My life is the definition of manic-deppressant

I'll admit it, I have a bit of a depressing personality: no I do not depress people with my personality (at least I hope not), but rather I am prone to depression. I take preventative measures in order to not spiral down into it, but sometimes circumstances in life make it all the more difficult and all I want to do is sleep late and go to bed early. I know I need fellowship, but I don't want to put on a happy face, nor do I want to explain what's going on, so I push everybody out of my life. Thus the spiral begins...

The last two days, however, I woke up without pushing the snooze button even once (gasp). I jumped in the shower and hopped in my new wheels read to attack the day. I sent this text to my family, who responded with flabergastion.

 

 

I remember going through a hard time in high school, and my young life leader encouraged me that the Christian life is not about always being on the "spiritual high," but rather God gives us those times as a refresher and a means to get through those "spiritual valley" times. I know this is true, and trust me it's not that I want to be manic all the time because I annoyed even myself yesterday when I couldn't seem to sit still. Makes me wonder, how would God want to see me handling those "valley" times? How are we suppossed to move foward through these times as Christians?

 

 

(New wheels)

 

On Politics

     Sitting in Church today, I was extremely distracted by all the children. I had recently wrote a paper on reflecting theologically on worship services, so I sat and thought, "What is the church trying to say, by inviting children to join in the service at different times?" I realized that the local Church I attend places a very high value on children, knowing that they are the future Christian leaders in our world.

     My "ears perked up" as I recalled a distinction I had made on my last paper, regarding how different faiths spread, and that one major was is through procreation. However, Christianity also spreads "through prayer (Matt 6:5-13), teaching (Matt 28:18-20), preaching (Rom 10:14), service (1 Peter 4:11) and demonstration of love (John 13:35)."

     Today's sermon happened to be on politics, and the Christian's role. 

     1) Are we to be political or apolitical? 

     2) If we are to be political, how? 

     We examined Luke 23. In verse 3, Pilate asks Jesus if He is king of the Jews. It is important to notice, that if Jesus said no, he would be a liar, but if he said yes, he would be labelled as a threat to the empire. Jesus answers "you have said so," being "deliberately ambiguous" (to use my pastor's words). Commentators have advised that Jesus was claiming He was king, but not of an earthly kingdom.

     Later on we read that Barabbas, a convicted murderer, had been released. It is often overlooked, that because of Jesus, Barabbas was given his life back. Though Jesus came to seek and save the lost (Luke 19:10), He also met many physical needs during his ministry on earth. We see examples of Jesus healing and feeding throughout the gospels. 

     Was Jesus himself political? 

     Jesus dealt with two types of "political" (if you will) groups. The Essenes and the Zealots. The Zealots were ready to take up arms and fight for their cause, whereas the Essenes tended to run for the hills. They had their "fire insurance," so why both engaging culture?

     Jesus taught a middle ground between both of these groups. We are to work for the well-being of others, but not at the expense of unnecessary division. We are not to be apolitical, Jesus was in fact a political figure. However, we are also not called to "outsource" our call to the government. We should be involved more so than just voting. After all, if Christianity is indeed spread by a demonstration of love and service, what better way to do that than by meeting physical needs, just as our Savior did? But we must not stop there. One relationships are formed, we must also exercise much prayer and teaching that our efforts might be productive in the cause of the Kingdom that is not of this world.

{Update}

The article I mention in my comment below.

Modus Tollens: Reliability of Logic

A recent fascination with truth, and also with the technical language of philosophy, brought me to this conclusion, prompted by a comment from a fellow classmate in Advanced Apologetics.


Modus Tollens in an argument form which denies the consequent:

- If P, then Q
- Not Q
- Therefore, not P

Apply this to the reliability of logic.

- If logic is ever not reliable, it is never reliable.
- Logic is reliable.
- Therefore, logic is always reliable.

Simple, yet controversial.

Does the Ontological argument reduce to, "If God exists, he exists," ?

I'm sorry, what?

I was introduced to the Ontological argument last fall. However, while trying to just keep my head above water while in my first semester of seminary, I did not spend too much time trying to understand it (please don't disown me, my dear professors).

