James 4: 13-17 (brief)

Desert-Windows

Delta Evrou, Greece-trekearth

James 4: 13-17 English Standard Version

13 Come now, you who say, “Today or tomorrow we will go into such and such a town and spend a year there and trade and make a profit”— 14 yet you do not know what tomorrow will bring. What is your life? For you are a mist that appears for a little time and then vanishes. 15 Instead you ought to say, “If the Lord wills, we will live and do this or that.” 16 As it is, you boast in your arrogance. All such boasting is evil. 17 So whoever knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, for him it is sin.

James 4:13-17 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

13 Come now, you who say, “Today or tomorrow we will go to such and such a city, and spend a year there and engage in business and make a profit.” 14 [a]Yet you do not know [b]what your life will be like tomorrow. You are just a vapor that appears for a little while and then vanishes away. 15 [c]Instead, you ought to say, “If the Lord wills, we will live and also do this or that.” 16 But as it is, you boast in your [d]arrogance; all such boasting is evil. 17 Therefore, to one who knows the [e]right thing to do and does not do it, to him it is sin.

Footnotes:

James 4:14 Lit Who do not
James 4:14 Or what will happen tomorrow. What kind of life is yours?
James 4:15 Lit Instead of your saying
James 4:16 Or pretensions
James 4:17 Or good

End of Scripture

T. Carson provides the view that this section is not primarily referring to disbelieving Jews, but is applicable to believing Christians. Carson (1986: 1545).  The reminder is that one does not know what will happen tomorrow and life is like a passing mist. Carson (1986: 1545).

The writer of the Book of James reminds that it is only if the Lord wills that such and such shall take place. Carson (1986: 1545). Boasting in arrogance is a sign of trusting in one's own self and one's own plans, rather than in the sovereign plans of God. Therefore, the text states that to know what the right and good thing to do is and not do it, is sin. This does not preclude the possibility of sins of ignorance. Carson (1986: 1545). Barclay states that this is a warning from God that one's life is not in human hands but in God's. Barclay (1976: 114).

Barclay also writes that 'James answer is that no man has a right to make confident plans for the future, for he does not know even what a day may bring forth. Man may propose but God disposes.' Barclay (1976: 113).

The uncertainty of this life is a cause to trust in God, as in dependence. Barclay (1976: 114). This should not paralyze a Christian with fear and inaction, as plans can still be made, but an understanding should be that these plans may not occur within God's will. Barclay (1976: 114).

Excellent from Barclay in regard to the idea that no human being has the actual right to make confident plans for the future, in reality only tentative, humble plans. Because, what human beings often propose, God disposes of.

Often in a Western, goal-driven, success-minded society, not that I am opposed to goals, from a Christian perspective, God is placed in a box as in philosophical, theological restrictions, and from youth forward persons are encouraged by significant others to 'go for the gold' etcetera.

This menu and recipe for success comes with certain preconceived notions of how life should play itself out.

But, even though God the Son was incarnated as a man, and is forever, now the God-Man, Jesus Christ, God often has a different, non-human way of looking at life and human success.  God often does not follow the menu, the recipe and plan for success that persons, Western persons, and Christians would like that would be in-line with preconceived notions.

Yes, this also connects to problems of evil, problems of suffering and theodicy.

To deal with reasonably, I reason it requires much prayer, significant Biblical, Theological and Philosophical study, fellowship with other believers that encourage one in a proper direction and personal adaptability by the leading of the Holy Spirit.

When in agreement with preconceived notions, related plans and goals and when not in agreement with preconceived notions, related plans and goals.

BARCLAY, WILLIAM (1976) The Letters of James and Peter, Philadelphia, The Westminster Press.

CARSON, T. (1986) ‘James’, in F.F. Bruce (ed.), The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Zondervan.

James 1:8 Double-minded man (brief)

Castle Point, Ireland

Dublin, trekearth

James 1:5-8 English Standard Version

5 If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask God, who gives generously to all without reproach, and it will be given him. 6 But let him ask in faith, with no doubting, for the one who doubts is like a wave of the sea that is driven and tossed by the wind. 7 For that person must not suppose that he will receive anything from the Lord; 8 he is a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways.

