Blog closed
as you can see by the dates on other entries on this blog, I am not much of a blogger. For now I am closing this blog and will post no new entries in the forseeable future.

Minutes With Messiah March 2008

The March issue of Minutes With Messiah is now posted on the web site. To open it, click on the following link. To save it to your computer, right click the link and “save target as.”

mwm0803.pdf

The individual articles:

"If Ahasuerus is Xerxes, that might explain some things in the book of Esther. Xerxes inherited power from his father, Darius the Great, of Battle of Marathon fame."  (Who Is Ahasuerus?)

"We go to concerts or listen to radios and compact disks. Most Americans do not think of music in terms of something in which you personally participate or that you personally make. This attitude has even crept into many churches." (Watched Worship)

"While God was mid-sentence Avraham said, “Lord, if I have found favor in your sight, please wait right here for your servant.” (Gen 18:3) Then he walked away from God. Imagine the effrontery. This is the Creator of the Universe." (Walking Away From God)

The audio (.mp3) versions have also been posted at the audio index.

What Does the Bible Say About..?
The “What Does the Bible Say About..?” section of the Minutes With Messiah web site has been updated with these new questions.

What does the Bible say about same sex marriages?
Answer: Marriage between people who are of the same gender and who never intend to commit homosexual acts is not something the writers of the Bible ever considered. Read more.

What kind of food did Daniel refuse to eat?
Answer: All we know was that it was the king’s food and wine. We don’t even know whether it included flesh.  Read more.

Is what the Catholic Church teaches about saints true?
Answer: Every Christian is a saint. “beloved of God, called saints.” (Romans 1:1) “to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called saints.” (1 Corinthians 1:2) Read more.
 
Does Isaiah 34:16 promise I will find a mate?
Answer: If you read the whole chapter you find that humans are not included in this passage. The chapter is about the destruction of Idumea Read more.

Since Christians are already forgiven, is it wrong to pray for forgiveness?
Answer: I agree that Christ’s blood brings forgiveness of sins past, present, and future. I even agree that God may be willing to forgive even if  Read more.

Is it a sin?

Is smoking a sin? Is drinking alcohol a sin? Is it a sin for a woman not to change her last name when she marries? Is sex before marriage a sin? Is cutting, or gambling a sin? Will I go to hell if I pierce my body, tattoo my body, or commit suicide? People seem obsessed with what is a sin.

Perhaps this is all part of a greater problem. People get into what I call a "balance scale" legalism. The idea is that their good deeds have to outweigh their bad, and then God will owe them salvation. The problem with that mentality is that no amount of good deeds will outweigh just one sin. It that were possible, then Jesus did not have to die.

The gospel (good news) is that, because of the blood of Jesus, God can forgive all our sins, and forgives each time we sin, if we are one of his children. God’s graciousness coupled with the perfect sacrifice is sufficient that we don’t have to worry about what is or is not a sin.

See my article, "Will I Go to Hell?", for more about this subject.

February 2008 issue of Minutes With Messiah

The February issue of Minutes With Messiah is now posted on the web site. To open it, click on the following link. To save it to your computer, right click the link and "save target as."

http://www.minuteswithmessiah.com/issues/mwm0802.pdf

The individual articles (click on the picture to go to the article):

"Many years ago I had a job giving out parking tickets. Part of my route involved giving out tickets in two-hour-parking areas. One day I was ticketing a car I had ticketed a couple of times before. " (A Parking Ticket)

 

"Censorship notwithstanding, people cannot act as the "thought police" because they do not know what others are thinking. They can only judge actions. God, on the other hand, knows our thoughts. He can legislate morality, and has done so." (Legislating Morality)

"Whether God grants us the faith or we are able to develop it on our own, is it not our own faith that saves us? According to Paul, apparently not. In Paul’s explanation to the Galatians about saving faith, all but one time he talks about the faith of Jesus. " (Of, Not In)

If you find these articles beneficial, please spread the word. E-mail a link to this blog or to the individual pages or .pdf file to a friend, neighbor, enemy, or anyone else who might gain something from it.

