“Today’s Christian college students are nauseated by any kind of religious hype: blow-dried evangelists, insincere appeals for offerings, faked healings, goofy buzzwords or schmaltzy Christian pop music. What they crave is reality-honest relationships, healthy mentoring, passionate worship and daring faith that is reflected through brave actions, not just words.”

“What they crave is reality.”

These words I have quoted are from an opinion piece written by J. Lee Grady, the editor of Charisma magazine.  He defines reality, in a Pentecostal sense, in the last part of the quote.  The questions for today’s discussion concern this reality.

Would you say that he is right or wrong from your own observations?

Do you believe that your own local assembly would be attractive to these Christian college students?

If not, do you see any ways that things could change to make it more attractive?

If you want to read the whole piece, you can find it here.

Love you all

Tags: charisma magazine, Discussion, honest relationships, j lee grady, passionate worship, Pentecost, Pentecostal, relationship, Relationships, town hall, Tuesday

I am a gay (defined as: showing or characterized by cheerfulness and lighthearted excitement; merry.) open theist.

There, I have said it.  I have been writing from this frame of mind ever since I started this blog but have been hesitant to label myself.  The open theist label, that is.  The reason for this is mainly that I hate labels.  They never really justify anyone’s beliefs totally.  I constantly hear people refer to themselves as three point Calvinists or four point Calvinists.  What does this really mean?  If you are a Calvinist, then you are, right?  And most Arminians really do not even know who they are or what it means.

Open theism is the same way.  There are many proponents of this view and none of them agree on all the intricacies of this theological worldview.  That is one of the reasons I hate labels; they are never really accurate in describing anyone’s total belief system.   Another, and even more valid reason is, that once you label yourself, most dismiss your views, thoughts, discussions and relevance out of hand.  I have seen many people ostracized and labeled as heretical from the start once they say they are an open theist.  And many times by people that do not even know what it means.

I believe this viewpoint is biblically sound, addresses almost all the problems I ever had as an atheist, and actually reflects the way we all live as Christians already.  We just can’t seem to let go of some of the eisegesis of scripture that has come before us.  We ask questions like: who are we to question the early church fathers, those greats of traditional scriptural thought.  Well, have you ever thought about the fact that not all of those agreed with each other.  If they had I would be one of the first to give what they have said credence.  My own denomination has had loads of changes over the last one hundred years of doctrine but some are still so dogmatic about their own current beliefs to the point that they argue that they cannot be wrong and any who oppose them are therefore, heretical.

Open theism really boils down to an argument about God’s omniscience.  Does God live outside and above time?  Does God know every free will choice we will ever make in the future?  Is the future something that exists already to even be known or is it just something that unfolds as choices are made and therefore becomes the present?

I simply do not see how free will exists if God already knows all the choice in front of me as facts.  I am okay and actually believe He does know all of my future choices as possibilities.  A great book to introduce you to this whole concept is “God of the Possible: A Biblical Introduction to the Open View of God” by Greg Boyd.  But the discussion has to go deeper than just do I or anyone else have free will, even in this viewpoint.  I keep being bombarded with the question about Peter’s free will and whether God allowed, foresaw or actually made Peter deny Christ.  I believe I have answered this but I do realize that just maybe it was too spread out among the posts and comments to ascertain.

So here is part of what I believe about our free will and I believe it answers any question about Peter’s free will.

For God to truly have loving relationships with His creation He had to make us with free will.  Our choices are our own.  Peter’s choices were His own.  But a major choice he made was to follow Jesus.  I believe part of the whole concept of servant hood to God is that we come to a place where we turn our free will over to Him and allow His will to take over.  Peter was on that path.  He stood and declared that he would never fall in following our Lord but our Lord knew him better than he knew himself.  He knew that there was still a pride issue Peter had to overcome to be the man that God wanted him to be.

So the simple answer is that yes, I believe God possibly, and take note I said possibly, caused Peter to deny Jesus.  This is not a big problem to me because it is actually where we all are supposed to be.  We are supposed to make a free will choice to follow God and part of this, a major part, is giving Him our free will. Is this not what we are doing when we ask Him to direct and lead us as we live for Him?  Peter had already come to this place and God used this opportunity for his growth.

