Saturday, May 04, 2013

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 

Sunday, April 28, 2013

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.

Sunday, April 21, 2013

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

Friday, April 19, 2013

Genuine Evil? (PhD Edit)

Bertinoro, Italy-Facebook
April 19, 2013

Some brief comments on the Boston Terror issue.

My prayers go out to all the victims. 

I have been watching some of the coverage on television and following some of the stories online. I reason the coverage via the Seattle CBS affiliate KIRO that is simulcasting with WBZ seems to actually be often more informative and less repetitive than CNN. I have found this with other major news stories as well that the local broadcasts are often more informative.

I like many others of course assumed the terrorists would have some connection to Islam. I do realize that technically there are what are described as moderate Muslims that will not commit such actions. Yes, I have met them, and know them. It is not a personal issue.

But, I would not fault Western governments for taking measures to profile in order to attempt to prevent such terrorist acts from possibly occurring again. And this would include documenting the ethnic origin of where persons are from, in this case Chechnya, Russia, and the religion associated, in this case, Islam, as long as basic rights and freedom were maintained based on Western democratic values.

There is a balance between security and freedoms. I lean toward more personal freedoms for citizens especially and the ability to have personal rights to protect self, but realize the State as in Romans 13 does have the God-given mandate to maintain law and order.

End

During my Doctoral work Dr. Mesle was kind enough to personally reply to my requests for assistance and have his assistant send me photocopies of his out of print work which was useful as commentary on the works on the now late Professor John Hick.

Please note I have presented two posts in regard to the Gratuitous Problem of Evil, where I state I do not hold to gratuitous evil:

Genuine Evil? (PhD Edit)

Robert Mesle (1986) states that Hick’s approach has the same problem as every classical theistic concept, that being a denial of genuine evil.[1]  He notes that Hick risks making God into a devil as he has God ultimately responsible for evil,[2] and if Hick denies that God can prevent evil, he ceases to be a classical theist.[3]  Mesle writes that Hick’s position would be stronger if he admitted that not every evil led to something good occurring.[4]  He thinks that much of the evil in existence is unredeemed and can be called gratuitous evil which is unnecessary evil,[5] and is more harmful than good for humanity.[6]  Gratuitous evil, as an argument, is also known as the evidential argument for evil[7] and has been presented by atheistic philosopher William Rowe (1990) on more than one occasion.  He presents an argument for gratuitous evil[8] in ‘The Problem of Evil and Some Varieties of Atheism’ in The Problem of Evil.

Mesle (1991) notes that if God was truly omnipotent and had moral values equal to the best human ones as we understand them,[9] then there would be less suffering in the world.[10]  He states that Hick misses the point by not acknowledging gratuitous evil[11] as Hick sees that all evil must play a redemptive role for humanity.[12]  Hick answers this objection within a section of John Hick’s Theodicy (1991)[13] where he writes that the existence of an enormous amount of evil does not entail that God cannot work his ultimate good purposes.[14]  He comments that evils are not rendered good, or turned into merely apparent evil by the fact that God can turn them towards a good purpose.[15]  It should be stated that natural evils are not a major concern within Hick’s soul-making theodicy.[16]  This is because he thinks that human beings must exist in a challenging, dangerous environment in order for human progress to be made.[17]  For this reason natural evils would be a natural means which could assist God in potentially building souls.[18]

HICK, JOHN (1970) Evil and The God of Love, London, The Fontana Library.

HICK, JOHN (1978) ‘Present and Future Life’, Harvard Theological Review, Volume 71, Number 1-2, January-April, Harvard University.

HICK, JOHN (1981) Encountering Evil, Stephen T. Davis (ed.),  Atlanta, John Knox Press.

HICK, JOHN (1993)  ‘Afterword’ in GEIVETT, R. DOUGLAS (1993) Evil and the Evidence for God, Philadelphia, Temple University Press.

HICK, JOHN (1993) The Metaphor of God Incarnate, Louisville, Kentucky, John Know Press.

HICK, JOHN (1994) Death and Eternal Life, Louisville, Kentucky, John Knox Press.

HICK, JOHN (1999) ‘Life after Death’, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), A New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press.

MESLE, C. ROBERT (1986) ‘The Problem of Genuine Evil: A Critique of John Hick’s Theodicy’, in The Journal of Religion, Volume 66, Number 4, pp. 412-430. October, Chicago, University of Chicago Press.

MESLE, C. ROBERT (1991) John Hick’s Theodicy, New York, St. Martin’s Press.

MESLE, C. ROBERT (2004) ‘Suffering, Meaning, and the Welfare of Children: What Do Theodicies Do?’, in American Journal of Theology & Philosophy, Volume 25, Number 3, September.  Lamoni, Iowa, Graceland University.

ROWE, WILLIAM L. (1990) ‘The Problem of Evil and Some Varieties of Atheism’, in Adams and Adams (eds.), The Problem of Evil, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

ROWE, WILLIAM L. (1994)  ‘The Problem of No Best World’, Faith and Philosophy, Volume 11, Number 2, April, pp. 269-278. Wilmore, Kentucky, Asbury College.

ROWE, WILLIAM L. (1996) ‘Privation’, in Robert Audi, (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

ROWE, WILLIAM L. (1999) ‘The Problem of Divine Sovereignty and Human Freedom’, in Faith and Philosophy, Volume 16, Number 1, January, pp. 98-101. Wilmore, Kentucky, Asbury College.



[1] Mesle (1986: 418).
[2] Mesle (1986: 418).
[3] Mesle (1986: 418).
[4] Mesle (1986: 424).
[5] Mesle (1986: 424).
[6] Mesle (1986: 424).
[7] Rowe (1990: 1-3).
[8] Rowe (1990: 1-3).
[9] Mesle (1991: 15).
[10] Mesle (1991: 15).
[11] Mesle (1991: 38).
[12] Mesle (1991: 38).
[13] Hick in Mesle (1991: 130).
[14] Hick in Mesle (1991: 130).
[15] Hick in Mesle (1991: 130).
[16] Hick in Davis (2001: 48).
[17] Hick in Davis (2001: 48).
[18] Hick in Davis (2001: 48).