QueerAmericaBlog

IMAG-INATION The Doctrine of Biblical Self-Love

Glenn — Mon, 02 Jan 2012 11:40:16 -0500

IMAG-INATION The Doctrine of Biblical Self-Love. Miles J. Stanford

Introduction

Believers today are being challenged and exhorted to develop a better self-image, and to exercise more self-love. It is our intent to present both the unscriptural, and the scriptural aspects of this important facet of the Christian life.

If I have anything prominently before me except the Lord Jesus, that thing, however good it is, becomes a screen for something of myself, and where there is any self- consideration, the region of spirituality is lost. It may be an amiable thing, but because it is of man and not of God, it is not spirituality. --J. B. Stoney

Fall Of The Fall

There is a growing number of Christians for whom the fall has fallen. To the degree that the believer weakens his concept of the fall, he weakens his Christian life and service. Error concerning the fall results in error concerning the two Adams; and error concerning the two Adams results in error concerning one’s spiritual growth and outreach.

Totality Of The Fall

Scripture leaves no doubt as to the totality of the fall. It was utter, and irrevocable. God made it very clear to Adam that if and when he should sin, he would surely die. And the day that Adam disobeyed God’s single stipulation, he died spiritually--he died unto God. And all the race of mankind died unto God in Adam that day.

"For as in Adam all die" (1 Cor. 15:22). As a result, "it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment." "Therefore, as by the offense of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation" (Heb. 9:27; Rom. 5:18). "As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one." "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God" (Rom. 3:10, 23).

Without question Adam was originally created in the image of God. "And God said, Let us create man in our image, after our likeness...."So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him" (Gen. 1:26, 27).

But when Adam died to God, his God-like image perished with him. "And the Lord said, My Spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh" (Gen. 6:3). "That which is born of the flesh is flesh" (John 3:6). "Among whom also we all had our manner of life in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others" (Eph. 2:3). "For to be carnally (fleshly) minded is death....Because the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, neither, indeed, can be. So, then, they that are in the flesh cannot please God" (Rom. 8:6–8).

The extent of the apprehension of the depth and utter ruin of the first Adam nature caused by the fall, determines the extent to which the new life in Christ can be brought to full growth in the believer; for just so far as man clings to one supposed "good thing" in him, so for the power of the Cross is nullified in his life, and so far the growth of the new life is constricted in him.

Freedom from the dominion of sin is the message of the Cross, but it can only be realized in experience up to the extent of the believer’s recognition of the fall, and a consequent offcasting of the fallen life of the first Adam at the place called Calvary.

Anomaly

Those who slight the fall refer consistently to the image of fallen Adam as "marred," or "blurred," or "in need of restoration." They dare not consider Adam’s image a total ruin because they are seeking its restoration, its reformation. For them it is back to the unfallen Adam, via Christ!

There is a strange anomaly at the core of the Reformation realm. On the one hand they go to the extreme of teaching that the fall was not beyond recovery of the original; while on the other hand they go so far as to insist that man is so dead in sin that it is impossible for him to believe--"total depravity."

These Calvinists insist that the Spirit must first regenerate the dead-unto-God individual, thereby giving him life in order that he may believe unto life. This the Covenant theologians refer to as "monergistic regeneration: the faith which receives Christ for justification is itself the free gift of a sovereign God, bestowed by spiritual regeneration in the act of effectual calling." --J.I. Packer

"Faith Cometh By Hearing"

The Scriptures present the reverse of this theory. "To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins" (Acts 10:43). First believe, then receive. John writes, "He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life" (5:24). First hear, then believe, then receive. "The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God; and they that hear shall live" (John 5:25). As a result of hearing, the dead are given life.

James, Peter, and John all clearly testify to the fact that life is entered into by believing, by faith. James: "Of his own will begot he us with the word of truth (1:18). Peter, "Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God" (1 Pet. 1:23). John: "But these are written, that ye might have life through his name" (20:31).

God commanded Israel to choose life. "I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing; therefore, choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live" (Deut. 30:19). Concerning this plea to choose life, Dr. L.S. Chafer wrote:

God having designed that man as creature ...

ONE NATURISM Part I

Glenn — Thu, 17 Nov 2011 07:14:46 -0500

Miles J. Stanford

We will briefly consider the "one-nature" error.

