A steady, fifty year stream of propaganda has convinced the world that a vast "universe" exists. Through CGI photos, space shuttle launches, countless books, television shows, and Hollywood movies, the vast majority of citizens on Earth believe men have walked on the moon, a rover is moving on Mars, and crystal clear pictures of Pluto were taken with a deep space camera and sent back to our planet. It is truly unbelievable how successful the governments of the world have been in fooling us. NASA and other space agencies make Mein Kampf look like a children's book on propaganda.
Have you ever asked yourself a simple question: How can signals travel millions of miles through the void of space, most of which is "dark matter" (according to experts)? Have you ever driven up a high mountain or flown in a plane? Ever lost your cell signal? How is it that we can control a rover on Mars but we cannot track an airliner over the Indian Ocean? Does it seem reasonable to you that the alleged satellites we allegedly sent into alleged deep space just happen to pass Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Pluto, etc., at precisely the right time to snap crystal clear, full color images? What about NASA's images of Earth? Notice how the size of North America differs over the years?
Speaking of NASA photos...Have you ever wondered why we don't have thousands and thousands of earth images? Don't we have thousands of satellites in orbit? Why is it that NASA admits all our images are pieced together from stratified data - they are composite images of the earth.
You see...the dirty little secret about space is that man cannot get high enough to snap a full picture of the earth. I know that sounds fantastic...but it's true. In order for rockets to work, they need oxygen and something to "push" against. The only reason rocket propulsion works on earth is our atmosphere. Pushing against the air propels the rocket forward. But that will not work in space. It will not work outside of Earth's atmosphere.
If you want your mind blown, view the hundreds of videos of weather balloons and amateur rocket launches. Study the video footage. You will discover that they ALL show the same thing: the sun is smaller than the earth, it illuminates locally, and it not even close to 93,000,000 miles away.
And once you have convinced yourself of that truth, the entire system falls apart. It means we are not living in a solar system or a lunar system. We are living in an earth system. And it also means that everything you have been told about earth and space, from galaxies to supernovas, is hogwash. It makes great TV, film, and art. But it runs contrary to observed data and common sense.
Open your eyes.
Saturday, February 6, 2016
Thursday, February 4, 2016
Lunatic Science
What shape is the earth? Are you certain it is spherical? Which version of "spheroid" is correct: near-perfect as NASA photos have indicated for 50 years? Oblate as official astronomers claim? Or "pear-shaped" as Neil degrasse Tyson has claimed? The fact that official NASA/government photos, Google Earth, and kindergarten classroom globes do not correspond to official "science" should cause every thinking person to question their world, pun intended. More significantly, the amount of discrepancy on this point alone - the shape of the earth - reveals that modern science has become "scientism" - a worldview akin to religion, possessing a set of dogmas and presuppositions which ultimately cannot be proved, but must be believed. It has become a propaganda vehicle, co-opted by "experts" and government officials.
In case you are unaware, a resurgence has occurred regarding Flat Earth and/or Concave Earth. I encourage you to search YouTube. As you sift through numerous videos questioning the rotundity of the earth, you will discover what lies at the heart - the very root - of the movement's strength and appeal: true skepticism and true science. I know that sounds contradictory. However, modern cosmology is not science. It is an industry filled with lunatics.
I do not use that term lightly. Those with mental deficiencies deny what their eyes see and what their bodies feel. Even worse, sometimes they see and feel things that aren't really there. In other words, they reject their everyday experience and the sensory data their bodies are equipped to receive and their mind is suited to interpret.
Perhaps some examples will make my point clear and reveal the existing lunacy with the globe theory. Have you ever done a handstand for more than a minute? I bet you stopped after 30 seconds due to the pain in your head. Our everyday experience tells us that our bodies cannot be upside down for too long because complications will occur. But if we live on a globe, some people are standing upside down everyday. Have you ever flown in a plane? Do you think if the plane turned upside down during the flight you would know? Now think about it. If a plane departs from Alaska and flies to Chile - from the Northern Hemisphere to the Southern Hemisphere - at some point during the flight the plane would flip over and have to land opposite the wheels - on the fuselage. That is, if globular theory were true.