Questions posted in January on What Does the Bible Say About..? site

Three new questions have been posted on the What Does the Bible Say About..? section of my web site. One asks what the Bible says about men wearing earrings. A second One asks the biblical significance of the number 24. The third One is a response to a previous answer about whether church attendance is required by God.

The most commonly visited questions in December included a new one that month asking whether our souls wait on earth thirty days after we die. Other popular questions included whether Christians can eat pork, the meaning of various numbers, whether specific activities (drinking, smoking, sex outside of marriage, kissing) were sins, and what the Bible says about various Islamic beliefs.

There were a number of other questions asked in December. Most were repeats of previous questions. Some resulted in lengthy e-mail conversations that were too long, specific, and detailed to include among the questions posted. If anybody wants the details of the conversations about differences between Islam and Christianity or about the necessity of baptism you may ask me and I will send you a transcript.

The Golden Compass, Part 2

Having given a review of "The Golden Compass" previously on this blog, I will now address whether Christians should or should not see the movie, independent of the quality of the movie itself.

Many of the fans of the books on which "The Golden Compass" is supposedly based object because the atheism is watered down. Many in the Roman Catholic Church object because the books are anti-church. Many others object to the movie because of the books. Not having read the books, I cannot judge that.

My biggest objection to the controversy over the movie is that such controversy often promotes a desire to see the movie. Many people went to see "The Last Temptation of Christ" because of the controversy who would not have seen it had they simply been told that it was a mediocre to poor example of a movie. More people go see a controversial movie than are kept away by the controversy. Therefore, the controversy raised over this movie by Christians is probably counter-productive.

Generally I take the position that censorship as a whole fails. Therefore, if anyone knows that their faith is strong, reading the books or watching the movie will not damage their faith. If it is weak, they should probably avoid such things.

The one seemingly valid complaint of Christians is that the movie is so good that children will be prompted to read the books. Normally I would say that is a good thing. In this case, it may be a neutral thing. Since I have not read the books, I must base my comments on what I have heard from others, or the small parts of it I have read quoted in e-mails or reviews. For our children, whatever they read or watch should be monitored (not necessarily controlled) by parents. This movie and the books on which it is based may begin a productive discussion about the nature of God and the church, as well as admirable themes such as loyalty and courage.

Based on what I saw in the movie, the Magisterium is supposed to equate to the church, but more specifically to the Roman Catholic Church. Any non-Catholic Christian who reads the book with this in mind will have little problem with the first book. There have been abuses by the Roman Catholic Church, which even they must admit. But abuses by one group that claims to be Christian does not negate the validity of Christianity as taught in the Bible. Those Christians, including preaching students, that I know who have seen the movie and read the first book point out that it is more a condemnation of the Roman Catholic Church, and Christ’s church is not the issue.

One theme, apparently, of the books is that God is old, senile, and eventually dies. One passage in the book refers to Daniel’s characterization of God as "the Ancient of Days." The author interprets that to mean senility. I interpret that to mean eternity. God is older than time, but unaffected by time. He cannot grow old and senile. The God that dies in the later books on which The Golden Compass is based is not the God of the Bible, so I would be unaffected by such a book.

Does that mean I will read the books? Not necessarily. Does that mean I would recommend the books? That might depend on the level of faith of the person reading it, and whether they have someone who is willing to talk out the issues raised in the books.

The controversy will not end. I just wonder if the controversy is playing into the hands of those who would promote the atheology of the books.

The Golden Compass

Much has been said about whether Christians should or should not go see the current movie, The Golden Compass. Unfortunately, much of this has been said by people who have neither seen the movie nor read the book on which it was based. I saw the movie last week and will choose this venue to give my views and reviews.

The movie is a pretty good movie. It is not the great movie that some are trying to make it. One reviewer praised it above the Harry Potter movies and "The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe" (based on the first of the Chronicles of Narnia). While the overall production values are quite good, I don’t think it measures up to either of those movies. The acting is generally excellent, with Nicole Kidman and Dakota Blue Richards standing out. Daniel Craig’s part was negligible, and the great Christopher Lee was wasted in only one scene. (One suspects the studio hired them mainly so they could put big names on the marquee. In this case it becomes a case of bait and switch.)