The argument against my belief of this issue is pointed toward making me out to say that I do not even believe in free will.  That is not the case.  But the last thing about this is that no matter what, God is God and can and has suspended our free will on many occasions.  Look at Pharaoh, look at Jonah, look at Job, look at all the people destroyed in the Old Testament, look at your own life where God got you to do something you really did not want to do.  All of these examples do not in any way mean that free will does not exist.

If this does not answer the endless questions about my belief concerning Peter and his denial, then I am incapable of answering what I believe.  If that is the case, I am sorry.

I pray we all use our free will choice to turn our free will over to Jesus.

Love you all

And in case you are wondering, the opening statement was not only to get your attention and to generate Google hits, I am cheerful, excited and merry (gay) because open theism truly does answer more of the unanswerable questions that skeptics have.  The mission field is wide open.  Let’s go.

Tags: atheist, Belief, blog, Calvin, Creation, Discussion, eisegesis, Free will, God, Greg Boyd, open theism, relationship, Servant, Servant Hood, Theological

Yes.  He did.  And we are here, only by His gracious act of creation.  If you have been following along with the posts and especially the commentary the last couple of weeks you are aware that creation has been discussed and I hope will continue to be.  No one is denying the fact of creation, just how to interpret the narrative we have that portrays it.  This post is not about creation in a wider sense.  It is about the many questions I have read out there in cyberspace asking what God created.

There is the question asking, did God create evil?  Another asks, did God create sin?  What about, did God create time?

Some believe He created evil and sin for example, so that we can experience good and His mercy.  Some believe He had to create time because He does not experience duration or sequence because He is infinite, but because we are finite we had to have time created to experience the same.  Some of these concepts are definitely brain twisters and the most vocal of the believers in these things end most of the discussions with the argument of God being so far beyond, above, mysterious, and such that we should not attempt to even ponder them.  Logic seems to have no place for determining what God is like.

I have other questions.  If we need evil to experience good, then how in the heavens are we going to experience good in eternity?  Isn’t the promise that evil will be gone?  Is evil a noun; is it something with independent existence?  Or is it just what occurs when Gods ways are not followed? The same goes for sin.  Isn’t it really just a turning from the path God set before us, missing the mark, as it is defined?

God is good because he said so.  Good has independent existence because God exists.  But God never, ever, said He was evil.  Isn’t evil really just a measurement, as is sin, of how much we are unlike God or how far we or our actions are from Him.  Did God create large, small, sweet, sour, pretty, ugly and such, or are these just descriptives and measurements of the things He did create?  Evil and sin are not things.  They are what things that are created do.

Time is in the same ballpark.  It is a measurement of sequence and duration.  Again, do we say that God created height, or depth, or diameter?  Or aren’t these just concepts that we use to relate to creation?  To me, time fits this description.  I once thought of God as timeless and above and outside time and it gave me nothing but headaches.  Upon further study, prayer, reflection and discussion I have come to the conclusion that this is a manmade concept and is not only unbiblical, it actually goes against much of the biblical witness.

As I read the love letter to mankind that we call the bible, I see a God that desires relationships with His creations.  I see a God that experiences sequence and duration.  A God that asks things like, how long?  How much?  When?  All of these things point far away from timelessness.  In eternity, if God does not experience time, meaning duration and sequence, then how will we relate to Him then?  It will be no better than it is here.

God is everlasting to everlasting.  God simply always was and always is and always will be.  He is the Alpha and the Omega, which are actually finite terms meaning the beginning and the end.  These do not point to timelessness either.  They actually point us to the fact that we find our beginning and ending only in Him.

Did God create…?

As far as evil, sin, and time go, I say no.  It just does not fit the picture of the Father that Jesus painted for us.  Instead we find that He is good, He is perfect, and He will be there with us and for us.  Hallelujah.

Love you all

Tags: alpha and the omega, Beginning, Bible, Creation, Discussion, Ending, Eternity, Evil, Father, God, Good, hallelujah, Heaven, jesus, King, Mercy, Perfect, relationship, Relationships

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

On Tuesday I tried to provoke a discussion about “rights” as declared in one of our nation’s founding documents.  I believe in a way that I failed.  It seems that we all have a tendency to assign our own definitions to words when it comes to ideology.  And many of us want to go off on tangents that take us to those things that we individually hold dear.  I sometimes get a little frustrated and when I try to clarify it may seem a little harsh.  I do not mean it that way.  I am just trying to get some answers to questions that I have.  I do want your opinions and your participation, even when we do not agree, but I do want to discuss from common ground.