If this globe is "spinning" as mainstream dogma asserts, the problems increase exponentially. Ever kicked a soccer ball towards a goal? Did it hit the goal or land near it? If the atmosphere and ground are spinning hundreds of miles per hour, then how can a projectile that leaves the ground travel in a straight line from our perspective (if you are kicking north/south)? Golf ball? Throwing a football? If the football is traveling at 200 miles per hour (at rest, but not really at rest), and you throw the football perpendicular to that force (north/south) then the path would NEVER appear straight from your eyes. But it does appear straight. What about rain? It should always appear slanted. Fireworks? They should never appear "straight" up. How do skydivers hit their target - every time? Hot air balloons?
Lunatic science tells us to distrust what we see and feel. Modern academics and the "high priests of cyclotrons" (W.H. Auden) have disconnected us from our world. They want us to put our trust in them, with their complicated mathematical formulas and magical instruments that allow them to see into the past like seers of the ancient world.
How appropriate that "looking into the past" fascinates them. Lunatics cannot function in the reality of the present.
In case you are unaware, a resurgence has occurred regarding Flat Earth and/or Concave Earth. I encourage you to search YouTube. As you sift through numerous videos questioning the rotundity of the earth, you will discover what lies at the heart - the very root - of the movement's strength and appeal: true skepticism and true science. I know that sounds contradictory. However, modern cosmology is not science. It is an industry filled with lunatics.
I do not use that term lightly. Those with mental deficiencies deny what their eyes see and what their bodies feel. Even worse, sometimes they see and feel things that aren't really there. In other words, they reject their everyday experience and the sensory data their bodies are equipped to receive and their mind is suited to interpret.
Perhaps some examples will make my point clear and reveal the existing lunacy with the globe theory. Have you ever done a handstand for more than a minute? I bet you stopped after 30 seconds due to the pain in your head. Our everyday experience tells us that our bodies cannot be upside down for too long because complications will occur. But if we live on a globe, some people are standing upside down everyday. Have you ever flown in a plane? Do you think if the plane turned upside down during the flight you would know? Now think about it. If a plane departs from Alaska and flies to Chile - from the Northern Hemisphere to the Southern Hemisphere - at some point during the flight the plane would flip over and have to land opposite the wheels - on the fuselage. That is, if globular theory were true.
If this globe is "spinning" as mainstream dogma asserts, the problems increase exponentially. Ever kicked a soccer ball towards a goal? Did it hit the goal or land near it? If the atmosphere and ground are spinning hundreds of miles per hour, then how can a projectile that leaves the ground travel in a straight line from our perspective (if you are kicking north/south)? Golf ball? Throwing a football? If the football is traveling at 200 miles per hour (at rest, but not really at rest), and you throw the football perpendicular to that force (north/south) then the path would NEVER appear straight from your eyes. But it does appear straight. What about rain? It should always appear slanted. Fireworks? They should never appear "straight" up. How do skydivers hit their target - every time? Hot air balloons?
Lunatic science tells us to distrust what we see and feel. Modern academics and the "high priests of cyclotrons" (W.H. Auden) have disconnected us from our world. They want us to put our trust in them, with their complicated mathematical formulas and magical instruments that allow them to see into the past like seers of the ancient world.
How appropriate that "looking into the past" fascinates them. Lunatics cannot function in the reality of the present.
Saturday, April 18, 2015
Beyond Sin, Confession, and Obedience
The Christian life has been described as a cycle of sin, confession, and obedience. This cycle continues until we die or Christ returns, when our sinful nature is finally eradicated and we are fully sanctified, or perfectly "conformed to the image of Christ." In this life, perfect conformity is impossible because, as Paul says, "I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out" (Romans 7:18). This constant struggle between the new desire and the inability to fulfill that desire serves as the basis for viewing the Christian life as a cycle. The believer sins. Then they confess, agreeing with God that they did sin and apologizing for that sin. Finally, they move forward, pledging a new commitment to obedience.
