All Souls Are Mine

Behold, all souls are mine; the soul of the father as well as the soul of the son is mine: the soul who sins shall die. - Eze 18:4

It's not a terribly profound verse, but it has some interesting thoughts nonetheless.

• Every soul is God's--not just Christians' and Jews'. All atheists' souls are God's. Same with Hindus', Buddhists', and agnostics'.
• The problem of sin is with the soul. This is what Jesus was getting at when he said "Everyone who looks at a woman to lust after her has committed adultery with her in his heart." No, he is not guilty of committing adultery physically, but when it comes to being right with God, 'physically' frankly doesn't matter. All that matters is soul/heart sins--it's just that physical sins are the overflow of soul sins.
• This whole section is talking about spiritual death. The wicked don't always physically die earlier than the righteous, but they do die spiritually when the righteous have eternal life.

Atonement

...when I atone for you for all that you have done, declares the Lord GOD. - Eze 16:63

What a wonderful forshadowing of the upcoming work of Messiah. This is what Jesus came to do: atone for us for all that we have done. Messiah was not to be a earthly king. He was to atone for us, be a sacrifice for our sins, and reconcile sinners with their perfect God.

Live!

And as for your birth, on the day you were born your cord was not cut, nor were you washed with water to cleanse you, nor rubbed with salt, nor wrapped in swaddling cloths. No eye pitied you, to do any of these things to you out of compassion for you, but you were cast out on the open field, for you were abhorred, on the day that you were born. "And when I passed by you and saw you wallowing in your blood, I said to you in your blood, 'Live!' I said to you in your blood, 'Live!' -Eze 16:4-6

Here the Lord is speaking to Jerusalem. It is a very clear passage of how God chose them to be his people. They were destitute and had nothing to offer him, but he came to them and said "Live!" We too are destitute and have nothing to offer God, but he comes to us as we wallow in our sin and nakedness and says "Live!" He doesn't say "Please choose me," or "I'll give you happiness," or even "Don't you want a better life?" but simply and profoundly "Live!"

God isn't merely offering life here--he is commanding it into existence. When God commands life, we live. The dead are made alive. But he doesn't just give life and leave us alone as helpless infants--only to be ravaged by wolves. He goes on to make us "fluorish like a plant in the field" and "clothes us in embroidered cloth." What a wonderful God we have that gives us true life.

The Temptation of Christ

And he took him to Jerusalem and set him on the pinnacle of the temple and said to him, "If you are the Son of God, throw yourself down from here, for it is written, "'He will command his angels concerning you, to guard you,' and "'On their hands they will bear you up, lest you strike your foot against a stone.'" And Jesus answered him, "It is said, 'You shall not put the Lord your God to the test.'" -Luk 4:9-12

If Jesus was tempted for 40 days, why are only three of Satan's attempts listed? These same three are listed in Matthew. I suspect Satan challenged Jesus more than three times over the course of those 40 days. I suspect these three are listed because Satan only has three ways he tempts God's children...

1. He exploits our physical desires to get us to disobey God. This is his strategy with trying to get Jesus to turn stones into bread when he was hungry. He tries to distract us from remembering God's provision both by providing our needs in his perfect timing and by sustaining us through the need.
2. He attempts to make himself look good. "Look, I can give you all the kingdoms of the world. I'm your best friend. Trust me (just like Adam and Eve did, moohaha)."
3. Then he distorts Scripture, quoting it accurately. This is the most dangerous of all the temptations because we have Biblical support to keep on doing what we're doing. Look at evils like slavery, male chauvinism, drunkenness, licentiousness, legalism, etc. that have been performed under the guise of "the Bible says," when it clearly doesn't.

OK. There are probably lots of other ways to analyze these three temptations--pride, doubt, putting faith to the test--but these are the three I saw today, and it's my blog, so that's what you get. Please post your analysis for everybody else's reading pleasure.

Electric Cars

I'm all in favor of more fuel-efficient cars. I just want people to be realistic. This article talks about a plug-in car, which sounds like a great idea. Yes, it would be very convenient to never have to fill up with gas. But I hope the author of this piece understands that the electricity used in the car comes from somewhere. Is he going to complain when his electric bill goes up? Yes, the increase will probably be less than he pays in gas, but it will go up. And does he realize that the extra electricity needs to be generated somehow and will most likely come from burning fossil fuels? Of course we would like to have cleaner electricity, but until windmills, hydroelectric plants, solar, and nuclear power are more prevalent, we need to know electric cars will simply move the pollution away from the streets and off to the power plants.

http://www.soultek.com/clean_energy/hybrid_cars/hybrid_car_types/gm_chevrolet_volt_electric_concept_vehicle.htm

Abortion Insanity

You shall not murder. - Exodus 20:13

I was trying to find some logical justification for abortions. So far this is the best attempt I can find. Of course, there's not much logic in there...

