If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
The Double Standard
I watched the movie Religulous and Bill Maher says “I don’t preach certainty, my Gospel is that of doubt, I just don’t know”. In some ways, after watching the movie, I think it’s very hypocritical of him. Throughout the movie he isn’t playing devil’s advocate, he is a devil’s advocate. What I mean is. He believes the opposite of the Christian/any religious dogma. That is where his certainty lies, in anti-religious beliefs. If he were preaching doubt as gospel, then he’d doubt even his own thoughts. Doubting evolution, doubting creationism (he does), doubting as all aspects of beliefs, even atheism/naturalism.
I say this because Bill Maher isn’t trying to bring doubt to all, just to the religious communities. Which is fine, I have no qualms with this because any honest religious person (of any faith) will admit to doubt in their belief system. But I think if I were preaching a ‘gospel of doubt’, I’d doubt everyone and everything, not just one sect of belief systems (the religious crowd).
Why not doubt everyone who speaks and has an opinion. If someone says “Krishna did this”, why not doubt the sources and bring criticism to them. Why not doubt the law of gravity? Doubt doesn’t disprove something but it causes you to think (at least me…) critically about a topic and look at more than one side (your current side).
Doubt is healthy and Godly
Over the past 6-10 months, I’ve come to embrace this. I’ve come from accepting the reformed doctrines (Protestant and Pentecostal churches) where certainty is creed, yet it’s not Scripture. Where you can “know” your after-life destination. Yet Scripture isn’t as plain. Scripture is a combination of many books, from many authors. To say something is ‘plainly laid out’ is a difficult opinion to defend since it’s 66 different books with 66+ different intentions (by the author) and different cultures than today. I’m not saying Christians can’t be certain, I’m saying certainty isn’t reality, nor idealism. Love is. Love is perfect, yet knowledge is partial (1 Cor. 13:8-13). To say you have the ‘more perfect’ doctrine or 100% certainty in a topic is arrogant and prideful. Because ‘we look through a mirror dimly’ (vs. 12).
We can’t fully know anything but we can try our very best to figuring out things. But knowing that things are imperfect (our mind, our information, everything….is IN PART) is a humbling feeling. I can say “I believe in Christ…” with conviction but that is based off of partial information/knowledge.
Certainty isn’t ideal plainly because it’s not Scripture and I think Scripture is a good model to live by (only when the concepts of Scripture are looked at within context of everything it was birthed from; Scripture takes a little time to understand, looking at things at face value is almost impossible to correctly interpret).
Certainty isn’t reality because through Church History doubt is seen through ‘Saints’ and Christians throughout the existence of the Christian religion. Mother Teresa had her doubts God was even there, hearing her. Today most would say (religious or not) something special was surrounding her life, be it God, strange fame, or whatever but something above the norm happened to her life. To me, I say, although she doubted God was absolutely with her throughout her life, since the fruit of her work was so impacting for good.
No where in Scripture does it say one needs to be 100% certain of Christ to go to heaven. Faith as a mustard seed… is Scripture. Only believe is Scripture. Trust is faith. If you can trust a little, you’ll fall safely into His arms. A little, the size of the mustard seed. If your following someone…that is a lot of trust, even if your complaining along the way. You might say “I though we needed to turn right at the last intersection” but the truth is His way is perfect. We may not understand everything, we will have our doubts (since we don’t understand His intentions), but we are following… and that is important and counts for everything.
Avoid the extremes
Obviously, the more trust, the better but blind faith isn’t always smart. Because we look through the mirror dimly. If you can’t think for yourself, then you are in the path of danger. Christ has given you a brain. If you “hear the voice of God” say kill someone. Don’t take this in blind faith, use your brain. Obviously it’s difficult to follow something ’spiritual’ like God but everything is spiritual because you are a spiritual person, so use your mind, heart, and wisdom to consider all options and know why you made your decision. Have a reason for your ‘belief’ but be open to correction and be open to being 100% wrong in your beliefs because YOU DON’T HAVE A PERFECT MIND and you might’ve missed something. I’m guilty of all of this and it’s why I’m posting it.