An easy place to see this cycle being played out is through the form of worship on Sunday morning. At some point during regular worship, the Law is read, demonstrating to all believers that they have broken God's Law and are therefore sinners. Following the Law is some sort of declaration of pardon. The believer, convicted by the Law's work, is reassured that they are forgiven because of the gospel. After one is assured of their right standing with God, a sermon is preached. This solidifies one's right standing and motivates them towards "love and good deeds." Communion often comes last, serving as another testimony of God's grace toward the believer. It is essential to understand that every aspect in corporate worship is both essential and intentional. The church service serves as a model for believers, reinforcing their personal cycle of sin, confession, and obedience. Although formal worship takes place once a week, the believer is encouraged to live by the cycle daily, as they seek to glorify God in their personal lives.
But what if I told you that the Law's purpose was to bring about more sin? What if you discovered that your confession and repentance will not bring one step closer to God? And, finally, what would you think if God never intended us to even know good and evil so that we could obey the good and disobey the evil?
As you ponder these questions, consider what the New Testament says about the Law's. Romans 3:21 tells us that a righteousness "apart from the law has been made known." In Romans 5:20, Paul, an expert in the Law, says that the "law was added so that the trespass might increase." I Corinthians 15:56 says the "power of sin is the law." In the second letter to the Corinthians, Paul claims that death was brought through the "ministry....engraved in letters on stone" (7). Three verses later, this same ministry of death is described as a "ministry that condemns" and one that "has no glory" in the present. Prior to, and leading up to, this discussion of death and condemnation, Paul asserts that "the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life." The letter to the Galatians actually answers the question of the Law's purpose: "it was added because of transgressions until the Seed to whom the promise referred had come" (3:19). This means that the Law has a temporary function as a "tutor" until we come to Christ. In Philippians 3, Paul contrasts his former life of depending on the Law with his present life in Christ - the former was a pile of "dung" based on a "righteousness that comes from the Law." Colossians tells us that the "written code, with its regulations" was "cancelled," although it was "against us and....stood opposed to us" (2:14). And, finally, Hebrews makes absolutely clear that Old Covenant is "obsolete" and the Law is merely a "shadow of the good things to come", the reality of those shadows being found in Christ.
The evidence and weight of the New Testament is actually against the Law, not for it. It has served its purpose for the believer in Christ, and, therefore, does not need to be preached, taught, or returned to. As Romans 8 declares, "What the Law could not do...God did by sending His own Son." Living in Christ - in the "newness of life" or "in the Spirit" - has nothing to do with Law. The contrasts between the old and new could not be more clear. There is another way to live, one that does not require a constant reminder of sin, leading to confession, and leading to a new obedience. That is perhaps the greatest irony of returning to the Law - no one actually obeys it. In fact, no one can obey it. That's why it was given in the first place - to demonstrate that we could not be God and to point us to the person who is God, the Christ.
Once we know Christ, we have passed from darkness to light. We have come from death to life. How? His work provides complete forgiveness for every sin, past, present, and future. And, He gives us the Holy Spirit, who gives us life when He indwells us. This life is a restoration of that life we had before the Fall - a life that was not focused on "good and evil." It was a life of utter dependence on, and joy in, God our Creator.
The Christian life, then, is not a cycle. It does not focus on failure and sin. It is oriented in Someone Else's obedience. It is more concerned about what God has done for us than what we can do for God. It is not focused on Self, trying to rid sin from the body and bringing the flesh under control.
Get rid of the cycle. Embrace the inheritance and grace you have already received.
Saturday, September 21, 2013
Evangelical/Calvinst Discussion
E: So...are you saying that I cannot make the choice to be saved?
