mistakes

My first official act as Interim Pastor was to serve communion. After a brief recounting of the Last Supper and the Apostle's warning about self-examination from I Corinthians 11, I asked for the Lord's blessing.

Then the officers uncovered the elements and I divided the wafers (which were all in one serving dish) into the two platters, set the platters on the top of the juice serving trays and prepared to give them to those who would be serving them.

Then, the unthinkable happened. I had a stack in each hand and the plate of wafers started slipping off the tray of juices in my right hand. The deacon did not notice it and my other hand was full. I tried to set the stack back on the communion table, but the tray had slid off and clattered onto the floor, upside down. I had just dropped the broken body of Jesus on the floor!

I set the trays back on the table, picked up the upside-down tray from the floor, divided the wafers that were in the other tray in half and put half into the picked up tray, and then passed the stacks, one-by-one, with two hands, to the servers.

Once the servers were headed down the aisles, I dropped to my knees, and with the other ministers, picked up the broken pieces with humility and contrition, placed them into the inverted lid from the wine-serving container and resumed my place behind the table while one of the other ministers took the pieces reverently to the kitchen and disposed of them.

Upon reflection, this is a lot like life situations. We make mistakes. Even big ones that appear to trash Jesus and our testimonies. But life must go on. We must confess with humility and contrition on our knees, but then, we get up and make the best of what is left of our lives.

I mustn't let the one mistake in the past determine the course of the rest of my future. Yes, it was bad. If we were Roman Catholic, it would have caused a major ordeal, because of their doctrine of transubstantiation. (After the blessing, the wafers become the real flesh of Christ, not just a symbol.) So I can count my blessings that I am a Protestant and only made a symbolic error.

I could spend days trying to figure out what went wrong. Was one of the wine-cups too high, keeping the tray from being level? A manufacturing defect I could sue them for? Was the server at fault for not being ready to take the serving trays from my hands. Should I not have tried to hold the stacks in one hand? Was there something on the bottom of the tray that made it uneven? Et cetera, et cetera, etc.

Maybe that paragraph was written to try to take the blame away from myself and find someone else I could blame for it.

But it happened and I was a participant, so I must accept my share of the blame. But it is over. It is behind me. I must not let it continue to affect my thoughts and my life, except for trying to learn life's lesson for the next time.

Then I must realize the effect this mistake had on the other ministers and the congregation, and try to be the best example of confessing and repenting I can be. And then moving on. Really believing Romans 8:28, that God will work it all together for good. Really trusting. And moving on.

That means there is a purpose for the mistakes, a reason behind it all, even if all I can see now is "through a glass darkly." Some day, I will see "face to face." (I Corinthians 13:12)

Life, after all, goes on. It must go on.

Why does it take so long to study Ephesians?

Last night, after the Bible study, I was asked a question about why it is taking so long to read through one letter of six chapters. It is a good question. :)

My answer had many parts. The first is that we aren't just studying the one book. For example, last night, we referenced chapters in Genesis, II Timothy and Galatians, in addition to the passage in Ephesians 5. In fact, we are looking at the whole Bible from the perspective of the letter to the Ephesians.

In order to understand the letter, we need to know the mindset of the Apostle who wrote it. Since he was Jewish, his background understanding is that of the Old Testament. So we need to read some of the concepts of the Old Testament to understand what he is saying.

The second part of my answer is that many of the Bible study members are hoping to improve their English language skills, as well as their Bible knowledge. Every week we examine several English words that occur in the text we are studying. This practice improves our English vocabulary, as well as our Bible knowledge.

The third part of the answer is that this book is the Bible. It is God's word. It is very deep. It is like no other book. It contains information that will save our souls. It takes time to understand it.

Inheritance for Descendants of Abraham by Adoption

For almost a year, the English Bible Study group of the Starkville Chinese Christian Church has been studying the letter of the Apostle Paul to the church at Ephesus.

One of the major topics in the first two chapters of Ephesians is the concept of adoption. Paul appears to be answering the question of a predominantly gentile audience as to how gentiles can be part of the church.

Adoption is a way that a family grows by adding an unrelated person as a member of the family. Adoption is normally an act of love. It is often a way a family who is not able to have their own children is enabled to show love to a child by adding the child as a family member. Sometimes, families who have their own natural children also adopt children. These people are often motivated by love. They adopt children who have been abandoned by their birth parents, or whose birth parents do not feel they are able to raise a child, for whatever reason.