If you have ever discussed theology with one of our Catholic brothers, then you might understand.  As Protestants, most of us shore up our doctrine with the Word of God as proclaimed in the Bible.  But Catholics will quickly let you know that some of their beliefs are not biblically justified but are just as reliable doctrinally due to other things such as church doctrine, Catholic writings, the catechism, and even the words of the pope.  We can’t truly discuss anything with them because of the basic lack of an agreed upon foundation.

The same thing seems to be going on in my previous post.  Being a simple man, and maybe not at the level of intelligence as some of my commenter’s, I tend to read most things as they are written.  I am not trying to apply a certain definition to “rights” or “equal” or “life” or “liberty” or “the pursuit of happiness”.  I simply define them for what they are in light of the context of the words I am reading.  So I will define what I see being said as I go.

We hold these truths (an obvious or accepted fact; truism; platitude) to be self-evident (evident in itself without proof or demonstration; axiomatic.), that all men are created (to cause to happen; bring about; arrange, as by intention or design) equal (Having the same quantity, measure, or value as another.), that they are endowed (provided or supplied or equipped with) by their Creator (God) with certain unalienable (Not to be separated, given away, or taken away) Rights (Something that is due to a person), that among these are Life (the animate existence or period of animate existence of an individual), Liberty (freedom from arbitrary or despotic government or control, from external or foreign rule, from control, interference, obligation, restriction, hampering conditions, from captivity, confinement, or physical restraint) and the pursuit (an effort to secure or attain) of Happiness (good fortune; pleasure; contentment; joy).

It seems to me that this whole statement shows that the framers of this highly esteemed document did not really know the Creator very well at all.  Before you get angry at me, remember that I am not arguing about what the founding fathers wanted or tried to establish.  It seems they did their very best in a fallen, sin-stained, self-absorbed world to fashion a nation that takes the one thing in the statement above that is true, equality, and makes it almost a reality.  But even that has taken over two centuries.  Just think about why there was recently a historical precedent set when our newest president was inaugurated.

Our rights, especially life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are what we hang on to.  These are the points behind which we stand and declare that we are something special indeed.  It seems that our adversary relied on this same concept in the garden.  Aren’t we as special as God?  As Americans, we surely are.

When I read some of your comments over the last two days I am tempted to give in and agree with some of you.  All these things sound good to me but yet, I do not ever want to see something about God that is not true.  I really almost want to agree about life as a right but even that has to looked at as what it is.  And what is the word I would use instead of rights?  What, exactly, is life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?  I agree these do come from our creator, but they are not rights.  They, like everything else God has given us, are gifts.  Someone used the word privilege and that to me is not quite right either.  Privilege is like an allowance, something given maybe because it is earned or due.  I believe we can become even better soldiers for the Kingdom when we realize everything, all that we have, are “gifts”.

When I read this famous statement and compare it to what I know and what the bible teaches me about God, about the only thing that stands as truth is the part about us all being equal.  But as we know from history, and even the times we live in, equality as a concept still has a long way to go.  Equality is very biblical.  We must start pursuing it like we do happiness.  We must start valuing it as much as we do our liberty.  We must start seeing it as being as important as life itself.

I, personally, do not think we have any rights, anything that I am owed just for existing, from God.  I instead thank Him for the gift of life, for the liberty I have in Christ, and in the place of happiness, for the sheer joy I have in being one of His.

My Declaration of Independence from the kingdoms of the world begins with…

I hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal and for a loving relationship with God and each other, that we are blessed by our Creator with more Gifts than we can imagine, and that among these are Life and  Liberty in Christ and Happiness and Joy by pursuing the Kingdom of God.

I thank God for these Gifts.

Love you all

Tags: America, catholic writings, catholics, certain unalienable rights, Christ, Church, Creator, Kingdom, life liberty and the pursuit of happiness, Love, relationship, Theology, Truth