for God earlier as it can mean many things to different people. Unfortunately, for many, it is synonymous with perfection. As it pertains to us; it's not that at all. Obviously, as it pertains to God, it does connote perfection, as He is the embodiment of perfection. Set apart for God and from the world is what demonstrates holiness. As already stated; it's not perfection. It's not even particularly difficult for a true Christian. It just requires the determination that nothing is more important than my relationship with Jesus. Therefore, I will conduct myself with the singular goal of pleasing Him that gave all for me. Not to earn His love (I already have that) but to demonstrate my love for Him. How others along the horizontal plane view me matters not. 

There are many in this post-modern (I would say post-Christian even) world, who consider this view a bit hard to take. Words like zealot, self-righteous, judgmental, and Fundamentalist (noooo!) come to mind. It's as though the word holy itself is just too...something. Sort of like Hell or homosexual (must be the H words, they just smack you in the face). I think there are a fair number of Believers who would benefit from a bit of a smack now and again. Doing a bunch of "things" in God's name doesn't make you right with God; spending a bunch of time with God will. We all need to spend less time scanning the "horizon" to see how we compare to other Christians and spend more time looking straight up to Him. He'll use us as He sees fit to further his kingdom.

Stop the World...It's Become Too Silly!

 The title of my post was inspired from a line in an old Monty Python bit: "stop the skit, it's become too silly!". Of course, the biggest difference between then and now is that, then, it was funny; now it's not. I mean, what could possibly be sillier than men dressing up as women (whatever they are) and reading stories to young children; and they're not creepy uncles, they're total strangers. Maybe males undergoing mutilation, so they can "live" as females and even compete against "real females" in sports so they can win. Or maybe it's the whole non-binary/pick-your-own pronoun thing. Or maybe it's millions of otherwise high-functioning humans who voted in a cognitively challenged senior citizen for the leader of the most powerful country in the world. Or maybe the idea that despite living in the most perverted and violent culture in history, we should have less police. Or maybe increasing the rights and legal protections for the aforementioned perverts (cue the homos and trans folks, and anyone else in the ever-increasing alphabet soup) and criminals in society, while continuing murdering the unborn. 

While we're focused on the unborn, let me mention a new twist I just read about. As I spent many years working in the corrections field, I read a fair share of the current articles. If you want to really know what silly is, hang around inmates for a decade or so. In a nutshell, this pregnant female inmate is angling to get out of prison on a murder charge (search Natalia Harrell) based on her slimeball...er, lawyers claim that her unborn child is being held in prison wrongfully. Her baby didn't hop over the seat in the Uber ride and shoot some other ho...er, female she was arguing with, so why should the little one be behind bars? And if you let the little one out, momma has to go with, as they're pretty close. The argument continues along the lines that the unborn child is living in an unsafe environment, being surrounded by violent felons, not getting adequate nutrition (are they saying jail food is crummy?), not getting proper prenatal care, yada, yada yada. So, in a nation where most people are just fine with killing babies in the womb (given the "right" circumstances) some government officials are actually going to consider these arguments! In the institutionalized setting of prison, that child is better off than being "free" with the dirtbag mother. I'm sure the mother would still be surrounded by violent felons and doing a lot more drugs and alcohol to boot, if she were on the outside. Trust me, she wouldn't be concentrating on Flintstones vitamins, or her pre-natal classes either. Most importantly, a lot more abortions happen outside of prison, than in. So, if we are going to use the welfare (no pun intended) of the child as the paramount concern, it's no argument.

Most of us know women who gave up smoking and/or drinking (both of which I don't do and discourage any true Professor of Christ to abstain from) while they were pregnant, over concerns for the baby's health (even heathens). But here we have an unmarried woman (don't know for sure, taking a leap; can you say baby mama!) who wouldn't even give up carrying a firearm, let alone shooting someone! Heck, she probably was drinking, drugging, and smoking! Point being: where was her concern for the welfare of her unborn child then? Silly? Of course not. It's tragically sad. But that's where we are these days. What should be tragically sad, is just silly because it happens so often. It's silly, because fools actually condone it, or at least, don't speak out against it. 