Now taking advanced apologetics, the Ontological argument has reared its face once again. I confess that my initial thought was that it simply reduced to: "If God exists, he exists." Profound, I know. I shall pen my thoughts on the subject in this forum as opposed to writing an academic paper. Although, based on my previous syllabus reading skills, I might come to find out that I actually am required to write this paper, in which case I would gladly appreciate your comments.

The Ontological argument takes a variety of forms, but basically reduces to

1) We can conceive of a greatest possible being (please don't try to tell me that we cannot, because I am conceiving of one right now).

2) It is greater to exist in reality than to merely exist in understanding.

3) A greatest possible being therefore necessarily exists in reality.

4) Therefore, a greatest possible being exists.

This argument was put forth by Anselm in the 11th century, and has been scrutinized by contemporary philosopher Alvin Plantiga, among others. After taking apart, rewording, and expanding (to 33 premises) Anselm's argument, Plantiga advises that though the argument is sound, it does not serve as a proof for the existence of God. "It establish not the truth of theism, but its rational acceptability."

Don't worry. After reflection on both, I no longer think this argument is simple enough to reduce to the tautology "if God exists, he exists." I would therefore begin by placing myself in Plantiga's camp by accepting that this argument is sound but questioning if is serves as explicit proof for the existence God. It does make me think, though, how one would respond to this argument if they did not accept it as sound. And, if they did accept it as sound, but not true, then one (or more) or the premises must be false. However, this modus ponens argument is logical and consisting of true premises. What then do we do with it?

Defining away the problem

When Person-x pushes Person-y to the logical conclusion of their proposition (in an effort to change their mind) and it is realized it is unlivable, Person-y cannot simply define the problem away by saying, "that's not what I meant by ___."

1) If a new word was chosen, the argument would still prove unlivable per its retention of the essence of the proposition.

2) If a new meaning of the same word was chosen, thus changing the essence of the proposition, I would venture to say it would probably agree with Person-x.

3) In order to remain intellectually accountable, Person-y must be willing to admit this when it happens, and cannot simply deny it based on the fact that it contradicts his initial proposition. 

4) The goal is truth, and the essence of truth is: what corresponds to reality. It is not a power play, a philosophical game, or a religious manipulation. 

5) The law of bivalence states that each proposition has one of only two truth values: it is either true or false. Thus every proposition is either true or false, based on the truth maker as being: that which corresponds to reality.

6) Truth claims are not personal attacks, and when someone takes it personally, they are revealing their priority is not to discover truth, but to get away with ____.

Meditation #2

(...) God is necessarily good. Therefore, any conclusion we come to which portrays God in a negative light, necessarily has false premises or misunderstandings. Ethics are a reflection of God, and are therefore necessarily good. What the bible teaches can have arguments which prove their goodness, various unbiased apologetics, but at the end of the day is it in their essence to be good. Therefore, any conclusion we come to which claims the ethical teachings of the Bible are not in fact good, necessarily has false premises or misunderstandings.

Meditation #1

It is a curious idea to me, comprehension, both of writing and of reading. I have concluded and (then) find the desire or passion behind the importance of the conclusion. I retrace my thoughts to lead my reader to the same conclusion, yet I can't help but summarize, as this is my second time in this thought journey. This I struggle in meeting the minimum length requirements, do I also succumb to in-articulation? Is that a even a word? I am reminded that my goal is to be conversant, or my knowledge is gained in vain.

World Religions

A great reading found here , some notes copied below...

There are five major things to keep in mind when doing apologetics regarding world religions:

1. Know what the other believes. Never assume you know their faith as much as they do.
2. Read their book. Nothing will open up avenues for discussion as much as the knowledge that you have read the books they find holy.
3. Know Christianity. If you don’t know what you yourself believe, how are you to share that with others? As you engage with people of other faiths, you must continue to learn about your own faith and its answers to the questions others pose.
4. Preach the Gospel. The goal should not only be to rebut the others assertions and beliefs. It should be to guide the other towards Christ crucified and the salvation provided for by God.
5. Build a Genuine Relationship. It isn’t enough to simply engage in dialog; one must show they are interested in what the other has to say and what they believe. They must also be more than an occasional debate partner; they must build a relationship and become a friend. I’m not suggesting deception here, the relationship must be genuine. By showing a Christlike life to others, we can show them the intimate joys of Christianity.