The way the Christian church had its beginning in the Old Testament was that God called people to serve Him. One of the major characters in the Old Testament was a man called Abraham. God called Abraham out of the Chaldean city of Ur, and told him to go to the area called Caanan, now known as Israel. God made a promise to Abraham.

“Leave your country, your people and your father's household and go to the land I will show you. I will make you into a great nation and I will bless you; I will make your name great, and you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse; and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you.” Genesis 12:1-3

The focus of the Old Testament from that time forward was on Abraham and his descendants. Isaac was the son of Abraham upon which the focus continued, and then Isaac’s son, Jacob (and his twelve sons), was the major figure in the Old Testament, through the end of the Book of Genesis. God changed Jacob’s name to Israel, and the rest of the Old Testament is the story of Israel and his descendents.

Being a member of the family of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob meant that a person was a part of the family of God, and also, a recipient of the benefits of the promise God had made to Abraham.

It was a natural question for the people of Ephesus to be asking, “What am I, a Greek, doing in the church of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob?” Paul’s answer was that they had been adopted. The same answer goes for Chinese and Americans. How can we become a part of the church of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob? By adoption. We become part of the continuing Old Testament church by being adopted into the family of Abraham.

“[God] predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ.” Ephesians 1:5

One of the benefits of being in a family is that family members are blessed with an inheritance. Paul continues in Ephesians 1, describing more about our adoption and inheritance.

“And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God's possession—to the praise of his glory.” Ephesians 1:13-14

Paul describes that their adoption was marked by their hearing the gospel and believing it. When they believed in Christ, they received the Holy Spirit who changed their lives. The Spirit is a guarantee that we have been adopted and that we will receive the inheritance promised to all the descendants of Abraham.

When a person becomes a Christian, he or she receives the current blessing of God’s Spirit, and the future inheritance that goes with being a part of the family of God.

The remainder of chapter one is a prayer of Paul that the Ephesians would grow in their understanding of what God was doing in their lives. Verse 19 repeats the promise about the inheritance, “I pray also that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened in order that you may know the hope to which he has called you, the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints.”

Being a Christian means being adopted into the family of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Being in that family guarantees that we will receive an inheritance from God.

As we continued through the letter to the Ephesians, our English Bible study group studied about living as a Christian and about marriage and family life, and trying to please God in everything we do.

Thank God for the wonderful message from God to us!

no more basketball

As of today, this blog will have no more references to basketball. I have made a new blog devoted to basketball and coaching and the things I have learned in almost 50 years of loving this game.

See http://bbtheorypractice.blogspot.com

get your education

Moved to http://bbtheorypractice.blogspot.com/.

covenant and promise

Yesterday's post on the form of a Biblical covenant has a lot in common with a Biblical promise in the New Testament.

The promises are given unconditionally by a sovereign to his subjects.

The mediator of the promises is the Holy Spirit.

The promises have blessings contingent on the believer's faith or acceptance.

The curse for unbelief is not receiving the promised results.

The sacrifice was Jesus' death.

The sign is Love.

Form of the Covenant in the Bible

The word covenant appears throughout the Old Testament. God appears to have made covenants with the following individuals: Adam, Noah, Abraham, 4.Isaac, 5.Jacob (called Israel), Moses, 7.David, and 8.Solomon.

Putting all the images together, we see the following characteristics in the form of the covenant:

Unilateral: Sovereign to Subjects
Given through a Mediator
List of Responsibilities
List of Blessings for Obedience
List of Curses for Disobedience
Sealed by a Sacrifice
Remembered by Signs

The New Testament Covenant has the same form, but is spiritual, in our hearts.

premarital/marital counseling

I read Everett Eggerichs' book when contemplating premarital counseling, Love & Respect: The Love She Most Desires; The Respect He Desperately Needs.

It is not a premarital book, per se, but it is an excellent companion to
Why Marriages Succeed or Fail: And How You Can Make Yours Last by John Gottman. Gottman's book is from the perspective of a psychologist and is good at describing the things that successful couples do and the things that unsuccessful couples do, in marriage.

Gottman's book is only a little prescriptive, because he is attempting to be philosophically neutral. His intended audience is mainstream people and psychological researchers.

Eggerichs, on the other hand, writes from an evangelical Christian point of view, starting with scripture and declaring how to behave in marriage in light of Gottman's results.