1)
Wesleyan One-Naturism

This is the traditional Pentecostal aberration: "Total Depravity does not mean that human nature is essentially and completely evil, but that every part of it is damaged and infected by inherited Adamic sin. "It is insisted that there is no new nature involved at conversion, but rather the impartation of spiritual life that regenerates the old Adamic nature.

Eradication: This is the teaching that all sin is eradicated from the sinful Adamic nature. The Wesleyan "pure heart," is attained when the "second blessing" experience of the "Pentecostal flame" consumes the sinful propensities of the old Adamic nature. Presto, new divine nature!

2)
Arminian One-Naturism

Another type of "one-naturism" is set forth by J. Sidlow Baxter in his book, A New Call to Holiness. This holiness theory is that of amelioration of the sinful Adamic nature. Dr. Baxter writes:

"Sin is a diffused infection of thought, desire, motive, impulse, inclination, and even of instinct, right through the moral nature. From the moment the Holy Ghost fully possesses us, He begins to correct, purify, refine, inbreathe and renovate all the qualities, tempers, urges, propensities, and functions of the mind, the sensations, and the will. This is how holiness begins and continues to be inwrought" (p. 116).

This is the humanistic theory of change in contradiction to the spiritual principle of exchange; "Not I, but Christ."

3) Covenant One-Naturism

The most prevalent and insidious type of "one-naturism" today is that of Covenant Theology. Through the error of considering Romans 6:6 to be actual (condition), rather than positional, it is claimed that the old Adamic man is actually crucified, dead, and gone--eradicated. Those holding this view are forced, however, to admit to indwelling sin in the Christian. Some teach that it is simply a residual influence left over from pre-salvation days.

Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones and Dr. Jay Adams refer to indwelling sin as "old habits." Dr. John MacArthur terms it the "old coat of humanness." Dr. Charles Solomon says it is the "energy of residual sin." Another erroneous term for the indwelling old man is "condition of flesh." The one-nature proponents separate the alleged eradication of the old man from the indwelling "flesh."

However, the Word teaches that "flesh" is a person, as well as a condition. "My Spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh" (Gen. 6:3). "Fathers of our flesh" (Heb. 12:9) sire progeny of flesh. Belief in the eradication of the old man tends to relieve the Christian of much of his responsibility concerning the activity of his indwelling Adamic life and nature. He is wont to place the blame for his sinning upon Satan, and upon "residual tendencies" and "habits" developed prior to salvation.

But here is the crux of the matter: it is not possible for the source of indwelling sin to be eradicated, while retaining sin, the product of that sinful source. Effect must have a cause! If you sin, you have its source, i.e., Adam.

Dr. Lloyd-Jones taught that "The old man is non-existent. Your old self is gone" (Romans Six, p. 65). Dr. MacArthur: "The old man is dead, destroyed, removed…it isn’t around" (Tape GC 2147). Dr. Solomon: "The old man and sin nature no longer exist in the Christian" (Rejection Syndrome, p. 106). Dr. Bob George: "That old man is dead and gone; he will never exist again" (Classic Christianity, p. 90). Dr. Bill Gillham: "I claim by faith that the old man is extinct" (Lifetime Guarantee, p. 187).

What the one-nature eradicationist fails to understand is that death ever means separation! Separation from God is living death. I, as a new creation in the Last Adam, was positionally separated from the first Adam at the Cross (Gal. 2:20). Hence I reckon myself dead (separated) from sin and its source, the sinful indwelling old Adamic man. This is the meaning of Romans Six.

PAULINE DISPENSATIONALISM

Glenn — Thu, 17 Nov 2011 06:50:13 -0500

PAULINE DISPENSATIONALISM

Miles J. Stanford

PAULINE DISPENSATIONALISM

Miles J. Stanford

Breached Bulwarks-- There are three great fissures in the Dispensational dike, through which doctrinally contaminated Covenant theology is pouring. These inundating law-streams arise from three sources: (1) Israel’s New Covenant, (2) Israel’s Sermon on the Mount, and (3) Israel’s Millennial Kingdom.

These rifts are not only caused by Covenant-engineers from the outside, but also Dispensational-sappers from the inside. Unless these torrents are terminated, the Church will suffer greater devastation in the grip of Covenant Theology than she has from the turmoil and personal wreckage caused by the Arminian Charismatic chaos.

Pauline Dispensationalism -- Our theme is as follows: The Church is to be kept separate from all else, including Israel and her Law, via clear-cut Pauline Dispensationalism.