Have faith! Doubt healthy! And think about things wisely!
I just saw a snippet about Eastern Orthodox churches on the history channel. It stated that the Eastern churches tended to be more liberal in there theology. That there is no hell. After watching this snippet, it reminded me to write something on my blog.
Side Note
Since I’ve been thinking about many different religions recently and different concepts and philosophical ideas, I just decided to bite the bullet and blog. I say ‘bite the bullet’ because writing on my personal blog is time consuming, at least mentally. Writing isn’t my favorite but I think it’s great and wise to do. I even tried to maintain a journal but that went no-where fast. So, I’ll be ~90% transparent on this website/blog. I’d be lying if I said I’m 100% transparent, nor is anyone 100% transparent online and if they are….they tend to be misunderstood too much and people easily lose the focus on being caring and nice. So, to avoid those issues and many more, I’m going to be ~90% transparent but you won’t notice any difference, even if you were a very close friend of mind, because I won’t lie about anything (at least not intentionally). I’ll just use this blog to share that ~90% of my life and keep that 10% for my future wife.
Back to topic, Is Christianity Man-Made Religion?:
When I decided to passionately pursue God, I looked at all the religions and Christianity made the most, out of them, logical sense to me. This was about 5 years ago. But, now I’m revisiting all religions and comparing them to Christianity again but thinking from even more concepts (atheistic).
Briefly read this. It basically states how Christianity’s message isn’t original (suppose-ably) and that there are at least 5 pre-Christ like figures. Krishna, dating back 3000BC. Horus 1200BC. Etc. Most rabbis and some preachers know that the Old Testament is extremely similar to Egyptian, Babylonian, and other non-jewish texts. When I say extremely similar, I think I read somewhere stating that Deuteronomy (5th book of the bible; in the Torah) is almost 80% similar to other texts within their culture.
Why is this a big deal to me? Well, simply because from an Atheist’ point of view, you could easily make a case for Man-Made Christianity. Easily, means Easily. Many well-known atheists don’t really take this shot because they tend to make a mockery of our faith. I’d say 80% of the atheists I’ve met, talked to, seen on T.V., watched on YouTube, read blogs of, etc, are all non trying to have a serious intellectual discussion. I can easily say, many Christians have been insensitive jerks, inconsiderate, and even mean on many occasions. So, they are equally to blame. But BOTH are guilty, not just the Jesus freaks.
Eastern Thought and Western Thought (in general)
Okay, with all that said. Eastern vs. Western thought is amazing. Westerns tend to try to make things black and white, where Eastern smears it all together. Easterns tend to be liberal. Westerns tend to be arrogant and branded as ‘know it all’s. For example: 2 thoughts, one event, one question. When does the bus get here? Westerns say ‘We expect it in 10 minutes’. Easterns say ‘When it gets here’. Is one right and one wrong? NO! Both are correct with different perspectives.
Many concepts in Scripture (OT and NT) are seen throughout Eastern religions but expressed differently. Does that make one correct and one not? ….I have no answer for this and the purpose of this post. To cause you to critically think.
If it’s all good and God is using different religions to reach different people. Why hell in Christianity? Why did Jesus die? Does that mean I can have my cake and eat it too? Why or why not?
THINK FRIENDS! That’s all….
If God is beyond our comprehension, or just even beyond our dimension, is there such a place where Truth and Error can blend? Can Good and Evil blend? Can opposites merge? I’m not saying Yin-Yang because they are fighting each other…..I’m saying Yin-Yang compliment each other in such a way, where it all smears and becomes gray….
What are your thoughts….please let me know ur current faith and then add your comment as well.