Both are 5-star selections.

baptism: spiritual; indwelling, filling

Baptism is a one-time kind of thing. In John 3, Jesus talks about being born of water, and being born of the Spirit. There are two baptisms that symbolize becoming a Christian, the baptism of water, and the baptism of the Spirit. The Spirit's baptism is also known as regeneration, i.e., the moment we receive the new nature, the spiritual nature, from God.

"Indwelling" is another word for "being lived in." That is the normal state of a Christian, someone whom Christ's spirit lives in.

"Being filled" refers to us as vessels. Sometimes, we we are more full than other times. Paul describes how to be filled with the spirit in Ephesians 5. It involves four parts:

1. Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs,
2. singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord;
3. Giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ;
4. Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God.

Ephesians is full of things we put off (habits from the old nature) and things we put on (i.e., the new nature's habits). To be spirit-filled is to live a life engaged in these new habits to the exclusion of those old habits.

faith and health

Life goes on. I was putting in a new circuit for a rental house we own and had the electrical panel off so I could run the wire. I took the two screws out and stuck them in my mouth, because I was late for church (Wednesday PM) and I was teaching the Bible study, so I was in a rush. Next thing I knew, my mother-in-law came around the corner (she lives in that house) and started asking me questions in Chinese.

I tired to answer her, but couldn't talk well with the screws in my mouth. Anyway, I satisfied her, got the wires connected, and put the covers back on. But . . . No screws! I looked all over, and finally, concluded that I had swallowed them.

I went to church and taught the lesson but told the people to pray for the safe passage of the screws to their ultimate destination.

More than ten days passed, but the screws didn't. :) I started having indigestion and feeling something was "in my craw."

Finally, I went to the doctor. He made X-rays. They showed no screws, but they didn't image near my prostate, so they could be headed out. He prescribed some expensive antacid ($83.00) and I went home, expecting to be rid of the screws, shortly.

Unfortunately, they didn't come out. I finally went to my mother-in-law's, again and started searching for the screws. I took the covers off, and found both of them, thrown into the far dark recesses of the panel.

I felt stupid and that I had wasted a doctor visit and $83.00, but began thinking about something I have always kind of believed, about faith and healing. I had demonstrated clearly that what I believed could make me sick; what was to stop me from believing that what I believed could work towards my healing, just as well?

I have had prostate cancer for 8 years, now. So far, I have had confidence that the prayers of the people I talk to, plus the vitamins, herbs, and changed diet, make a difference. They have.

When I chose my treatment path (i.e., no conventional treatment), my family and friends, after discussing PCa with their medical friends/practitioners, were genuinely concerned that I had chosen a death sentence rather than treatment. That was 8 years ago.

I tried to get them to come up with some reports showing that there was a difference in outcomes based upon treatment (including watchful waiting). No one could find such information. I did refer them to the side effects associated with each treatment.

The bottom line: Ten year survival rate (whatever that means) is the same, but quality of life differs drastically between treatment vs. non-(conventional)-treatment. And most of the suffering comes from iatrogenic causes, i.e., the cure is often worse than the disease.


In all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make your paths straight. -- Proverbs 3:6

Time Alone

Have you ever felt the need to be alone? I have. To not talk? Me, too.

peripheral vision

Moved to: http://bbtheorypractice.blogspot.com/

child discipline

We went to a Memorial Day gathering with several Chinese friends and had dumplings. Very good! One of the ladies wanted to know when to begin disciplining children.

"When you know they know what "No!" means."

Ultimately, we want to raise children who are able to copy Jesus' words and say, "Not my will, but Thy will be done" to the Heavenly Father.

If they haven't learned to say it to their earthly father, how can we expect them to say it to God?

Discipline trains children like the Law trains Christians. When they are older, their character will have been shaped the way a Christian's heart gets shaped by the Law. Then, as mature people, that Law written on their hearts constrains their behavior from the inside, out.

Preaching in the Chinese Church

When preaching in the Chinese Church, I generally make slides that contain both English and Chinese versions of my outline.

Since I can read very few Chinese characters, producing these slides takes a lot of time. Since I am frequently making them the day before preaching, I don't have time to get them proofread before displaying them on the overhead projector as I preach.

I use Babelfish to help me make the translations. First, I type in my English phrase, then have it converted to Chinese. Then I copy the Chinese phrase that is generated, and paste it back into the input of the translator, and have it translate that phrase into English.

If I get out the same English I began with, I paste that Chinese into the PowerPoint slide I am making. This procedure gives surprisingly good results.