The Lord Jesus Christ loves His Church, for whom He gave Himself on the Cross. He did so that He might cleanse and sanctify her with the washing of water by the (rightly divided) Word of truth. He would present her to Himself a glorious Church, not having Charismatic spot, nor Covenant wrinkle, nor any such thing, but that she should be holy and without earthly Jewish blemish (Eph. 5:25–27).

The glorified Lord delivered His sanctifying and glorifying message exclusively to His Bride through Paul—a life-giving Word infinitely higher than His earthly message to the nation of Israel. The Pauline Gospel, governed by Pauline Dispensationalism, belongs to the Church.

Dual Gospels--Most dispensationalists and all Covenant theologians fail to realize that there are two Gospels, each dependent upon the Blood of the Cross. The one Gospel is earthly (Kingdom), the other is heavenly (Grace). Both Gospels are “according to Jesus,” and present only one way: by faith.

One Gospel was ministered by Christ on earth, during His pre-Cross humiliation, and was exclusively addressed to Israel regarding her Millennial Kingdom. The other—altogether “new creation” other—was ministered to Paul by the glorified Lord Jesus Christ; after Calvary, from heaven, exclusively to and for His chosen heavenly Body.

John the Baptist’s, Jesus’, and the Apostles’ Gospel concerned the Messiah and His Kingdom-specifically and repeatedly referred to as “the Gospel of the Kingdom” (Matt. 4:23; 9:35; 24:14; Mark 1:14; Luke 9:2, 6). The other, “the Gospel of the Grace of God, “was neither preached nor mentioned until Paul went forth to declare it (Acts 20:24; Rom. 3:21–28; Eph. 3:1–3).

Heaven-based Church -- The Church’s Source is in heaven; as a unique body she was brought into being on earth at Pentecost. She will return to her eternal Source and abode in heaven at the Rapture—not partially, but each and every member of His completed Body. The glorious heavenly Church has no relationship, no continuity, with anything prior to the Cross, nor after the Rapture. His Body will be completed; His spotless Bride presented to Himself in heaven.

Paul’s heavenly Gospel is exclusively for the Church. One need not go down to earthly Israel for anything! Why should a heavenly citizen, “blessed with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ, stoop to purloin some “spiritual” blessing from comparatively poor Israel? Like the wealthy shoplifter, in the 5 & 10! The Bride shares the throne with her Bridegroom, whether in heaven, or on earth.

Anti-“Ultra”-- Before going further, be assured that the dispensational aspects of the Word presented here are simply normal, clear-cut, Pauline teaching. We have always been opposed to all so-called “ultra,” “extreme,” [or post-Acts2] Dispensationalism. We insist that the Church was born on the day of Pentecost; we insist upon the privilege and responsibility of the Lord’s Supper; we insist upon believers’ baptism by immersion. We have been associated with the Bible Church movement for over half a century; we are just seeking to give God’s revelation to Paul its proper place and nothing more—there is no more!

Heavenly Gospel-- The Gospel for the Church, the Gospel of the Grace of God, Paul’s Gospel, is not mentioned in the Scriptures until 1 Corinthians 15:3–5. “For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received [from Christ in glory], that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures; and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures; and that He was seen…”

“But I make known to you, brethren, that the Gospel which was preached by me is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ” (Gal. 1:11, 12). “For I [the glorified Lord] have appeared unto thee [Saul] for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in which I will appear unto thee” (Acts 26:16).

“All the Apostles (except Paul) accompanied the Lord and followed Him to the cloud (Acts 1:9). Paul sees Him the other side of the cloud, and it is this which characterizes his entire ministry.”

The glorified Lord directly communicated to Paul not only the great fundamentals of the heavenly Church Gospel, but totally new revelation concerning His Body—truths that He never shared with the nation Israel. These truths concerned our identification with Christ crucified, buried, resurrected and ascended; our heavenly position; our co-heirship and co-reign with our Beloved Bridegroom, and much more.

Dr. Chafer wrote, “The current neglect of the extensive doctrine of the Church is not only blameworthy, but has led to a considerable array of baneful errors. The Church is the purpose of the Father in the present dispensation, and His supreme purpose in the universe” (Systematic Theology IV: 54).

Infinitely Above-- All the while the Lord Jesus’ heavenly Gospel in content and position is infinitely above the Kingdom Gospel that He shared with earthly Israel—which they rejected.