Is America Abandoning God?

As always, Ravi does such a gracious job of articulating truth, in the context of the question, "Is America Abandoning God?" Please watch this enjoyable video, I have typed out some quotations below.



"There is a God shaped vaccum, but with these trememdous attacks from a rabid secularism, kind of attractive spirituality without god, collapse economically, geopolitical manueverings in the name of religions, all of these have had a role to play in disallusioning people, but somewhere in the deep recesses of our own thinking, we don't like the feeling of being left alone. None of us does. And we want a voice from somewhere and the least we are saying in the coming to these meetings is, "is there legitimacy to this?"

"It is in vain oh men that you week within yourselves a cure for your miseries. All your insight only leads you to the knowledge that it is not in yourselves that you will discover the true and the good. The philosophers promised them to you and they've not been able to keep their promise. They do not know what your true good is or what your true state is. How then could they have provided for you a cure for the ills which they have not even understood? Your principle maladies are pride which cuts you off from God and sensuality which binds you to the earth and they have done nothing but foster at least one of these two maladies. If they have given God for you for an object it has been to pander to your pride. They made you think that you were like Him and resemble Him in your nature, and those who have grasped the vanity of such pretentions have case you down into the other abyss by making you believe that your future is like that of the best of the field and have led you to seek your good in lust, which is the lot of the animals."

"If the message changes it can be compromised ... give up all substance of the Gospel to win them over, what are you winning them over, to?"

"People are equal, ideas are unequal. Let ideas be pit against each other, but don't take the egalitarianism from the person."

The Importance of an Intellectual Faith

"Today, many Americans of all ages not only accept a Christianized version of adolescent narcissism, they often celebrate it as authentic spirituality"

When Faith is not challenged, it can often go unnoticed that a strong foundation is non-existent. The danger is that deceptive philosophies begin to be accepted, which imply that there is no absolute Truth, or that it is unknowable.  Hebrews 11 tells us that Faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do see.

Growing up in the Bible Belt, we were told that "when you accept Christ, you just feel Him wrap his arms around you!" With a tilt of the head, one could raise their hand and ask, "um, what if I did not feel that?"

There are some pseudo Christian groups (i'll refrain from using the term cults) that base their conversion solely on this "warm and fuzzy feeling". Don't get me wrong, I know that God's peace and comfort can be experienced literally and physically, but this is not where we are to remain.

With knowledge comes the reality of our need for a Savior... a fundamental understanding of God, man, sin, and therefore our relation to God. This truth is unwavering. Emotional/Spiritual highs exists, but cannot be our foundation as they are wavering.

We can look to the example of how Jesus Himself ministered using parables, in order that those who accept the teaching might have roots to their Faith, (Matthew 13:18-23).

We can look to the example of Paul in Acts 17:16-34, and his use of reason and truth in his ministry.

How does this apply to our ministry? 

As Christians, we know the way to truth is found in the Bible, God’s special revelation, and also God’s general revelation through history, science, and reason. My Prayer, is that our efforts in ministry are not done in vain by only appealing to an emotional sense, and that we acknowledge the danger that is created by the vulnerability of Faith with no roots.

On Law

"The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul;The testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple; The statutes of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart; The commandment of the Lord is pure, enlightening the eyes; The fear of the Lord is clean, enduring forever; The judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether"
 Psalm 19:7–9

"Surely I have taught you statutes and judgments, just as the Lord my God commanded me, that you should act according to them in the land which you go to possess. Therefore be careful to observe them; for this is your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the peoples who will hear all these statutes, and say, ‘Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people"
Deuteronomy 4:5–6

^" But we know that the law is good if one uses it lawfully, knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine, according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God which was committed to my trust"1 Timothy 1:8–11

"For as many as have sinned without law will also perish without law, and as many as have sinned in the law will be judged by the law (for not the hearers of the law are just in the sight of God, but the doers of the law will be justified; for when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves, who show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else excusing them) in the day when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my gospel"
Romans 2:12-16

There is much sociological and bioethical brokenness in our world. And, not claiming to know the answer, just some speculation.