James 1:5-8 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

5 But if any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all generously and [a]without reproach, and it will be given to him. 6 But he must ask in faith without any doubting, for the one who doubts is like the surf of the sea, driven and tossed by the wind. 7 For that man ought not to expect that he will receive anything from the Lord, 8 being a [b]double-minded man, unstable in all his ways.

T. Carson writes that from James 1: 5-8 wisdom is a great theme of the text and that God does give generously and without finding fault to persons, but they must ask in faith and without doubt
otherwise as a doubter one is like a double-minded man (person) unstable, a drunken person, and like a tossing ship in the sea. Carson (1986: 1537).

Barclay adds that a person such as this is as one with two souls, or two minds inside. As if one believes and trusts in God and the other does not. It is as if a civil war is going on inside of such a person. Barclay (1975: 46).

Being double-minded is to have two minds in regard to God.

However, for example, if one has terminal cancer and prays for healing through medical intervention and/or supernatural healing, one would likely realize that God probably will not answer the prayer with healing in this life. So this is a form of doubt.

But that person demonstrates faith and belief that God could and might provide the healing and that God is benevolent regardless of what God wills, based on his Scripture, related theology and even philosophy.

This would not be double-minded thinking.

Double-minded thinking would be to not consistently trust in God and turn to God and therefore doubt that God would answer prayer in times of trial, including when one would hypothetically have terminal cancer.

BARCLAY, WILLIAM (1976) The Letters of James and Peter, Philadelphia, The Westminster Press.

CARSON, T. (1986) ‘James’, in F.F. Bruce (ed.), The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Zondervan.

MARSHALL, ALFRED (1975)(1996) The Interlinear KJV-NIV, Grand Rapids, Zondervan.

THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT (1993) Stuttgart, United Bible Societies.

A man       two-souled/double minded    unsettled             in         all              the               ways           of him.

anhr diyucoV akatastatoV en pasaiV taiV odoiV autou 

Brief Sunday Scriptural & Theological Reflections

Munich, trekearth

A friend of mine when discussing his life struggles noted this concept from Song of Solomon/Song of Songs today. He has had and on, off and now on again romantic relationship.

Song of Solomon 2:7 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

 7 “[a]I adjure you, O daughters of Jerusalem, By the gazelles or by the hinds of the field, That you do not arouse or awaken my love Until [b]she pleases.”

R. W. Orr explains that is concept is repeated in 3:5 and 8:4. Orr (1986: 708). There is the idea here of not awakening passion prematurely, of not bringing about behavior which time has not yet properly arrived. Orr (1986: 708). Basically, the Lord is in charge and Orr states the time of love will arrive in due season. Orr (1986: 708).

I am in full agreement with the concept of my friend, thinking he was wise to allude to the text. Reading Solomon it is a counter to modern concepts of must have 'now' which often arise from the sinful nature and society and culture rather than Scripture and the Holy Spirit.

On the other hand, there is within Reformed theology the idea that persons always do the will of God, in disobedience or obedience. It is stated in Bondage and Liberation of the Will that Satan and the wicked are under his commandments. All things are subject to the power of God and so there is no thing that does not obey his will. Calvin (1543)(1996: 43).

I reason it a Biblical idea as God is omnipotent and eternal.

It can be deduced God in first cause and infinite.

God was the only entity in existence prior to the creation of matter and angelic beings.

With matter and angelic beings being finite.

God therefore has the power to sanction his perfect will, but also with what he permits. As Erickson has noted, God has a perfect and permissible will and most of what he wills would be his permissible will.

This allows for the possibility that God could as the first and primary cause of all things willingly allow secondary causes a multitude of thoughts, acts and actions in obedience and disobedience.

Therefore, one could for example, awaken love too early, awaken the wrong love, or reject a wrong person.

A key to decrease the likelihood of error is to in Christ, seek the guidance of the Holy Spirit and also gain as much related knowledge and wisdom as needed.

My friend seemed to be on that track.

CALVIN, JOHN (1543)(1996) The Bondage and Liberation of the Will, Translated by G.I. Davies, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.

ERICKSON, MILLARD (1994) Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.

ORR, R.W. (1986) 'The Letters of John' in The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Zondervan.

So often relationships are based on misunderstandings...