Sometimes in my life, I feel God reaches down to embrace me. Not in some ’sexual’ or ‘perverted’ way. Instead the presence of Almighty God manifests for a moment in my life. Some people call it the ‘anointing of God’, others a ’spiritual high’, others ‘epiphany’ (hmm, epiphany means ‘manifest/show’), no matter what you call it, it’s a moment when something special happens.
I had one of these experiences over a week ago. Keep in mind, I haven’t been to ‘church’ in a while, haven’t read the bible in a while, nor prayed fervently. This isn’t something that I’ve ‘earned’ or deserved. It’s something that just happened. I would honestly say it surprised me because I wasn’t expecting it, again, it just happened.
So, just like every day, I stepped in my car to run some errands. I turned on my CD that I got from Promise Keepers and it turned on the fourth song “Our God Saves” by Paul Baloche. This ‘epiphany’ happened within the first minute of the five minute song. I encourage you to listen to it.
It wasn’t the words of the song that struck me. There is nothing in the song about ‘the faithfulness of God’. The first minute sings “In the name of the Father, In the name of the Son, etc”. It’s a prayer to lift of God. Within this prayer is where the ‘presence of God manifested’.
I was literally flooded with thoughts of the Faithfulness of God. He is faithful. God is faithful, He is always faithful and will complete what He said.
Knowing truth and experiencing truth aren’t very different as people say but when you experience a truth, the truth becomes deeper into your heart based on things that happen in your life. I’ve read scripture, the bible, from cover to cover and some of it is hard to believe or sometimes we forget what it says or even we might not even know what is in it. But regardless of ‘knowing’ or ‘experiencing’ truth, it’s truth, it’s firm, it’s a rock, the truth stays the same.
What I’m saying is let go of all the stress you have. Let it all GO because God is faithful. Whether you believe it or not, whether you can comprehend it or not (which, I think most of us would agree, it is hard to comprehend), God is faithful.
Scripture says in 2 Timothy 2:11-13 (NASB version)
11 It is a trustworthy statement:
For if we died with Him, we will also live with Him; 12 If we endure, we will also reign with Him;
If we deny Him, He also will deny us; 13 If we are faithless, He remains faithful, for He cannot deny Himself.
So, if we have no faith in this situation (the economy dropping down), God remains faithful. Like, He just doesn’t stop being faithful. God’s honesty is resilient, if you ‘fail’ God, He won’t fail you. This is unconditional truth.
I think this other statement applies and helps us better understand who God is.
Numbers 23:19 (NASB version)
19 “God is not a man, that He should lie,
Nor a son of man, that He should repent; Has He said, and will He not do it?
Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good?
In context, verse 21, it states “God is with ‘Israel’“, meaning strength and victory. Every time in the Bible when it says “God is with such and such“, it’s follows by victory and strength in that current situation.
God is with His people, He will NOT fail you, even if you fail Him. Let go of all your worries and trust in His faithfulness.
Now, before I wrap things up, I have one question for you.
What is God faithful about?
Seriously. If we’ve established ‘God is faithful‘. Faithful about what?
…
Simply put. God is faithful on what He says. Now, I could ask another question (which is what I normally do; example, I’d ask “How do we hear God?“) but instead of running down 10,000 rabbit holes, I’ll stay here. God is faithful on what He says. If God has said something to you, He meant it, He didn’t lie about it, and He will fulfill it.
I encourage you to use wisdom in ‘what did God say‘ and don’t become overtly excited about it and let Him do, what He promised to do. This is very difficult to walk out but I encourage you to try and trust. Use God as the model, His faithfulness is resilient, is yours? Do you keep your word? By imitating God, you learn more about Him, so try it. See what it feels like, see how it changes people’s view of you. Finally, watch the video behind that song, it’s a great song, I love it right now, it’s a very timely song for me.