I found out a weakness one time when I accidentally typed the homonym of the word I thought I was using, principal for principle. What I typed in was what was returned by Babelfish, so I used the phrase. Unfortunately, the Chinese phrase that was produced was nonsense!

The person who was translating my sermon into Chinese asked me to explain in different words, and, as I did, he smiled a big smile and told the congregation what I should have said.

It all works out for good!

Self Control

Moved to: http://bbtheorypractice.blogspot.com/

Coaching Basketball

Moved to: http://bbtheorypractice.blogspot.com/

Algorithm proof by mathematical induction.

In analysis of algorithms, we learned a technique similar to mathmatical induction whereby the algorithm is shown that if it is true for case N, it is true for case N+1. Then, it is shown to be true for some specific case.

There is a weakness in this method. Because computer programs are supposed to have a start and stop case and not be running infinitely, these cases must also be examined, individually, so, in addition to the proof in the first paragraph, we must also demonstrate that the algorithm handles the first case and the last case.

There is another special case that messes up many computer programmers: the zeroth case, i.e., the case where there are no records to process. Many programmers assume there will be an input, so their programs do stupid things, such as initialize counters at 1, rather than initializing at zero and allowing an increment only when the input actually happens.

Time

I have most of my good thoughts in the shower. After toweling dry, I frequently forget what I thought. Today, however, I remember, and the topic was good enough to blog about.

It is about time. No, I mean, it is about the topic, Time.

In the Bible we learn that before Time began, God already was. And we also learn that, "Time shall be no more."

This means that time has a beginning, and time will have an end.

In science, we typically assume that time extends from minus infinity to plus infinity, i.e., it has no beginning and no end. But the Bible says God has that attribute, not time.

This means that some of our scientific thinking needs to be challenged, especially those things with a time component.

Take "C" for instance. C is supposedly a constant, the speed of light in a vacuum. But C is given in terms of time, e.g., meters per second or miles per hour.

The next major paradigm shift in science will come when it is recognized that time is not a continuous function. E = mC^2 will need to be changed to E = mC(t)^2, where C(t) is a function/variable, depending on time, and not a constant.

If time is not a continuous function (because it doesn't go to minus infinity and doesn't go to plus infinity), many formulae will need to be reconsidered. Many things that depend on rates will need to be reevaluated. For example, take radioactive decay. What happens if we try to extrapolate a time line based upon an "inifinite time" assumption vs a "beginning/ending time" assumption?

Then, I got out of the shower.

Evolution and Intelligent Design are not Science

I hit upon a site discussing Intelligent Design (I.D.) at http://www.greatschools.net/cgi-bin/showarticle/ms/512#ID and found the following:

From Oklahoma 02/10/2006:
"I don't believe anyone says you can't choose to believe in I.D., however that's not really the point. I.D. doesn't belong in the science classroom because it is quite simply inconsistent with the scientific method - it is not 'falsifyable', and therefore it is NOT 'science'. "

I replied that if that statement is true, then so is this one:
"I don't believe anyone says you can't choose to believe in Evolution, however that's not really the point. Evolution doesn't belong in the science classroom because it is quite simply inconsistent with the scientific method - it is not 'falsifyable', and therefore it is NOT 'science'. "

The problem with origins is that there must be a first. By definition, the first is unique. The scientific method requires experiments that can reproduce a desired result. A unique event can't be reproduced, and is, therefore, outside the realm of science.

Get Evolution and Intelligent Design out of the science classroom and put them in Philosophy or Religion where they belong.

Presuppositions Color Conclusions

presuppositions: interaction on a usenet group at Mississippi State.

<>On Fri, 19 Nov 2004, JPL wrote:

> WRONG! That is the typical cheap shot taken by a theist who either
> (a) does not understand the meaning of the word "atheist" or (b) is being
> purposefully deceitful. The word "atheist" means one who is without
> theistic belief. All children, e.g., are atheists until they are brainwashed
> by their parents into thinking there is a god or gods. There is a small,
> very small, part of atheism called "positive atheism"which asserts there
> is no god. To lump all atheists into that is a cheap shot.
> Everyone is either theist or atheist. There is no middle ground, e.g,
> there is no agnostic safe median between the two. If you believe in
> god(s) then you are a theist. If you lack that belief then you are an
> a-theist.

As you said, WRONG!!! We could go on, "IS," "NOT", "IS," "NOT," like a couple of kids. And we might both be right, but in our own frame of reference, but we can't both be right, absolutely.

Deductive argument works like this:

If something can be put into the following form (modus ponens), it is valid because of the form (i.e., formal logic).