Those who do not center in the truths which the ascended Lord communicated directly to Paul will not know who and where they are in ...

What does it mean to pray in Jesus' name?

Glenn — Thu, 17 Nov 2011 06:21:22 -0500
Question: "What does it mean to pray in Jesus' name?"

Answer: Prayer in Jesus’ name is taught in John 14:13-14, “And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Son may bring glory to the Father. You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it.” Some misapply this verse, thinking that saying “in Jesus’ name” at the end of a prayer results in God’s always granting what is asked for. This is essentially treating the words “in Jesus’ name” as a magic formula. This is absolutely unbiblical.

Praying in Jesus’ name means praying with His authority and asking God the Father to act upon our prayers because we come in the name of His Son, Jesus. Praying in Jesus' name means the same thing as praying according to the will of God, “This is the confidence we have in approaching God: that if we ask anything according to his will, he hears us. And if we know that he hears us—whatever we ask—we know that we have what we asked of him” (1 John 5:14-15). Praying in Jesus’ name is praying for things that will honor and glorify Jesus.

Saying “in Jesus’ name” at the end of a prayer is not a magic formula. If what we ask for or say in prayer is not for God’s glory and according to His will, saying “in Jesus’ name” is meaningless. Genuinely praying in Jesus' name and for His glory is what is important, not attaching certain words to the end of a prayer. It is not the words in the prayer that matter, but the purpose behind the prayer. Praying for things that are in agreement with God’s will is the essence of praying in Jesus’ name.

None But the Hungry Heart #5

Glenn — Thu, 17 Nov 2011 00:06:37 -0500

None But the Hungry Heart #5

What is shared herein is designed to further your acquaintance with the Lord Jesus on high, and to enrich your fellowship with Him and with the Father. Through prayerful meditation in None But the Hungry Heart #5, we trust the Holy Spirit will bring about a strengthening of faith and an upward drawing of heart.

Furthermore, it is hoped that these thoughts may provide you an opportunity to try your "faith wings"--to learn more fully the need to abide above, and thereby walk here below in the "Spirit of life in Christ Jesus" (Romans 8:2).

"And this I pray, that your love may abound yet more and more in knowledge and in all judgment (discernment); that ye may approve things that are excellent; that ye may be sincere and without offense till the day of Christ, being filled with the fruits of righteousness, which are by Jesus Christ, unto the glory and praise of God" (Philippians 1:9-11).
-Miles J. Stanford; Sept. 1973
Go to frames set

5-1. THE GREATEST

"We love Him, because He first loved us" (1 John 4:19).

We first come to know something of the Lord Jesus' love by what He did for us; but that is only the basis for coming to know His love in what He is to us. The first is known at the Cross, the latter is entered into through personal fellowship with the risen Lord.

"There are three steps in appreciation of His love for us. First, I learn that He loves me so much that He saved me. He is our treasure 'My Beloved is mine' (Song of Solomon 6:3). The second step of affection is the consciousness that He loves me so much that He has a right to me. He would have me for Himself. 'I am my Beloved's' (Song of Solomon 6:3).

"The third step is the consciousness that He loves me so much that He wants my company 'His desire is toward me' (Song of Solomon 7:10). Love's delight is found in the company of its object. May we know in a deeper way, and in a fuller measure, the sweetness of personal intimacy with 'the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me' (Galatians 2:20).

"Much ministry is lost upon us as to any practical result, because we are not prepared to be detached from things here, so as to be simply here for Christ. And the preparation for this is to come personally under the influence of the blessed attractiveness of the Lord Jesus. When we sit under His shadow with great delight, everything else becomes so small, and loses its hold upon our hearts." -C.A.C.

"But we all, with unveiled face beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord" (2 Corinthians 3:18).

5-2. INITIAL PREPARATION

"Saul armed David with his armor.... And David said unto Saul, I cannot go with these; for I have not tested them" (1 Samuel 17:38, 39).

Years of preparation are worth a moment of truth! Rest assured that once we are developed and trained by the Holy Spirit, the work whereunto He has called us will be ready and waiting (Acts 13:2). "Our Lord must have an instrument which He has formed in the fire and to which He has given peculiar knowledge of Himself."

"The greater the knowledge committed to a servant, the more necessary and important it is that he should be much alone with God about it, in order that he may realize the nature and effect of it on himself before he undertakes to make it known to others.