A.E. Wilder Smith speculates the reason for the deteriation of law and order in the US is "simply because for many years it has been commonly taught that life is a random, accidental phenomenon with no meaning except the purely materialistic one. Laws are merely a matter of human expediency. Since humans are alledgedly accidents, so are their laws." 

Sarah Sumner, dean of A.W. Tozer Theological Seminary, has been quoted saying " In a democracy, Christians can love others best by voting for laws that uphold the truth as revealed by God. When a law lies by saying something forbidden by God is permissible in society, people are set up for long-term hurt. God's universal laws are for the benefit and welfare of all people, not just Christians. It's just as harmful for an unbeliever to be involved in ... sin as it is a Christ follower."


Deuteronomy 6:24 says "And the Lord commanded us to observe all these statutes, to fear the Lord our God, for our good always, that He might preserve us alive, as it is this day,"

Do we really believe this?

But, why?

I was in Q&A session with a Muslim man who had converted from Islam to Christianity. When  someone asked him about his family, he got choked up as he explained they still go months at a time without speaking. He simply explained that he was not going to be the one to lead his parents to Christianity, but that it would be us (as he pointed to the audience).

I would venture to think that some of us can relate to having someone in our life that will not hear truth from us, I would hope that we could encourage each other and tag team this one. Why do I think evangelizing is important? For the same reason I desperately want the ones I love to experience freedom.

"It never dawned on these people that my pain was a very real cry to be whole, to be well. A 15-year old crying out for love, and getting instead an empty excuse for healing, empty words that said, 'there are no absolutes,' 'lose your inhibition,' 'experiment with your sexuality.' Think about it...at fifteen, confused and alone, what effect would those words have?...You see, I was one of those children... And I am one of the lucky ones...I got out alive."

Jeff (Open Letter from a Survivor)

Have we ever stopped to ponder the possibility that someone might actually want and desire to hear the truth of complete love and freedom and life? Do we believe this is where the Bible leads? How can we keep this to ourself? Do we keep awesome Groupons to ourself? Do we keep free concerts to ourself? Do we keep funny youtube videos to ourself?

"To [one side] He says, He who is without sin, let him cast the first stone.' And to [the other] 'If you love Me, you will keep My commandments.' To all of us, He says, 'If anyone would come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross.'" - Janey Cheaney

End Goal

I remember in middle school, hearing someone pointing out how Christianity had so many rules, and were implying how God made up all these rules as if he had no reason besides to test us or something. I really believed God must have had a good reason, but did not have alot of scripture memorized nor the skill to articulate very well.

I remember learning that God prohibited Jews from eating pork, and that at that time there was not really a good system for getting rid of all of the bacteria in pork. In my 6th grade mind, I thought - "Hey that's a pretty good reason. I bet God actually has good reasons for his commandments".

I came across the following verse while living in Prague in 2009:

"And the Lord commanded us to observe all these statutes, to fear the Lord our God, for our good always, that He might preserve us alive, as it is this day"

Deuteronomy 6:24

I have been challenging my sophomore girls, and myself along side them, to know how to articulate issues from a secular, or even anti-Christian perspective. The answer is not always only that the Bible says so (don't eat pork), or Jesus tells me in my heart (conviction), but can also be "hey, this will make you sick".

We will not always be surrounded by people who share our belief the Bible is true. We will also not always be surrounded by people who share our belief that Jesus is Lord. Could we possible start from a point of Truth and Goodness, keeping in mind people have a bad taste in their mouth of "God" and "Christianity" no matter how innacurate it might be?

Take an issue maybe more controversial than eating pork. Abortion, poverty, government, economics, education, religion. Are we educating ourselves to know the actualy issues, or are we crossing our arms and saying "Lalala I'm not listening to you, the Bible says this". But what this verse is saying, is that the Bible is telling us this for our good. Do we believe that? That it's not just a test that some are failing and we are arogantly showing that we aren't?

Most of what we do will have been done in vain if we are not keeping the end goal in mind, letting that drive us rather than the drive itself. Are we out to fill our broken world with really good people? Or is our aim each individual person experiencing God's goodness and recognizing their desire and need for Him.?Are we eagerly searching for these opportunities to help them make the connection? Are we living a life reflecting God's goodness in our relationships?  

I love what Jeff Ventilla says about living piously and competently. Are we competent on these issues, or have we just been told "we as Christians disagree with them".