C: Not at all. If someone is a Christian, they DO choose Christ. What I am trying to get at is this...why is it that one person chooses Christ and another does not?
E: Well one person understands the message and the other does not. One sees his need and the other does not.
C: So if the one who "sees his need" makes a choice for Christ, then isn't he saved by his choice?
E: Aren't we all saved by our choice?
C: That's what I'm getting at. Let me say it this way. If God only saves us after we make a decision, how then are we saved by grace and not works? Isn't making a choice an act of our will? Yet, we both claim that we are saved by God's grace alone. As Paul said, "For by grace have you been saved through faith."
E: It's both grace and faith in that verse. Notice that the grace comes through faith. I don't think that's controversial. Do you?
C: Where does the faith come from, though? That is, if the faith comes from us without the help of God, aren't we saved by something within us?
E: I don't follow.
C: We both say faith is necessary, right? Well, if that faith originates from our minds or hearts, apart from God, how is salvation an act of God? How is it "God's salvation" as the Old Testament says over and over? Or how is it the "gospel of God" or "of Christ" as the New Testament says? Wouldn't it be more appropriate to say it is the "gospel that I believed"?
E: Well we do believe the gospel, right? I don't understand why that's causing this discussion?
C: Let me get the point. How did you acquire the faith to believe?
E: I don't know. I heard the message of salvation one morning and felt the need to respond.
C: But hadn't you heard the message many times in your life?
E: Sure. I heard it all the time - Sunday school, from my parents, from the pastor.
C: Then what was it about THAT time that moved you? Was the pastor more gifted then? Was the music arranged better that morning? Were you already thinking about it during the previous week?
E: Not sure. It just "clicked" that morning. I can't explain it. I knew it was the truth and that I needed to "surrender" to Christ. So I made the decision to be committed to Him.
C: And is it that decision that caused God to save you?
E: Well sure. That's what the Scripture says - "whoever believes in me will never die."
C: Ultimately, then, God "rewarded" your faith. You "earned" the right to be saved by your understanding of the message and your decision to dedicate yourself to Him. How is this NOT salvation by something you did or thought or said?
E: You're putting words in my mouth. You said so yourself that Christians CHOOSE Christ. So what's the difference?
C: Here is the difference. What you can't explain related to your choice, the Scripture does explain. As Jesus said in John 3, "The wind blows where it pleases....so it is with he who is born of the Spirit." Notice the language - BORN of the Spirit. That is, God gives birth to you. And, just like you had no control over your natural birth, so you have control over your spiritual birth. God empowered you with the ability to understand and receive His message. He changed you BEFORE you made your choice. In fact, He had to change you or you never would have chosen Him.
E: Wait a minute....What do you mean He HAD to change me BEFORE I believed? First I had to accept Him, then He began to change me. Your idea is completely backwards. He did His part by dying on the cross and rising again. Now he asks us to do our part by repenting and following Him. After we make that choice, then God indwells us by His spirit.
C: Actually....God's plan of salvation is much bigger and much more involved than "His part" and "my part." E: How so?
C: Let's pick this is up next week. I have to get home. We'll start next time with your question of "why God HAD to change us BEFORE we believed?" Sound good?
E: Yeah. I'll see you soon.
C: Not at all. If someone is a Christian, they DO choose Christ. What I am trying to get at is this...why is it that one person chooses Christ and another does not?
E: Well one person understands the message and the other does not. One sees his need and the other does not.
C: So if the one who "sees his need" makes a choice for Christ, then isn't he saved by his choice?
E: Aren't we all saved by our choice?
C: That's what I'm getting at. Let me say it this way. If God only saves us after we make a decision, how then are we saved by grace and not works? Isn't making a choice an act of our will? Yet, we both claim that we are saved by God's grace alone. As Paul said, "For by grace have you been saved through faith."
E: It's both grace and faith in that verse. Notice that the grace comes through faith. I don't think that's controversial. Do you?