"It rebukes the haste and readiness with which many now enter the ministry, attempting to impress others with a measure of the truth which they have not proved for themselves. Surely the servant should ever be able to say: 'I believed, and therefore have I spoken' (2 Corinthians 4:13). It is better to lose time as to work in preparation for service than to lose time in repairing one's mistakes in undertaking a work for which one is not yet qualified."

"A servant's discipline must always be in advance of the service prepared for him. He cannot lead beyond the point to which he himself has been led. But when the depth and reality of the truth has been established in his own soul, he is made the channel of it."

"I have found that many a thing which I had presented in an extreme way because I was sure of it, I put forth in a simpler and a more real way when I had touched it in my own experience." -J.B.S.

"That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you" (1 John 1:3).

5-3. APPREHENDED TO APPREHEND

"I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus, my Lord" (Philippians 3:8).

Positionally, our Father subjected our old nature to the Cross and its resultant death. Experientially, He applies the work of the Cross to our old life, thereby progressively holding it in the grip of that death. He is "unforming" the old nature in death, and conforming the new nature in life.

"Life more abundant requires that what He did for us shall be made good in us. In His Cross He dealt with our sins, and He also dealt with ourselves; but that is something which has to be made good progressively. It is as we ourselves are dealt with in the power of the Cross that the way is made for His life to express itself in ever deepening fullness.

"The fact is that it is the old life which is in the way of the new life and its full expression. It is the natural life which obstructs the course of the divine life. Thus what has been done for us has ...

Should Christians Judge?

Glenn — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 23:19:49 -0500

Should Christians Judge?

Occasionally, we receive correspondence from individuals (liberal, progressive, postmodern, moral relativist, monist, etc.) being judgmental and seeking to censor our liberty in Christ and our obligation to exercise discernment. Curiously, these individuals fail to see the hypocrisy of their own position--that of engaging in the very behavior which they CLAIM is religiously, philosophically or politically unacceptable. Typically, they quote Matthew 7:1 "Do not judge, or you too will be judged." as a 'proof text' to the exclusion of what the rest of Scripture has to say on the subject. Of course, their motive is often that of intimidating anyone who would seek to discern error/falsehood from truth, immorality from virtue. Consider the following thoughts written by Miles J. Stanford.

The terms "judge," or "judgment," are used in different ways in the Word of God; their meanings and usage are mainly governed by the context in which they are found.

When they mean to condemn, to sentence, or to punish, man [individually] is to leave that prerogative with God. "Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord" (Romans 12:19). [During "the times of the Gentiles," God has established government--civil authority--as His earthly delegated representative/agent to administer justice upon evildoers. See Romans 13:1-7.]

At other times the words mean to distinguish, to decide, to determine, to conclude, to try, to think, and to call into question. This is what God would have believers do in love, especially as to whether or not preaching and teaching is true or false to His Word. Paul wrote, "And this I pray, that your love may abound yet more and more in knowledge and in all judgment; that ye may approve things that are excellent" (Philippians 1:9,10).

The Lord Jesus both warns and commands to "Beware of false prophets" (Matthew 7:15). We could not "beware," or know a false prophet unless we exercised true judgment. For that we are given the correct standard: "To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them" (Isaiah 8:20).

There are realms in which the believer is generally not to judge. In most instances he is not to judge whether or not a person is saved, if he professes to be scripturally* born again. "The Lord knoweth them that are his" (2 Timothy 2:19).

Nor are we to judge another's motives. Only God can see into the heart and know the motives that underlie actions. (1 Corinthians 4:1-5) [However, Scripture does allow for some exceptions--e.g. Philippians 1:15-18].

And we are not to judge believers concerning the eating of certain kinds of foods or drink, or keeping certain days, etc. (Romans 14; 1 Corinthians 10:23-33; and Colossians 2:16,17)

All too many believers remain immature or are actually drawn into error because they seek to exercise love apart from Scripture-guided discernment and judgment. Christians who are mature, of "full age," are "those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil" (Hebrews 5:14).

One of the reasons for the Church being in such a sickly condition today is that believers have not obeyed the commands of God's Word to judge error. "Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned, and avoid them" (Romans 16:17). The false teachers make the "divisions," and not those who protest against their errors.