The first part of the movie is slow and confusing. It is only when the action really starts moving half way through that the movie begins to get interesting. There is much left unexplained, most notably the nature of "dust." The average non-Catholic would probably never associate "the Magisterium" to the Roman Catholic Church, which it is apparently supposed to represent in the books. It is unclear why Nicole Kidman’s character works for the Magisterium, when her own character seems the opposite of everything for which they stand. Because of the weakness of the long introductory material, this becomes a good movie rather than an outstanding one.

Independent of the books, I would easily recommend that Christians see the movie. The themes of loyalty, courage, and free will are commendable. The mysterious "dust" seems to me to be roughly equated to the spirit of God. When anyone dies, their "demon" (which is explained to be equivalent to our spirit) turns into "dust." Even if you know that the Magisterium is supposed to represent the Roman Catholic Church, many would say that it only represents the traditional rather than the scriptural side of that body. If you do not know that the Magisterium is supposed to represent the Catholic Church, then it assumes the nature of any government that passes laws that they think are for the betterment of their people. Those fans of the books who objected to the watered down nature of the movie have a legitimate complaint. Other than an implied tendency toward anarchism, the movie stands as a reasonable "good vs. evil" story with strongly favorable religious overtones.

The movie points out that this takes place in an "alternate universe," parallel to ours. As such, it could easily be viewed as a cautionary tale about what could happen if the church were perverted beyond recognition. I could easily view it as saying this might be a possibility, but it is not so in our world. But that leads to the controversy, which comments I will post later.

The Teacher

In continuing to highlight certain articles or questions on my site, I have to mention one series of articles that are the most fun for me to write. I am a storyteller. Therefore, I have written a number of articles retelling events in the life of "The Teacher," Jesus. These stories generally recount the gospel story, but may add some tidbit of information or view it from a new perspective. Here are those articles.

The birth of Jesus	The UFO
Turning water to wine	A First for the Master
Sending the demons into the swine	Into the Herd
Feeding the five thousand	Fed By the Teacher
"My yoke is easy."	My Yoke
Walking on water	A Dark and Stormy Night
At the Feast of Tabernacles	At the Feast
In the Temple at Hanukkah	And It Was Winter
"Take up your cross"	Peter's Last Letter
Raising Lazarus	A Delayed Visit
The Lord's Supper	Oh, What a Night
The crucifixion	A New Day

As time goes by I will add stories to this list. I may even expand into retelling some of the other events outside the gospels. Stay tuned.

Antichrist or AntiChrist?

One visitor to my web site left me a comment, but had the discourtesy to leave a false e-mail address so I could not reply. I will take this forum for my opportunity to do so.

The individual wrote:

"The Antichrist" section [presumably of my Topical list of questions] should be "AntiChrist" section and the bible does talk about "one" man, the number of "his" name is six hundred threescore and 6.

My response:

In many English translations of the Bible, the word is "antichrist," not "AntiChrist." Even if, although it goes against what John writes, the term should be capitalized, there is no reason to capitalize the letter C. If it were a hyphenated word, Anti-Christ, that might be a possibility. Since it is a single word, all rules of grammar go against capitalizing within the word.

The book of the Revelation never uses the term antichrist (or Antichrist or AntiChrist). Since it is in that book that mention is made that the number of a man (most likely an emperor of Rome) is six hundred sixty six, there is no reason to believe that number should be applied to a man with the title of AntiChrist. From what the book says, you could just as easily apply that number to a man with the title of "Statistician."

As I have pointed out before (What Does the Bible Say About..Antichrist? and It Ain't Necessarily So), when John does use the term antichrist, he specifically says there are many (1 John 2:18; 2 John 1:7), and that they had already come in his day. Anyone who claims that there is only one who bears a title of "The AntiChrist" needs to prove that from scripture. They cannot. Anyone who says that there is one AntiChrist in our future must prove that from scripture. They cannot.

One problem that I find with modern premillennialists is that they take a biblical term or concept and place a "The" in front of it to make it something other than what the scriptures talk about. This is true of "The Antichrist," "The Rapture," and "The Tribulation," among other things. They personify general concepts as specific events or people. There is no justification from scripture, grammar, or common sense for doing this.