C: Where does the faith come from, though? That is, if the faith comes from us without the help of God, aren't we saved by something within us?
E: I don't follow.
C: We both say faith is necessary, right? Well, if that faith originates from our minds or hearts, apart from God, how is salvation an act of God? How is it "God's salvation" as the Old Testament says over and over? Or how is it the "gospel of God" or "of Christ" as the New Testament says? Wouldn't it be more appropriate to say it is the "gospel that I believed"?
E: Well we do believe the gospel, right? I don't understand why that's causing this discussion?
C: Let me get the point. How did you acquire the faith to believe?
E: I don't know. I heard the message of salvation one morning and felt the need to respond.
C: But hadn't you heard the message many times in your life?
E: Sure. I heard it all the time - Sunday school, from my parents, from the pastor.
C: Then what was it about THAT time that moved you? Was the pastor more gifted then? Was the music arranged better that morning? Were you already thinking about it during the previous week?
E: Not sure. It just "clicked" that morning. I can't explain it. I knew it was the truth and that I needed to "surrender" to Christ. So I made the decision to be committed to Him.
C: And is it that decision that caused God to save you?
E: Well sure. That's what the Scripture says - "whoever believes in me will never die."
C: Ultimately, then, God "rewarded" your faith. You "earned" the right to be saved by your understanding of the message and your decision to dedicate yourself to Him. How is this NOT salvation by something you did or thought or said?
E: You're putting words in my mouth. You said so yourself that Christians CHOOSE Christ. So what's the difference?
C: Here is the difference. What you can't explain related to your choice, the Scripture does explain. As Jesus said in John 3, "The wind blows where it pleases....so it is with he who is born of the Spirit." Notice the language - BORN of the Spirit. That is, God gives birth to you. And, just like you had no control over your natural birth, so you have control over your spiritual birth. God empowered you with the ability to understand and receive His message. He changed you BEFORE you made your choice. In fact, He had to change you or you never would have chosen Him.
E: Wait a minute....What do you mean He HAD to change me BEFORE I believed? First I had to accept Him, then He began to change me. Your idea is completely backwards. He did His part by dying on the cross and rising again. Now he asks us to do our part by repenting and following Him. After we make that choice, then God indwells us by His spirit.
C: Actually....God's plan of salvation is much bigger and much more involved than "His part" and "my part." E: How so?
C: Let's pick this is up next week. I have to get home. We'll start next time with your question of "why God HAD to change us BEFORE we believed?" Sound good?
E: Yeah. I'll see you soon.
Monday, September 2, 2013
Sit at My Right Hand: Thoughts on Christ's Rule Part I
Quoting from both Psalms 45 and 110, the writer of Hebrews opens his book discussing the Son's kingship. Using the Old Testament, he states the Son's throne is "forever and ever" and He rules with a "scepter of uprightness...love[s] righteousness and hate[s] wickedness" (1:8-9). Although the kingship of the Son is eternal, ("Your throne, O GOD..." 1:8), a hint of the temporal is made in verse 13: "Sit at my right hand, UNTIL I make your enemies a footstool for your feet." In addition, verse 3 tells us that the sitting of the Son occurred "after he [made] purification for sins." So how can the Son rule from His throne for eternity, yet not sit on that throne until He completed the purification for sins? How are we to resolve this eternal/temporal tension in relation to the Son's rule and reign?
Scripture does not leave us groping in the dark. Understanding and resolving this tension centers on the Person and Work of Jesus, the Christ, the Son of God. Hebrews 1:3 tells us that the Son is the "exact representation" of God's "being" and that He "upholds all things by His powerful word," a further testimony to His divinity. At some point in human history - about 2000 years ago - God the Son began the work of "making purification for sins." This work, of course, is what is called the Gospel, and has many parts: God taking a human nature (Jesus) and being born through Mary; Jesus obeying the law perfectly; Jesus becoming a curse for His people; Jesus suffering God's wrath; Jesus atoning for sinners' sins, etc. What we discover, then, regarding the kingship of the Son is quite fascinating! The Creator and Ruler of the universe, who holds all things together by His mere word, left His throne for a short time (about 33 years). He lived as one the creatures He created, in a land that He formed, during an historical era that He brought about through His wisdom and Providence. Then, once His purposes for that 33 year journey were completed, He returned to His "natural" abode and "sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven."