An often misapplied Scripture is "Judge not" (Matthew 7:1). This is a command against hypocritical judgment, and is not directed to those who in love and sincerity discern whether a teacher or teaching is true or false to the Word. "Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considereth not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye. Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye" (Matthew 7:1-5).

Actually, the last statement of this Scripture commands sincere judgment: "then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye." We are not to forget nor seek to avoid the fact that our Lord Jesus commanded us to "judge righteous judgment." He commended one, "Thou hast rightly judged." He asked others, "Why even of yourselves judge ye not what is right?" (John 7:24; Luke 7:43; 12:57). Paul wrote, "I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say." Again, "He that is spiritual judgeth all things" (1 Corinthians 10:15; 2:15).

It is all too common and easy for Christians to assume a critical and censorious attitude toward those who do not share their opinions about matters other than those which have to do with Bible doctrine and moral practice. But it is our privilege and duty to do all we can to encourage their spiritual growth. We are to love and pray for one another, and to consider ourselves lest we be tempted. The safest and most profitable thing to do is to judge ourselves. "For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged. But when we are judged, we are chastened (child trained) of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world" (1 Corinthians 11:31,32).

It will make all the difference if we judge our own faults as uncharitably as we do the faults of others; and judge the failings of others as charitably as we do our own!

* Mr. Stanford's statement was written several decades ago, ...

Holiness, Tradition and Pharisees

Glenn — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 22:33:12 -0500

Mark 7
Holiness is one of those words that means different things to different people, isn't it? What associations does it conjure up in your mind? For some of us I suspect holiness has decidedly unattractive connotations. A "holy joe" is one of those religious fanatics who embarrasses you by his antisocial killjoy attitude to life. "Holier than thou" is the way we describe pompous prigs who reckon themselves morally superior to everyone else. Even at its most positive, the word "holy" I guess conveys rather austere if nostalgic memories of the hymns we used to sing in school chapel... "Holy, holy,holy" - intoned to a ponderous organ amid hushed whispers, stained-glass windows, gothic architecture and acute physical discomfort. No, holiness is not a quality to which the majority of people feel attracted.
But then it would rather defeat the object of the exercise if they did. For the whole point of holiness is to be different, separate, clearly distinguished from everything that is profane and ordinary. In Old Testament times the pots and pans they used in the sacrifical ritual of the Temple were "holy"...because they were kept especially for that "sacred" purpose. The priests were "holy" too, because of their special role in offering the sacrifices. Defining such objects and persons as "holy" was a way of making clear to the Jewish people that in a very real sense God didn't belong to this world. He was different and therefore those who wanted to have dealings with him had to be different too.
The holiness code that comprises a substantial part of the Book of Leviticus generated a sacred-secular divide in ancient Israel for precisely this reason. To embed in every Jewish mind an awareness of the mystery and transcendence of God... what biblical scholars have sometimes called his "otherness".
The trouble was, some of them took it too far. The idea of holiness always has this risk attached to it. In the wrong hands instead of being a vehicle of witness to the sublime uniqueness of God's person, holiness can all too easily be perverted into mere religious eccentricity...a pious theatrical that awakens at best the amusement of the watching world, and at worst its contempt. The boundary between being sanctified and being sanctimonious, between being pious and being downright peculiar, is a frighteningly narrow one. The risk of the former degenerating into the latter is always greatest when the people of God feel threatened.
Take the period, for instance, five centuries before Christ, when the Jews were taken into Babylonian exile. It was a devastating experience for them. Suddenly they found themselves surrounded by a totally pagan society. Everything familiar had been snatched away from them. The instinctive response of any ethnic or religious minority in such a hostile environment is to become culturally defensive; to guard with jealous pride every cultural distinctive it is possible to preserve. And that is exactly how the exilic Jews reacted. They may not have had the Temple any longer, but they could still circumcise their children and observe the Sabbath. The might have to speak Aramaic in the market-place, but they could still use Hebrew in their synagogues. These cultural markers thus became more important than they had ever been before. For they were the only way the they could retain their identity as Jews in the cosmopolitan melting-pot of Babylon where they were now forced to live.
In many respects it was a perfectly understandable, even laudable development. We observe exactly the same kind of thing in many countries today where minority groups strive to preserve their local dialect or their national dress against a cultural tide that would homogenize the entire world if it could. But the trouble was that in the case of the Jews, because of their special self-consciousness as the chosen people of God, this need for the maintenance of their cultural distinctiveness got tangled up with their ideas of holiness. They turned their traditions into a system of regulations and defined holiness as obedience to these rules.
Take for example the issue of ceremonial washing. The Book of Leviticus certainly laid down certain regulations regarding ritual ablutions in its holiness code. But the scribes of post-exilic Judaism amplified these regulations to such an extent it was considered improper to eat a single mouthful of food if the appropriate handwashing procedure had not been observed. Mark, you may have noticed, draws our attention to this practice with what I sense may be a slightly sarcastic edge to his tone. (Mark 7:3-4)
Now as I say, this kind of legalistic attitude towards things like ritual washing became increasingly influential in the post-exilic period. The original biblical idea of holiness was being subtlely subverted by the need of Jews to defend their sense of cultural superiority in a world where they were now politically and economically powerless. The rabbis vied with one another to pile more and more regulation on top of the ancient law of Moses. They were convinced that only by the painstaking observance of such rules could the Jewish people maintain their cultural distance from the Gentiles and thus preserve their unique privilege as God's "holy" people.And in the first century no group was more zealous in its conformity to those rabbinical rules than the Pharisees.
Now in some respects the Pharisees have had a bit of a raw deal at the hands of Christian commentators over the years. The very word "Pharisee" has a pejorative, almost villainous overtone to it, which is really unfair. For there was much about the Pharisees that was admirable. (i) this was a group who believed passionately in the inspiration of scripture and devoted themselves to the rigorous exposition of the biblical text. (ii) this was a group who zealously pursued personal holiness (iii) this was group who scrupulously tithed their income. (iv) this was group who enthusiastically sought to win new converts to their faith.
Who does that remind you of? I have to say ...