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/news-articles-press/politics-policy-issues/abortion-access/before-roe-6159.htm

"People in the United States don't know about these horrors. Nor do they remember what women's lives were like here before abortion became legal. Before 1973, single women who got pregnant were fired from their jobs. Younger ones were sent to maternity homes for unwed mothers and their children were put up for adoption. Married women who got pregnant were forced to carry pregnancies to term regardless of their circumstances — even if they had so many children that they couldn't afford to feed another one; even if they had metastasized cancer; even if their fetuses couldn't live outside the womb because these fetuses had developed without a heart or brain."

• A single woman getting fired because she is pregnant has absolutely nothing to do with abortion. The employer was absolutely wrong in firing her, and he should be punished for it; the baby shouldn't.
• Young pregnant women were sent to maternity homes. Heaven forbid someone tries to help a pregnant woman. So a woman should have the right to kill her baby because someone wants to help her?
• Their children were put up for adoption. OK, someone wants to raise the child the mother wants to kill, and that's a bad thing?
• A mother can't afford another baby. That's a legitimate concern. But maybe she could give the baby up for adoption instead of killing it. Why doesn't she kill her worst behaved kid instead? Oh yeah, that's illegal. Wait, so was killing the one in the womb. Oh, I know why: People would know she killed it instead of being her little secret between her and the abortionist.
• Metastasized cancer. Well let's see, if having the baby would kill mom, or she can't get proper cancer treatment because she's pregnant, then this one could be legitimate. If the argument, however, was that mom won't be around for the baby's first birthday, then I'd say adoption is a much more logical option. If a woman has a three month old and finds out she has cancer, she doesn't buy a gun and kill her baby, but she makes sure her will is in order and finds someone to raise the child.
• Even if the "fetuses" couldn't live outside the womb because it doesn't have a heart or brain. First, this just shows the rhetoric of the argument--they must avoid the word "baby" at all costs. There is no such thing as a fetus outside the womb. By definition, as soon as it is out of the womb it is no longer a fetus. Second, if the baby doesn't have a heart or brain, it isn't alive to begin with, so this isn't truly an abortion.

"Nowhere in scripture does it say women should not have reproductive rights."

• Does he mean the right to reproduce or the right to not reproduce? If it's the first, I would completely agree. But since we all know he really means the latter, how about "thou shalt not murder"?

"Tell them you are devastated and will commit suicide if you can't terminate this pregnancy."

• That should be grounds for putting the mother in a psych ward--not for killing the baby.

The only strategy of pro-abortion logic is to grasp on to extreme cases as a justification for routine cases. Some moms will die from giving birth, therefore all moms must be allowed to kill their babies. Some babies won't survive full term, therefore all moms must be allowed to kill their babies at will.

They throw out stories of moms undergoing illegal abortions and the complications they suffer. Should we feel sorry for them? Should we feel sorry for the poor man who tries to rob a bank to pay the bills but gets shot in the process? People die from overdosing on heroine, so should we have doctors dispensing it? And lots of people blow themselves up making meth, so we should get OSHA to make safe meth labs. And terrorists often get hurt when they try to blow other people up, so maybe when a terrorist shows up I should volunteer to kill myself so he doesn't need to get hurt.

Why can't we find a logical compromise? How about, if carrying the baby puts the mother's life in undue risk, then she can choose her life over the baby's. If the baby is already dead, of course it can be removed. Ironically, these same arguments make sense if a person goes to a doctor to have a leg amputated. If the leg is cancerous and will kill the rest of the body, of course it can be amputated. If the leg is healthy and the person wants it removed for any number of reason--already have enough legs, don't like the extra calories it requires, want to lose weight, or even has severe pain--no doctor would perform the surgery.

Pro Choice

Last night, while I was playing with my baby, suddenly someone began pounding on our door. I expected it to be a friend, someone who could make loud pounding funny. But no, it was one of our regular solicitors trying to get me to sign on to some liberal petition. The petition of the night was to promote pro choice "women's reproductive rights." I was caught off guard (remember I was expecting someone I knew) and didn't respond as I wish I would, telling him I'm not interested and very pro life. As soon as he walked away I started to think of all the things to say--like. . . .

I'm pro choice too:

• I believe a woman has the right to choose abstinence or to sleep with whomever she wants
• I believe a woman has the right to choose to use contraceptives
• I believe a woman has the right to choose between keeping her baby or giving him up for adoption.
• I believe a woman has the right to choose to prosecute a rapist or an incestuous family member
• I just don't believe a woman has the right to kill a baby...or more accurately to pay a medical hit man to kill her baby

I also believe in women's reproductive rights:

• Women have the right to reproduce with whomever they please and as often as they please
• Women have the right to take fertility drugs
• Women have the right to have surgery to enhance their ability to bear children
• Women have the right to use their body as a surrogate for someone else
• I just don't believe killing a baby is a reproductive right since, by definition, reproducing involves making a new baby, not killing it.