Application of this in my life, has been in regards to other religions. I know Christianity is true, and therefore if another relition contradicts it, it is not true. But do I know where it contradicts? Have a really studied to see what is contradicting? Would this not be a necessity if I am to ever to approach an intentional conversation with this person?

The Unborn

Approximately 126,000 abortions are performed worldwide each day
Approximately 46 million abortions are performed worldwide each year

I think it is easy to become defensive to religious, or other "pro-life" organizations, when debating various issues regarding the unborn (or now, recently born). As a "pro-life" supporter, I would like to be given the chance to explain what I believe, hence the quotations around pro-life.

I am supportive of the life of the conceived, in the same way I am for the life of an adult. I am for choice, in the same way I am for free-will and the assuming of responsibility when the wrong choice is made.

So what is the wrong choice? Well let me begin that discussion with another question, why is murder wrong? Granted, most people do not equate abortion with murder, so I think this is where the conversation must start.

I will define murder as the premeditated ending of the life of one human being, by another. What is life? If it is full maturity, then can you honestly say the punishment for homicide should not be applied to all tweens who does not meet this arbitrary standard? If it is dependency, can you honestly say a set of full grown conjoined twins do not have the right to continue living, or one of them does not? If it is when they are recognizable as human, lets take the issue back to day 70 after conception when they have a recognizable face, or day 45 when they have identifiable arms and legs. But then what of full grown mature adults who have been involved in tragic events leaving them unrecognizable? If it is mental function, then lets take the issue back to day 40 when brain waves are detected. What about people who develop Alzheimers? If it is a hearbeat, then lets take the issue back to day 30 when the heart starts beating. But what of those people who have heart attacks, why help them? Is is uniqueness, provided that on the day of conception all 46 chromosomes are present - does one of identical twins no longer have the right to live?

The majority of abortions are preformed between the seventh and tenth weeks.

If we can agree on the fact that at conception, that the embryo is in fact a person, can the argument still be made that it is solely the mother's body in question?  

"The fact that restricting access to abortion has tragic side effects does not, in itself, show that the restrictions are unjustified, since murder is wrong regardless of the consequences of prohibiting it.

The appeal to the right to control one's body, which is generally construed as a property right, is at best a rather feeble argument for the permissibility of abortion. Mere ownership does not give me the right to kill innocent people whom I find on my property, and indeed I am apt to be held responsible if such people injure themselves while on my property. It is equally unclear that I have any moral right to expel an innocent person from my property whenI know that doing so will result in his death." Mary Anne Warren

Before addressing why abortion inducing drugs (which are not in fact contraceptives) should be provided or not, I really am curious the easy availability of them is pushed before the information regarding the whole truth about them. In an article published on March 19th, a congresswoman explained that providing did not equal promoting. I would agree that it does not directly equal promoting, but if definitly does not promote accountability. If these  abortion inducing drugs are available in vending machines, or any method which does not require any level of informedness, how is that not: the promotion of ignorant abortions? Maybe I am wrong, but it seems that the mere knowledge that women are lacking could potentially solve so much of the problem.

“I was horrified that the ‘products of conception’ and ‘tissue’ I had ‘removed from my uterus’ had had precious little hands and feet and a beating heart,” she said. “I felt like a monster. And I felt betrayed by the medical professionals I had trusted.” - Lisa Skowron

In a previous post I referenced an article which pointed out that narrowing the scope of personhood leads to tyranny and suffering as we saw in the Roman Empire, American slavery, and Nazi programs.

I would really like to not be labelled as a conspiracy theorist, but more so I do not want to be ignorant. Even more so I do not want to leave this kind of a place to my children, if in fact it is through someone the Lord wants to do something.

"Your eyes saw my substance, being yet unformed.

And in Your book they all were written,

The days fashioned for me,

When as yet there were none of them." Psalm 139:16

“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you;

Before you were born I sanctified you;

I ordained you a prophet to the nations.”

Jeremiah 1:5

  "If men fight, and hurt a woman with child, so that she gives birth prematurely, yet no harm follows, he shall surely be punished accordingly as the woman’s husband imposes on him;

and he shall pay as the judges determine.