blackstreet- finally

Glenn — Sat, 10 Apr 2010 05:02:17 -0400

blackstreet- finally

Boyz II Men A Song For Mama Lyrics

Glenn — Sat, 10 Apr 2010 04:48:34 -0400

Boyz II Men A Song For Mama Lyrics

In Memorium:

Pentagon Sees a Threat From Online Muckrakers

Glenn — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 00:06:51 -0400

By Stephane Strom

NY. Times

To the list of the enemies threatening the security of the United States, the Pentagon has added WikiLeaks.org, a tiny online source of information and documents that governments and corporations around the world would prefer to keep secret.

The Pentagon assessed the danger WikiLeaks.org posed to the Army in a report marked “unauthorized disclosure subject to criminal sanctions.” It concluded that “WikiLeaks.org represents a potential force protection, counterintelligence, OPSEC and INFOSEC threat to the U.S. Army” — or, in plain English, a threat to Army operations and information.

WikiLeaks, true to its mission to publish materials that expose secrets of all kinds, published the 2008 Pentagon report about itself on Monday.

Lt. Col. Lee Packnett, an Army spokesman, confirmed that the report was real. Julian Assange, the editor of WikiLeaks, said the concerns the report raised were hypothetical.

Marvin Gaye "What's Going On / What's Happening Brother"

Glenn — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 12:44:58 -0500

Marvin Gaye "What's Going On / What's Happening Brother"

Neil Young - Rockin' In The Free World

Glenn — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 11:37:09 -0500

Neil Young - Rockin' In The Free World

Neil Young: We R In Control Unofficial Music Video

Glenn — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 11:07:26 -0500

Neil Young: We R In Control Unofficial Music Video

Agenda 21 & the Club of Rome

Glenn — Sat, 26 Dec 2009 14:47:22 -0500
Agenda 21 & the Club of Rome

Walter Cronkite - Dies July 17,2009 "Glad to stand at the right hand of satan"

Glenn — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 05:36:38 -0400

Walter Cronkite - Walter Cronkite - Once The Most Trusted Man In America - Who Sold Out To The Elites NWO Agenda -

Rumour of the century (wiping Israel off the map)

Glenn — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 01:30:59 -0400

GEORGE GALLOWAY ON (wiping Israel off the map)

Glenn — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 01:15:18 -0400

The Directors Chair (Rev. 4 & 5) - Dr Roy Clements

Glenn — Sat, 29 Aug 2009 13:54:31 -0400

The Directors Chair

(Revelation 4 & 5)

By Dr. Roy Clements

I shall never forget my first visit to the serious theatre. It was a school outing to the Old Vic where they were presenting Macbeth. It was a play in which I had a personal interest because I was to feature in my school's production of the same work later in the term. I didn't have a major part; in fact, I was to be an Apparition - conjured up by the three witches to give Macbeth some rather dubious political advice! I had no name; Shakespeare simply dubbed my couple of lines as the words of 'a bloody child'! But I was all-agog to see how the Old Vic was going to handle this demanding role.