But He didn't just sit down. He was invited by God to sit down. Here we see a fuller picture of what those 33 years accomplished. Christ was earning the right to be king. He was meriting the just declaration and invitation of God to rule and reign. To put it another way, the rightful wages of Christ's labor was complete ownership of everything in heaven and on earth. Or, as Jesus said, "all authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me" (Matthew 28:18).
The ramifications of this idea - this truth - are staggering. For, if Christ is presently reigning NOW, only waiting for all His enemies to be made a "footstool for His feet," then how ought we to view the governments of this world? What about the great movements from Monarchy to Democracy to Oligarchical Socialism? Is this movement of the worlds' governments a resistance of His rule or an outworking of Him bringing everything under His dominion? Both? Neither? What about the intellectual and political elites intentionally overthrowing "kings" and "tsars" and "dictators"? Have their intentions been to thwart the concept of "king" from collective conscious? And, on a more personal note, if Christ has the right to rule everything and everybody, how ought we to live? What does His rule say about our "freedoms" and "liberties?" Should we fight for "freedom"?
Great truths force us to ask great questions.
Scripture does not leave us groping in the dark. Understanding and resolving this tension centers on the Person and Work of Jesus, the Christ, the Son of God. Hebrews 1:3 tells us that the Son is the "exact representation" of God's "being" and that He "upholds all things by His powerful word," a further testimony to His divinity. At some point in human history - about 2000 years ago - God the Son began the work of "making purification for sins." This work, of course, is what is called the Gospel, and has many parts: God taking a human nature (Jesus) and being born through Mary; Jesus obeying the law perfectly; Jesus becoming a curse for His people; Jesus suffering God's wrath; Jesus atoning for sinners' sins, etc. What we discover, then, regarding the kingship of the Son is quite fascinating! The Creator and Ruler of the universe, who holds all things together by His mere word, left His throne for a short time (about 33 years). He lived as one the creatures He created, in a land that He formed, during an historical era that He brought about through His wisdom and Providence. Then, once His purposes for that 33 year journey were completed, He returned to His "natural" abode and "sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven."
But He didn't just sit down. He was invited by God to sit down. Here we see a fuller picture of what those 33 years accomplished. Christ was earning the right to be king. He was meriting the just declaration and invitation of God to rule and reign. To put it another way, the rightful wages of Christ's labor was complete ownership of everything in heaven and on earth. Or, as Jesus said, "all authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me" (Matthew 28:18).
The ramifications of this idea - this truth - are staggering. For, if Christ is presently reigning NOW, only waiting for all His enemies to be made a "footstool for His feet," then how ought we to view the governments of this world? What about the great movements from Monarchy to Democracy to Oligarchical Socialism? Is this movement of the worlds' governments a resistance of His rule or an outworking of Him bringing everything under His dominion? Both? Neither? What about the intellectual and political elites intentionally overthrowing "kings" and "tsars" and "dictators"? Have their intentions been to thwart the concept of "king" from collective conscious? And, on a more personal note, if Christ has the right to rule everything and everybody, how ought we to live? What does His rule say about our "freedoms" and "liberties?" Should we fight for "freedom"?
Great truths force us to ask great questions.
Thursday, June 3, 2010
On the Past and Uncertain Future: Reflections on Ecclesiastes
Even after 30 years of reading and studying the Bible, I am still amazed at the insight God provides through His written word. I probably have read Ecclesiastes over 10 times. Each time something "new" pops out. Last night, I was captivated halfway through chapter 7. Both verses 10 and 14 are still swirling through my head. These verses provide human instruction for living "under the sun" - the time prior to God bring down His kingdom, "the new heavens and the new earth."