But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life"

Exodus 21:22-23

Political Antinomianism

Antinomianism has been defined as" Opposed to or denying the fixed meaning or universal applicability of moral law

"If while evangelizing we abandon the sociopolitical realm to its own devices, we shall

fortify the misimpression that the public order falls wholly outside the command and will

of God, that Christianity deals with private concerns only; and we shall conceal the fact

that government exists by God's will as His servant for the sake of justice and order." Carl F.H. Henry, Twilight of a Great Civilization, (Westchester, IL: Crossway, 1988), p. 20.

.....

"Legislation is forged in the meeting point between the way things ought to be and the way they currently are" says Matt Anderson

But what about the way things "ought to be"? Legislation in and or itself does not provide the foundation for this. We cannot disagree with the need for the existence of laws, we recognize we are sinfull people. We cannot continuing debating individual laws, without appealing to the code to which they are set out to hold us accountable.

We need to be super sensitive to the potential problem that is created when humans (being sinfull) are in positions of power. Not only can they try to blur what the foundation is for laws, but they can create and/or support laws which in fact contradict with the code to which they are set under in the first place.

"One of the most startling commentaries on this century is the fact that millions more

have died at the hands of their own governments than in wars with other nations—all to
preserve someone's power." Chuck Colson, Kingdoms in Conflict, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1987), p. 270.

As Christians, do we or do we not agree that there is absolutle truth? That truth is not relative? Is this not the code to which laws should appeal?

"By raising segregation and racial persecution to the ethical level of law, it puts into practice the antinomian rules of Orwell's world. Evil becomes good, inhumanity is interpreted as charity, egoism as compassion" (Elie Wiesel).




               

Kony 2012

A more current example regarding Kony where " the United States took that kind of action because the people demanded it. Not for self defence, but because it was right."


KONY 2012 from INVISIBLE CHILDREN on Vimeo.

This isn't finished. "In order for him to be arrested this year, the Ugandan military has to find him. For this to happen, the Us Govenment has deployed advisors to help with the use of technology that will assist in finding him. However, if they do not believe that we care about arresting Kony, the mission will be cancelled. In order to care, they have to know."

Their has been some controversy over this video... that "the notion that a group of young Americans utterly disconnected from Uganda, save through the giving of small sums and a general feeling of sentimentality toward Africa, can stop a war there is laughable" (Jake Meador, A Failure of Storytelling: Kony 2012 and the Social Imagination).

There have been some other good points raised, that this would be an unconstitutional use of the US. Military, and that it would be economically irresponsible. Can we really afford to invest in this conflict, and is this the most responsible thing we can do?


Ugandan Leader Norbert Mao on KONY 2012 from INVISIBLE CHILDREN on Vimeo.

I do not have the whole answer, but I can draw off of what I do know. God has called us to care for the "least of these" Matthew 25 31-46 . I know that to sit and do nothing is not acceptable. We may not have the best answer, but with Prayer I would hope we would be given discernment and wisodm.

As Matthew Anderson of Mere Othodoxy says, "their video...challenges young people to get involved in something bigger than themselves, and seeks justice for the top international criminal in the world. That is something we should be proud of"


**For more reading and a great reference, A Brief Kony Reading List


What are your thoughts?

Is neutrality an option?

It has been said that the University platform is often more influential that the Church pulpit... and that if we are not investing in the future, people with alternative worldviews will.

Blasphemy has been defined as 1) denying of God what is true 2) ascribing to God what is false. This is in essence idolatry, which the Bible takes very seriously. In Exodus 20:3, God gave Moses the first commandment, "You shall have no other gods before Me."

There is a term called FALLACY OF EQUIVOCATION, which occurs when a word is used in two different contexts and is assumed to have the same meaning in both contexts, when distinct meanings ought to be preferred.

[ As a little experiment, I have ask the question "was President Clinton impeached?" to people my age or older who were very familiar with this particular piece of history. Most said "No, he served his full two terms." I reply "I realize that, but that was not my question. I asked if he was impeached" to which they give me a blank stare. To impeach means to bring an accusation against. I do not think anyone is denying that President Clinton has accusations brought against him.]