When the moment I was waiting for arrived, I was so enchanted that for all I I knew they could have been real witches on the stage. The Old Vic succeeded in producing not only some most realistic thunder and lightning, but by some clever lighting effects involving fluorescent paint, they produced an extraordinary eerie atmosphere on stage, so that the bloody Apparition whose role I knew so well appeared to hang in a halo of light in mid-air. It was joyously creepy for all the hundreds of schoolchildren who were watching. And it began an interest that lasted the rest of my schooldays, not in acting, but in stagecraft, in the technical wizardry that goes on behind the scenes. I wasn't an actor for the rest of my school career, I was a backstage boy, trying to learn some of those tricks that the Old Vic had demonstrated.

Ever since those days, I have always rather begrudged the prominence which the narnes of actors seem to have on theatre programmes, or on the credits after a TV film, just because their faces are seen. Anybody who has actually worked on a play knows that the real genius, the real brains, are not out there in front of the limelight at all; they are behind the scenes and supremely, of course, in that canvas chair that De Milne made famous, with the word 'Director' written on the back of it.

That's where the real creative genius lies - where the lighting effects, the stage sets, the camera angles, the author's script, and the actors' performance are all welded together to make of all these diverse elements, a single dramatic whole. It is the director who really ought to occupy the centre of the stage, yet he never does, and as a result, audiences are rarely aware of the supreme control that he exercises over everything that is going on.

That backstage experience of mine helps me to understand a bit the meaning of the visionary experience that John records in Revelation 4 and 5. It was the Bard himself, wasn't it, who said that all the world's a stage and all the men and women players. According to the Bible's view ...

The Face of Godless Politics (Rev. 13)

Glenn — Sat, 29 Aug 2009 13:32:49 -0400

The Face of Godless Politics

(Revelation 13)

By Dr Roy Clements

There are two subjects that one is never supposed to introduce into the conversation at any polite dinner-party: religion and politics. This chapter is all about both; or to be more precise, it is about the religion of politics. The Bible does not discuss politics in the categories of Conservative and Socialist or Republican and Democrat; instead, it speaks of the spiritual alignment of those who exercise political power. Political rulers are either for God or against him, and it is the purpose of Revelation 13 to warn us that, in the period between Jesus' first coming and his second coming, we must expect periods when godless politics manifests itself in particularly vicious ways.

First, the chapter portrays the characteristics of godless politics (1-6); then the techniques of godless politics (11-18); and finally, it presents us with what the Christian response to godless politics ought to be.

1. The characteristics of godless politics

I saw a beast coming out of the sea. He had ten horns and seven heads, with ten crowns on his horns, and on each head a blasphemous name (1)

It is important to read this chapter against the background of what is said in the rest of the New Testament about civil government. In Romans 13, Paul argues that the purpose of government is to reflect the just rule of God within human society. He insists it is perfectly possible for government to exercise power in a way that pleases God, indeed God himself has ordained it in order to maintain justice within a fallen world. Civil government is meant to be God's servant for the good of human society. Paul was of course aware that often civil government did not fulfil its God-given purpose. Indeed, in 2 Thessalonians 2, he anticipates a future time of political and moral rebellion when the "man of anarchy" would set himself up against God and his people; and in this passage from Revelation, John seems to be describing that same eschatological personification of antichristian tyranny. The early church called him "the Antichrist". John here calls him "a beast".

As with all apocalyptic symbolism, John's imagery is not meant to be visualised so much as decoded. In the Old Testament, Daniel had a very similar vision, except that he saw not one "beast" coming out of the sea, but four. The first was like a lion, the second like a bear, the third like a leopard, and the fourth was a hideously powerful carnivore unlike any animal he had ever seen. In Daniel 7 we are told these four beasts represented successive world empires - probably Babylon, Persia, Greece, and Rome. So what John seems to have done is to fuse together these four symbolic animals of Daniel to make one composite monster representing the sum total of all the godless tyrannies the world had ever known.

For John, most immediately, the monster represented Roman Imperialism; to Christians, ...