In this day and age, we are surrounded by silly fools. Although, they are different words; it's nearly redundant to say silly fool.  They are no doubt, closely related. So many Bible passages refer to the foolish and their ways. In these times, we are living it. People have silly entertainment and engage in silly pastimes. They admire silly people (think The View). The most silly and foolish thing about these people is that they consider us (people of God) as the foolish ones! The Lord did say the end days would be bizarro world (loose translation)! I thank God that Jesus loved me enough to pay for my sins on the cross and that I have been adopted as one of his own. Recently, we joined a church for many of the reasons a true Christian does. But in addition to that, I wanted to tangibly demonstrate the Rock I stand on surrounded by the sea of silliness, dotted with so many ships of fools. It's easy to want to "drop the curtain" as the "skit" has become too silly, but it's not my call. Until then, I want to enjoy the incredible blessings God still bestows on this creation, and on my life specifically. I want to be in the Good Fight and support others who stand beside me. I want to be part of the remnant that will hear ..."well done, good and faithful servant". 

Welcome Back Blogger

 I won't say that I can't believe it's been almost a year since I posted on my blog...so, moving on. I was moved many times over the past year to post as this crazy world never lacks for material to opine on, but I stopped. Why bother? There were/are innumerable bloggers and with the growth of YouTube, one is just lost in a sea of "noise". I mean opinions (or takes) are like noses; everyone has one and why should one pay any special attention to mine. I considered starting a YouTube channel, but the same dynamic applies. Besides, it's a lot more labor intensive to do it right and requires cashola for decent equipment. In addition, you have to be prepared to deal with more real-time interactions via comments. Blogging seems more leisurely, where YouTube seems more frenetic. Kind of old-school vs. new. 

So, I had to answer the questions I asked myself. The answer was/is to look at this differently. Two points held sway: I have decided to write for the sheer enjoyment, not to impress or convince anyone (although I would be pleased to accomplish either or both). As there are people who play a musical instrument, or sing in the shower, or take photos without any hope and or desire of garnering a large audience; I can practice my craft for no other reason than it's fun. In addition, it may be true that my take on things is no better or unique than many others; however, it certainly is no less worthy to exist in the marketplace of ideas either. It's rare that I read anything that is truly a "hot take", espousing a view that is singularly brilliant. And this applies to Joe or Jane Schmo commenting to an op-ed to Ben Shapiro writing an op-ed. 

That is why I have decided to pump some life into this blog. I just couldn't bring myself to let it just fade away to nothingness. I realize that I'm probably (no wait...almost certainly) the only one that feels this way, but I'm a little biased for sure. It was kind of sad when I poked around some other blogs via followers and such and found so many had just ceased to post. Almost like a garden that's not tended and becomes overgrown with weeds. A little sentimental for sure, but isn't that why most of us started in the first place; sentiment? Understanding there are blogs of a more practical nature, but I'm referring to those that speak to the more visceral, such as relationships, reviews of books/movies, family, God, etc. I do get it that people move on from stages of life (especially the young) but a lot of the "abandoned" blogs I saw could have, it seems, been maintained. Maybe not to the same degree, but to a degree. Maybe many have moved on to other formats like YouTube, but I hope they didn't give up discouraged due to lack of followers. If anyone could have used that criterion; it was/is me. The most followers I ever had was maybe seven (and two of them were family!).

So, here's to those of us scarce in followers, but not necessarily talent, and certainly not passion. Maybe I'm just making noise, but it's my noise. Think: If a tree falls in the forest and nobody hears it, does it still make a sound? Of course it does! If I write a blog and nobody reads it, does it still make a difference? It does to me. Someone might fairly ask why not just journal? That had occurred to me, but it's not the same. It's private thoughts that you want to keep private. Besides, unless you are relating a unique experience, such as riding a Yak bareback across Siberia; who cares? If you just want to yammer on about your trip to the mall or your cat's trip to the vet, just post it to Facebook. That's what Facebook seems to be used for by most; public journaling of mundane affairs. At least us brave bloggers are putting it out there! We're taking a stand; not just "reporting" events. We have a take! 

So, this is a short introduction to my revitalized blog. I'm going to follow the same format I always have in putting a Biblical spin on general musings or current events; hopefully with a fair amount of humor. In spite of living in these horrendous days where we can't define woman and homosexuals are accepted as normal, where speaking Gospel truth is hate speech; I like to think a little humor can help us cope. As Provebs 17:22 reminds us: A merry heart doeth good like a medicine: but a broken spirit drieth the bones. Too much is drying our bones these days, we can all use a little medicine.