Pseudo Christians, or what some refer to as cults, often "use Christian vocabulary, but not a biblical dictionary." (Kevin Bywater). This is sometimes done intentionally, which Paul talked about in 2 Corinthians 11:12-15. However, how many  people are deceived and led astray unknowingly?

This brings me to 2 Timothy 2: 23-26,

"But avoid foolish and ignorant disputes, knowing that they generate strife. And a servant of the Lord must not quarrel but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient, in humility correcting those who are in opposition, if God perhaps will grant them repentance, so that they may know the truth, and that they may come to their senses and escape the snare of the devil, having been taken captive by him to do his will"

Because I just got a new Study Bible , I'll just go ahead and point out "able to teach" means "convict and encourage godliness". This goes hand in hand with emphasizing gentleness and patience. We are not teaching for the sake of being right, but rather to help our brothers and sisters "come to their senses".

Some (let's be honest, everyone) have questioned, why Evangelism is important if God is Sovereign? (Good news, J. I. Packer read your mind and wrote Evangelism & the Sovereignty of God)

Now I whole-heartedly believe in the Sovereignty of God, but what if he wants to use us (by showing them the truth) in order that they may have that Peace sooner than later? ["if" being the key word here, this is just my personal thought] What would this look like? How could this potentially change our world? Not by our power/strength/plan, but because God is granting them repentance and we're right there waiting to show them the scriptures - encouraging them to see the true attributes of Yahweh. (The alternative, being to allow deceitful teachers come in and teach them false attributes and therefore point them to a false god.)

So, the title of the post: is neutrality really even an option? Can we really just sit back with our ticket to Heaven?

"All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people's sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation. We are therefore Christ's ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ's behalf: Be reconciled to God." 2 Corinthians 5:18-20

[ "Reconciliation" katallosso = catalyst: an agent that creates a reaction. "World" kosmos = cosmos: the order of all things. "Ambassador" presbeuo = elder: A person who brings maturity and balance into an immature and chaotic situation ]

In a time where our world was in need of some serious reconciliation, William Wilberforce was a social reformer. His epitaph as follows:

"In an age and county fertile, In great and good man, 

He was among the foremost of those who fixed the character of their times, 

because to high and various talents, to warm benevolene, and to universal candour, 

he added the abiding eloquence of a Christian life."

The Church

"To be a part of the church of Jesus Christ, as Jesus defined it, is to be a part of a spiritual legislative body tasked to enact heaven's viewpoint in hell's society"- Dr. Tony Evans

Sound a little harsh?

The Revelation of the Church is found in Matthew 16:18 - "And I also say to you, that you are Peter, and on the rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it."

"Peter" (Petros = small stone)
"Rock" (petra = foundation boulder)
"the gates of Hades" (Literal location in Caesarea Philippi (sin city) where shrines were built to other gods)

Jesus had taken his disciples on a 32 mile walk to have this talk. They are now standing in front of the center of worship to false gods. Is Jesus showing showing them where he wanted them to build His Church? In locations where God is not even known? In locations where worship to other gods is happening?

Where are these locations God is calling us to build or engage in His Church? The Church is a representative body, and therefore by it's very nature should be engaging in society. The Kingdom of God is powerful and will affect every aspect of society.

I found myself in Deuteronomy yesterday in Church...not that it's what he was talking about at the time, but it's where my eyes wandered to, specifically Deuteronomy 6:24. It's really been on my heart, especially while I'm here in a predominant atheist country, to be on my guard and ready to give the answer behind my Faith. I have always believed what Deut 6:24 says, but I was so glad to find a verse that said it, so it isn't my own words.

"So the LORD commanded us to observe all these statutes, to fear the LORD our God for our good always and for our survival, as it is today."

It's not that God just wants us to follow His rules just because, but because He wants the absolute best for us, and knows that the only way for that is through Him. I feel like this goes right along with all of Romans 8, that our promise as believers goes beyond just knowing we'll spending eternity in Heaven when we die, but who He promises to be for us while we're here on earth!
If I was asked, who is Jesus to me? He is the provider of Hope in situations when it doesn't make sense, and Peace that passes understanding. He has loved and forgiven me, and shows me how to do this to others. Most importantly, He is my comforter and source of strength in daily situations. This is what He wants for us, to be unconditionally loved, and again the only way for this is through Him.