Disclaimer: Please note, things surrounding this truth is gray. It’s difficult to clearly express this without having someone say ‘What about this?‘, ‘What about those dying in Africa?‘ etc. So, rest in the truth and wrestle with the questions surrounding it. Wrestling meaning: Ask yourself ‘If God is faithful, what about…‘ then ‘Well, did He say it?‘ then ‘Why or why not?‘.
Disclaimer: I just want to let everyone know, this is an essay I turned in for my Bible Hermeneutics class and yes, I’m in Bible College. BH stands for the methods to study the bible. I hope you read this and that it stretches your mind.
The main point of this essay is to describe presuppositions and assumptions that we bring to the task of hermeneutics.In a lot of ways, after Reformation, it brings this issue to the front of the debates.Since now, if you’re a Protestant, we view the Bible as our center and not counsels nor popes, we have a different problem now, and it’s one’s hermeneutical duties that are scrutinized.It’s the lens through which we read all of Scripture or any text for that matter.Personally, the best way to view presuppositions is to look at them as a blended-worldview.When I write ‘blended-worldview’ I’m talking about a lens, through which we understand everything, that we each possess, like the concept of a worldview but also takes into account the fact that no one has ‘just a Christian worldview’ or ‘just a humanistic worldview’ but instead each of us has a collection of different worldviews mixed together to make, what I called, ‘blended-worldview’.
Our hermeneutical task is to take off these ‘blended-worldviews’ and read the Scripture as best we can, without bringing our biases to the text. Although this is easier said than done, it’s still our responsibility to do this to the best of our knowledge and understanding at the time of our work and never forgetting to be sensitive to the Holy Spirit.To encourage and aid in training ourselves to take off these ‘lens’ is a good guideline that Fee and Stuart suggest, “A text cannot mean what it never meant.” [1] This suggestion has every intension to give us boundaries in our task of hermeneutics. It isn’t a bad thing to restrict us in this way, just like it’s not wrong to box in a child when he is very young, but when he reaches maturity he/she is allowed to roam free, but not until that point.
Another concern or issue when it comes to the topic of assumptions that we bring to the text is the translation itself. Now with over 50 translations, in 35 languages available at the click of my mouse [2] and hundreds more, it’s absolutely necessary to pick a ‘good’ translation.I think both of our textbooks outline that there are 3 types of translations, or one of 3 categories that every translation would fall under.There is the ‘Word-for-word’, ‘blended’ and ‘thought for thought’ translation. Each category is based on a different view of the inspiration of the text, questions like ‘Is it the literal words that are inspired, or the thoughts behind the words?’ help one understand the translators philosophy behind their word choices throughout Scripture, which aids our hermeneutical task because we now have the ability to use different translations and make judgments accordingly.If you feel you need only one translation hear this warning from our text, “The trouble with using only one translation, be it ever so good, is that you are thereby committed to the exegetical choices of that translation as the Word of God.” [3] Also, if you like only ‘work-for-word’ translations, I hope this statement helps open your mind to other concepts about Scripture, ”A second problem with a literal translation is that it often makes the English ambiguous, where the Greek or Hebrew was quite clear to the original recipients.” [4] I also really enjoyed the interview with the NLT Translator because it gave me a different side to argument of scholarship.The man sounded passionate about his work about linguistics, words and all that stuff that would make me fall asleep, if I did it.He said something very convicting and struck me to the core “Our scholarship should serve the church.” [5] I never had a ‘high’ view of those in the scholarship fields, such as Greek and Hebrew experts, OT and NT experts, cultural anthropologist, etc, because I used to think “No one that smart, or educated, can know God.”How naive of me, but praise God that He renews our mind and molds it into the mind of Christ, day after day.