Verse 7 warns us not to seek the "former days." Solomon insists that asking the question, "Why were the former days better than these?" does not stem "from wisdom." If we look to the past and long for the good ol' days, our minds are distracted from the present. We deny God's providential care NOW, seeking to escape our present circumstances in which He has placed us. It is a subtle complaint against the Divine Majesty - both a questioning and fist-shaking at His present goodness.
But we should not think a certain, self-created, future utopia is the solution to man's escapist thinking. In verse 14, Solomon tells us that God brings both prosperity and adversity "so that man may not find out anything that will be after him." The implication of Solomon's words are astounding: God does not want us to find certainty from our circumstances while we live 'under the sun'. Interpreting our present circumstances as an indication of a blissful future both assumes and presumes upon God's future actions. Solomon, therefore, instructs us to be "joyful" during prosperity and to "consider" God's Sovereignty during adversity - He brings both upon us. Of course, God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. So why should we joyfully praise Him only when times are good? His character is the same when times are tough.
For Christians, Solomon's affirmation to focus on the present has a unique meaning. For what is true about the present? Christ is presently reigning "above the sun." For a short time, He lived "under the sun," only to complete His mission and bring together the past, present, and future. He sits at the "right hand of God, the Father Almighty." He is now "crowned with glory and honor." And, as Paul tells us, "our [present] life is hid with Christ, in God." It is not longer we who live, but "Christ lives through" us.
How, then, do we fulfill Solomon's call to true wisdom? By focusing on Christ, "who is our life." May we banish all human utopias, both past and future. Instead, as we live here under the sun, let us realize what our Savior has done, is doing, and will do. He Himself - who presently lives - is making all things new.
Verse 7 warns us not to seek the "former days." Solomon insists that asking the question, "Why were the former days better than these?" does not stem "from wisdom." If we look to the past and long for the good ol' days, our minds are distracted from the present. We deny God's providential care NOW, seeking to escape our present circumstances in which He has placed us. It is a subtle complaint against the Divine Majesty - both a questioning and fist-shaking at His present goodness.
But we should not think a certain, self-created, future utopia is the solution to man's escapist thinking. In verse 14, Solomon tells us that God brings both prosperity and adversity "so that man may not find out anything that will be after him." The implication of Solomon's words are astounding: God does not want us to find certainty from our circumstances while we live 'under the sun'. Interpreting our present circumstances as an indication of a blissful future both assumes and presumes upon God's future actions. Solomon, therefore, instructs us to be "joyful" during prosperity and to "consider" God's Sovereignty during adversity - He brings both upon us. Of course, God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. So why should we joyfully praise Him only when times are good? His character is the same when times are tough.
For Christians, Solomon's affirmation to focus on the present has a unique meaning. For what is true about the present? Christ is presently reigning "above the sun." For a short time, He lived "under the sun," only to complete His mission and bring together the past, present, and future. He sits at the "right hand of God, the Father Almighty." He is now "crowned with glory and honor." And, as Paul tells us, "our [present] life is hid with Christ, in God." It is not longer we who live, but "Christ lives through" us.
How, then, do we fulfill Solomon's call to true wisdom? By focusing on Christ, "who is our life." May we banish all human utopias, both past and future. Instead, as we live here under the sun, let us realize what our Savior has done, is doing, and will do. He Himself - who presently lives - is making all things new.
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
"She" , inspired by Franz Kafka's, "A Little Woman"
I don’t know why she hates me so much. Perhaps hate is a strong word, but that is how I feel – at least at this moment. We are sitting across from each other, her eyes attentively fixed on me as she attempts to make eye contact. I, however, cannot look in those eyes, nor can I bear the smug grin and tilted head. It is the gesture of condescension, like a mother scowling over the stupidity of her adolescent son who should have known better. Protesting that I am a “man in my thirties” won’t help. I’ve tried that. Any protest simply ends in more severe body language – a shaking of the head and that long, lingering sigh that screams, “You’re an idiot! Grow up!”