It was the very early 1980's and my cousin David from Edinburgh came to visit us in Pitt Meadows. It may have been the summer because I remember leading him through an old short cut through real estate developments to reach a local pub. I was a kid, not even a teen. When he came back he stated he had a good time, but initially things were a bit rough because he was playing pool and he had asked the fellows if they wanted a 'fag' (cigarette) and he ended up with the pool cue at his throat. But when he explained they settled down and made friends.

Another one...

I told this story from a movie at lunch. A certain Mennonite friend with some non-resistant theology background was joking that he could quit being a software engineer one day and find work getting beat up.

From Dirty Harry (1971). The villain, Scorpio visits an African-American thug and pays him to beat him up in order to attempt to blame Dirty Harry for it. Near the end of the beating the thug asks, 'You sure you want the rest of it'? Scorpio states a racial slur and the thugs finishes off and throws him out stating...

'This one's on the house'.

I would post the YouTube video, but there is no full version.

Beyond Today

Cernayte, Vallee De Chevreuse, at Cernay La Ville, France-trekearth

Dedicated to Mr. Matt

I have been watching 'Vikings' on History. Although I do not put much credence in historical theatre, in comparison to text, I still appreciate the religious references both Norse and Christian. At the church sermon Sunday, an elder preached and mentioned that the Vikings married Nuns which ended up converting the Vikings. Now, I must be clear that I am totally, ethically and morally against any kind of forced relationship or marriage. It was the product of brutal times.  It is interesting how the Lord used the power of women to lead men to conversion, however. I am not suggesting at all, Christians should date and marry non-believers either, because in a modern democratic Western context that usually will not lead to a conversion. The Vikings were already religious in a sense, and today in the West one would be facing secularism, empiricism, and much skepticism about the supernatural, which would make conversion more difficult in human terms at least.

The Vikings and Nuns scenario does show how God did use women as a ministry in a rather odd, unorthodox way.

As the saying goes, one should not place God in a box.

After church Mr. Matt stated he sent me an email wondering if such and such an organization was a cult.

Note, sometimes I do not receive emails, and I tend to not read them from my cell phone as it is more difficult and less practical and delete most of the messages as usually they should arrive to my Windows Live Mail as well which is my primary email service. Email on the cell phone is my backup only. However, sometimes the email messages do not show up on Windows Live Mail. Therefore for important messages please email them to me more than once if need be, on Facebook and Window Live Mail if needed. Thank you.

And of course there are also Blogger comments, but those would be public.

Mr. Matt was asking about the 'Beyond Today' program.

http://carm.org/ucog

According to Matt Slick from Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry/CARM, 'Beyond Today' is part of the media presentation of the United Church of God.

Founder: It was founded "by Bob Dick and David Hulme, in Arcadia, California, an offshoot of Herbert W. Armstrong and was formed in May of 1995. Headquarters: Milford, Ohio 'Origins: The United Church of God is an offshoot of the Worldwide Church of God. The group claims to beliefs traced backed to the first century.

Sabbatarian.

Slick states quote:

'Analysis: The United Church of God is a non-Christian cult that denies the Trinity, the true divinity of Christ, and requires both baptism and obedience to the commandments to be saved. It teaches that there is a "God family" of which we can become members through keeping the Law. Jesus is one of two divine beings, the Father being the other. The Holy Spirit is a force, a power, and is not the 3rd person of the Trinity, and it is received only through the laying on of hands by their church members. It also teaches that their members are obligated to keep the Sabbath and must observe seven festivals. They cannot eat unclean meat. This is a false religious system that teaches a false God, false Christ, and false gospel. Stay away from it.'

He also states:

'Other Teachings: They teach that the wicked, or unsaved, are not alive in hell but are annihilated. Baptism is by immersion. The Bible is inspired and inerrant. They are pre-millennial and maintain that Satan is a fallen, evil angel. Christians are not to go to war and should refuse being drafted.'

Worldwide Church of God

John Ankerberg and John Weldon provide some information. As does the late Dr. Walter R. Martin.

Herbert W. Armstrong (1892-1986). Garner Ted Armstrong. Ankerberg and Weldon (1999: 1).

Movement also known as Armstrongism Ankerberg and Weldon (1999: 1).

Claim to have the only true interpretation of the Scripture Ankerberg and Weldon (1999: 1).