I have a very high view of Scriptural authority but speaking from the Scriptures we must have some guidelines to live within.We don’t want to preach a ‘different gospel’ [6] nor speak of a ‘different doctrine’ [7] neither lead people to a different Jesus [8].So their must be some guidelines.Although our Biblical Interpretation textbook [9] shares mainly the same guidelines, I really enjoyed how our other book conveyed the same concepts. First off, we should depend upon God for the interpretation and message He wants us to give to His people, through prayer and fasting.Second, we need to ‘exegete’ the scripture, finding out ‘what the text meant to its original recipients’ [10], this can be done with commentaries or bible dictionaries. Third, we should read the entire book in a few sittings, if not all at once, to get the ‘larger’ view of the text [11]. Those three guidelines should give anyone a great start in completing a hermeneutical task, in any book.
Aside from those, when looking at the Biblical text, we must understand it was written from a different mindset than our Greco-Roman understanding.We are very ‘step-by-step’ in our thinking, where the Hebrew’s thought in a ‘thought-by-thought’ concept.One way to understand this is that Hebrew’s rhymed thoughts not words, when it came to poetry.With all this said, I think a strong guideline would be to continually ask this one question, “What’s the point?” [12].
Now, when approaching certain types of genres of writing, there are more specific guidelines. Other than the general guidelines I outlined above, Fee and Stuart say, when approaching the Biblical Letters, “Despite some uncertainty as to some of the precise details, one need to learn to ask what can be said for certain about a text and what is merely possible but not certain.” [13] So, things aren’t as ‘black and white’ as one would think, and we should be open to that and receive this.Another type of genre is the Old Testament narrative. Also, more than ’40 percent of the OT is narrative’ [14] so it’s very important to understand this type of biblical genre. Fee and Stuart say there are 3 levels of narratives such as the ‘meta-narrative’, ‘the story of God’s redeeming a people for his name’, and ‘all individual narratives’ [15].I like to think of it as a ‘space-view’, ‘bird’s eye-view’ and ‘the view from land’. It’s not like one is ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ just different perceptions that overlap and intertwine. Some things to be careful of when reading narratives are the tendencies to ‘allegorize the text’ or ‘find “hidden meanings” and thinking that the stories are trying to directly teach us ‘moral lessons’ [16].The stories may or may not be trying to teach us moral lessons but this guideline is trying to stay away from assuming things in the text, so the best way to break down those assumptions is ‘taking a step back’, which I think this guideline is trying to do. Finally, the last genre that this section of reading had was the Gospels.I think if I understood Hebrew logic to a greater depth, I’d be able to give a better bases and guideline for the over-lapping effect of the gospel but either way, I’ll still try to do my best.One guideline to always keep in mind when reading the four gospels is that “none of the gospels supersedes the other, but each stands beside the others as equally valuable and equally authoritative.” [17] I like to think of all four gospels together make a beautiful painting but each one individually make up only one color of the entire piece of art.The author’s put it this way, “Nonetheless, the fact that God has provided four gospels in the canon means that they cannot be read totally in isolation from one another.” [18] Also, a good example of this is in the description of the Olives Discourse [19]. Plus, I think it’s safe to say that Matthew and Mark have strong commonalities, maybe even ‘one read the other?’ or as the author puts it they have a ’60 percent agreement in the words used, often in the exact word order’ [20].
Sources:
1. Gordon D. Fee, Douglas Stuart, How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth. Grand Rapids, MI. Zondervan. 2003 [Referred as ‘Fee’] pg. 30
2. http://www.biblegateway.com/
3. Fee pg.33
4. Fee pg. 43
5. Audio Interview with NLT Translator
6. Gal. 1:6
7. 1 Tim. 6:3
8. 2 Cor. 11:4
9. Klein, Bloomberg, Hubbard Jr., Introduction to Biblical Interpretation. Nashville, TN. Thomas Nelson. 2000
10. Fee pg. 58
11. Fee pg. 60
12. Fee pg. 27
13. Fee pg. 69
14. Fee pg. 89
15. Fee pg. 91
16. Fee pg. 92
17. Fee pg. 129
18. Fee pg. 135
19. Fee pg. 138
20. Fee pg. 137