<>Major Premise (General Rule)
Minor Premise (Particular)
__________________________
Therefore, Conclusion (Q.E.D.)
<>
Example:
<>All men are mortal.
Socrates is a man.
-----------------------
Therefore, Socrates is mortal. (Q.E.D.)

If the major premise is true and the minor premise is true, then it necessarily follows (from the form of the deductive argument) that the conclusion is true.

The problem is that our major premises are not always explicitly stated, and they, like the one in the example, may not be provable. I.e., can you prove that all men are mortal? (Hint: some people are still alive.)

Except for tautologies (e.g., X is X) which are true by definition, major premises can't be proved to be true.

Major premises are normally really a chain of assumptions, and the most basic ones are not stated, but assumed to be true. There are some things that are commonly accepted as true (the all-men-everywhere-believe things). The problem is that we can't really test all men everywhere.

People can communicate when they share the same basic assumptions, i.e., their world-and-life view (weltanschauung). When people come to different conclusions about the meaning of the facts, it is not generally because they are examining different particulars (minor premises), but because they have differences in what they believe to be true about the world and life, i.e., their logical framework (their major premises).

<>As I said, major premises cannot be proved; they are just accepted as true. If they are not, in fact, true, then conclusions derived from them may not be true. In logic, both the major premise and the minor premise must be true for the conclusion to be necessarily true. That is how two rational people, both looking at the same facts, come to different conclusions, and how we get into IS/NOT shouting matches.

Note that weltanschauungs cannot be proved. You have one; I have one; everyone has one. They consist of beliefs about reality, i.e., they are belief systems. The religious word for belief systems is "faith."

It is not just "mindless fundamentalists" that use faith; all people do, even those with great minds. Most people do not, however, openly state their beliefs. The assume everybody has the same basic presuppositions that they do.

I will tell you mine. I start with the joint presupposition that there is a God, and the bible is his revelation.

You may agree with me about one or both of those presuppositons, but if you agree with me about both of them, then you and I must come to the same conclusion about the definition of atheist.

[Webster (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=atheist&x=0&y=0)
BTW, agrees with me, demonstrating that the point is arguable, even without this discussion of biblical presuppositions. ]

Romans 1:18 - 23 (Weymouth translation) says:

For God's anger is being revealed from Heaven against all impiety and against the iniquity of men who through iniquity suppress the truth. God is angry: because what may be known about Him is plain to their inmost consciousness; for He Himself has made it plain to them. For, from the very creation of the world, His invisible perfections--namely His eternal power and divine nature--have been rendered intelligible and clearly visible by His works, so that these men are without excuse. For when they had come to know God, they did not give Him glory as God nor render Him thanks, but they became absorbed in useless discussions, and their senseless minds were darkened. While boasting of their wisdom they became utter fools, and, instead of worshipping the imperishable God, they worshipped images resembling perishable man or resembling birds or beasts or reptiles.

Therefore, an atheist is a person who denies the truth that he knows: God has made himself known to him and he refuses to acknowledge it. (Q.E.D.)

In order to discount my argument, you have to disprove my major premise, i.e., you must be able to prove that there is no God, or that the bible is not his revelation.

The minor premise is just a statement of what is in the revelation, and I have either stated it correctly, or not (which is verifiable). (I used copy and paste. :))

An apologist (Clark Pinnock) has stated that the heart cannot accept what the mind rejects as false. Christians are not mindless; they are just honest about their human inability to know things outside the realm of scientific investigation without revelation, and then they are submissive to what the revelation contains, when they accept it as being from God.

They use their minds to be convinced by logical proofs that their assumptions are well-founded. For example, the bible is not normally accepted blindly, but by a confidence that has been built up over time. When what it states about historical situations can be verified by other historical sources and archeology, for example, it gives confidence that it is also true in areas that cannot be independently verified.

What we have is two competing frameworks based upon two different world views. Whoever has the correct presuppositions is right. (It might be neither of us.) I cannot prove mine, but I accept them. Can you prove yours? They have to be different from mine because we have looked at the same minor premises, but reach different conclusions.

-Bill

> > By the way, I do believe in unicorns.

Because the bible mentions them. It is the only way for me to be consistent with my presuppositions.

> Once you convince someone of the existence of a mystical grand poopah
> in the sky, you can convince them of anything. I wonder if there is a
> strong correlation between xian beliefs and other gullibilities, such as
> reading tea leaves....or believing in unicorns, ghosts, etc.