Instead of looking at her, I am studying my shirt buttons as my fingers fiddle with them. She knows I don’t want to talk to her. She also knows I won’t talk to her. That doesn’t seem to bother her, though, because we’ve done this before. Every time she puts on that stern, unrelenting face I clamor up. I’ve never timed myself, but I would guess it takes me a half an hour to finally say something. That’s another one her spiteful tactics – the calm, patient waiting game. I bet she can sit for hours at a time, staring at me if she had to. She’s a control freak and a game player. And the worse part of it is she knows her body language, eyes, and perseverance are daggers piercing my conscience. She sees right through my nonchalant façade. She knows I don’t give a damn about these damn buttons on my shirt.
So, predictably, I change tactics. I move from button-fiddling to nail-biting. I should call it nail-studying. I spend a few seconds looking over each nail, deciding which one to bite first. When I make a semi-closed fist and hold my hand a foot-and-a-half in front of my face, I can see her reaction from the corner of my eyes. She also knows I don’t give a damn about my nails. Every time she wants to sit and talk with me I play this game – the game of not talking and waiting to see who cracks first. What does she want to talk about today? What did I do this time? I haven’t cheated on her. I’ve paid the bills. I haven’t yelled at her, beat her, or even gossiped behind her back. We’ve been together for years and, for the most part, I am content with her. It’s only times like these – times in which she holds her nose in the air and stiffens her upper lip – that make me self-conscious. What does she want? Why is she so cold and unfeeling right now? I am sick of her lectures. I am tired of her forcing her views upon me. Why can’t she accept me for who I am?
As I finish chewing my last nail, I muster up the courage to look her in the eyes. “Are you finally going to talk?” she gently asks with a warm, welcoming smile. I nod my head. She softly continues, “Where did we leave off?”
“We were discussing my avoidance issues, my problem with projection, and my self-absorption, Doctor.”
Instead of looking at her, I am studying my shirt buttons as my fingers fiddle with them. She knows I don’t want to talk to her. She also knows I won’t talk to her. That doesn’t seem to bother her, though, because we’ve done this before. Every time she puts on that stern, unrelenting face I clamor up. I’ve never timed myself, but I would guess it takes me a half an hour to finally say something. That’s another one her spiteful tactics – the calm, patient waiting game. I bet she can sit for hours at a time, staring at me if she had to. She’s a control freak and a game player. And the worse part of it is she knows her body language, eyes, and perseverance are daggers piercing my conscience. She sees right through my nonchalant façade. She knows I don’t give a damn about these damn buttons on my shirt.
So, predictably, I change tactics. I move from button-fiddling to nail-biting. I should call it nail-studying. I spend a few seconds looking over each nail, deciding which one to bite first. When I make a semi-closed fist and hold my hand a foot-and-a-half in front of my face, I can see her reaction from the corner of my eyes. She also knows I don’t give a damn about my nails. Every time she wants to sit and talk with me I play this game – the game of not talking and waiting to see who cracks first. What does she want to talk about today? What did I do this time? I haven’t cheated on her. I’ve paid the bills. I haven’t yelled at her, beat her, or even gossiped behind her back. We’ve been together for years and, for the most part, I am content with her. It’s only times like these – times in which she holds her nose in the air and stiffens her upper lip – that make me self-conscious. What does she want? Why is she so cold and unfeeling right now? I am sick of her lectures. I am tired of her forcing her views upon me. Why can’t she accept me for who I am?
As I finish chewing my last nail, I muster up the courage to look her in the eyes. “Are you finally going to talk?” she gently asks with a warm, welcoming smile. I nod my head. She softly continues, “Where did we leave off?”
“We were discussing my avoidance issues, my problem with projection, and my self-absorption, Doctor.”
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