God is currently two persons the Father and Jesus, now reproducing themselves into 'billions of persons'. Ankerberg and Weldon (1999: 2). God's purpose is noted as to reproduce himself as in recreating his own kind. Martin (1985: 318).

Jesus Christ is understood as Jehovah of the Old Testament/Hebrew Bible. Triparte. Ankerberg and Weldon (1999: 2). Martin quotes the theological understanding that in the atonement Christ's life resided in his blood and not in his spirit.  It is stated he did not shed a spirit to save persons from sins, and doing so gave life. Martin (1985: 320). But this seems a major theological misunderstanding of both the nature of God and the atonement, for in atonement Jesus Christ as the God/man would suffer physically and spiritually, in the atonement for the sins of humanity, a false distinction is being made. Even though God does not suffer physically, there would be spiritual anguish of experiencing the penalty for sin and the atoning work.

As Slick noted, this points to a misunderstanding of the true divinity of Christ. For the true God did fully understand and also did suffer, in a sense in spirit, in the atonement as God the Son, as some type of artificial separation within the incarnation should not be attempted.

The Holy Spirit is denied as the third person on the Trinity, but is viewed as 'God's mind and power', 'God's mind and love'. Ankerberg and Weldon (1999:  2).

The Trinity is viewed as Satanic and pagan.  Ankerberg and Weldon (1999:  2). The Holy Spirit is viewed as divine spiritual love, but not the third person of the Trinity. Martin (1985: 321).

Salvation is 'By works'. Ankerberg and Weldon (1999:  2).

Martin lists it as 'Salvation by Grace and Law'. Martin (1985: 321).

The blood of Christ is viewed as wiping the slate clean, but not saving a person.  A penalty for sin was paid. Martin (1985: 321). The atoning work of Christ saves persons from the death penalty and therefore based on this theology the Old Testament law and Ten Commandments still needs to be obeyed. Martin (1985: 321).

However, a reasoned review of New Testament texts such as Romans, Galatians, Ephesians and Hebrews will demonstrate that human beings are so corrupted in sin and unable to perfectly and fully obey the law that only the new covenant of Christ through grace through faith, can save persons, making the old covenant obsolete.

For example from Hebrews in regards to change in covenant:

Hebrews 7:26-28 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

26 For it was fitting for us to have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners and exalted above the heavens; 27 who does not need daily, like those high priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for His own sins and then for the sins of the people, because this He did once for all when He offered up Himself. 28 For the Law appoints men as high priests who are weak, but the word of the oath, which came after the Law, appoints a Son, made perfect forever.

Hebrews 9:11-16 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

11 But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things [a]to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect [b]tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation; 12 and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, He entered the holy place once for all, [c]having obtained eternal redemption. 13 For if the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling those who have been defiled sanctify for the [d]cleansing of the flesh, 14 how much more will the blood of Christ, who through [e]the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to God, cleanse [f]your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? 15 For this reason He is the mediator of a new covenant, so that, since a death has taken place for the redemption of the transgressions that were committed under the first covenant, those who have been called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance. 16 For where a [g]covenant is, there must of necessity [h]be the death of the one who made it.

Human beings become as God at the resurrection. Ankerberg and Weldon (1999:  2).

The Bible is viewed as authoritative only under the Armstrongism view. Ankerberg and Weldon (1999:  2).

Soul sleep is accepted as is a belief in annihilation of the wicked. Ankerberg and Weldon (1999:  2).

Hell is viewed as a pagan doctrine and heaven is denied. Ankerberg and Weldon (1999:  2).

This movement is also associated with Anglo-Israelism also known as British-Israelism. Martin states it originated roughly in the Elizabethan era with Richard Brothers (1757-1824). Martin (1985: 306). The theological view is that the ten lost tribes of Israel traveled westward through Northern Europe and eventually became the ancestors of the Saxons that eventually invaded England. The theory being the Anglo-Saxons are the lost ten tribes of Israel. Martin (1985: 306).

However, this view is not generally academically held.

ANKERBERG, JOHN AND JOHN WELDON (1999) Encyclopedia of Cults and New Religions, Eugene, Oregon, Harvest House Publishers.

MARTIN, WALTER (1965)(1985) The Kingdom of The Cults, Minneapolis, Bethany House Publishers.

Salsburg, Austria-Facebook