I'm sure he would have said something along the lines of "it's not a baby, it's part of her body." No it's not:

• Babies have different DNA. Half the DNA is from mom & half is from dad. The baby is no more part of her body than it is dad's. She just happens to be carrying it. When I put a book in a bookbag, I don't say the book is part of the bookbag. A book is a book, and a bag is a bag.
• Babies have different blood. Not only does mom's blood not mix with the baby's blood, but they can be completely different blood types.
• Babies have different genitals. If the baby is really part of mom...then half of all pregnant women have penises.

Yes, abortion is legal right now. That is a stain on our nation comparable to the injustice done to blacks. Slavery was legal for 89 years, but it was eventually overturned by a constitutional amendment. Dred Scot said blacks could not be citizens, but that too was overturned by a constitutional amendment. And another 89 years after slavery was abolished, segregation was finally stopped. It took 143 years for women to get the right to vote. Our nation has done many wonderful things, but this track record of injustice is not one of them. Some day the citizens of our country will wake up and stand up against this evil. Oh for the day when our culture reacts to the words "lynching" and "abortion" with the same disdain.

The Good Old Days

Don’t long for “the good old days.” This is not wise. - Ecclesiastes 7:10

It was wonderful seeing so many new and old friends last night. It makes me reminisce and remember "the good old days." It would be so easy to get caught up in this unhealthily. Oh, yes, there were great times - small group runs to Sebastian Joe's, a six-night-a-week social life, free bread, sushi without worry of the cost, bike rides to Duluth, and hours just hanging out.

But there's a reason "the good old days" is in quotes - they weren't any better than "the good new days." Our memories have this wonderful ability to forget the bad stuff from the past, or at least we forget those things when we're doing this pondering of the past. What about the loneliness I had in spite of the happening social life? What about the job I hated and all the travel? What about all the sin the Lord has overcome in my life since then? What about my wife, whom I had not yet met, or my daughter, who was not even alive yet? And what about all the friends whom I see regularly now? Aren't those relationships special and worthy of some real-time reminiscing?

I guess all I can say is it was great seeing my old friends. They all have a very special place in my heart. I am who I am in large part because of them. I don't miss my past though. I'm glad I'm living in the present. This is the best year of my life. . .so far.

Knowledge of the Lord

And I will stretch out my hand against them and make the land desolate and waste, in all their dwelling places, from the wilderness to Riblah. Then they will know that I am the LORD. -Eze 6:14

When I think of how God reveals himself, I usually think of happy things. He might heal a sickness, or fix a broken marriage, or make the stars shine extra beautifully on a warm spring evening. This passage teaches a second dimension of the Lord. He sometimes reveals himself through disaster. Disobedience gets punished--whether by the sword or famine or hell. And God's punishment reveals his wrath as much as his grace reveals his love.

Severed from Christ

You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace. - Gal 5:4

The problem is not with obeying the law. The problem is in seeking to by justified by our obeying the law. “Faith working through love” (v6b) is a summary of what it means to obey the law. Perverting God's wonderful law into a means of putting God into our debt severs us from Christ.

Spirit Walk

"If we live by the Spirit, let us also walk by the Spirit." -Gal 5:25

The Spirit gives us life--life to our mortal bodies, everlasting life, life with Christ. Therefore, we must walk with the Spirit. This is the motivation for all our obedience--gratitude!

Led by the Spirit - Part 1

But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law. -Gal 5:18

We love to run to this verse to say we're not under the law. We like to think this verse gives us freedom to do whatever we want. That is not what this verse means. This verse is expounding on Jesus' teaching that you cannot serve two masters--you either obey the Spirit or obey the flesh. Then Paul rattles off a slew of tell-tale signs you're following the flesh and issues the solemn warning that people who practice these will not inherit the kingdom like they think they will.

"Now the works of the flesh are evident:

• sexual immorality, ("adultery" in KJV)
• impurity, ("fornication" in KJV)
• sensuality,
• idolatry,
• sorcery,
• enmity,
• strife,
• jealousy,
• fits of anger,
• rivalries,
• dissensions,
• divisions,
• envy,
• drunkenness,
• orgies,
• and things like these.

"I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God." -Gal 5:9-21

Obedience

Consecrate yourselves, therefore, and be holy, for I am the LORD your God. Keep my statutes and do them; I am the LORD who sanctifies you. -Lev 20:7-8

God gives us two reasons to obey him:

1. Obey him because he is the LORD. Implied here is that he is holy.
2. Obey him because he sanctifies us. He does the work of changing our heart and making us clean, yet/because of this we are to obey him.

Both of these reasons are a response to God's character and work. Neither are a means to earn salvation.

Shave and a Hair Cut

You shall not round off the hair on your temples or mar the edges of your beard. - Lev 19:27

Why do we Christians ignore this command but stand firmly on those preceding and following it? We would never condone fortune telling or interpreting omens (v26). We do not allow cutting our bodies for the dead (v28) or making our daughters prostitutes (v29). So why is my haircut and clean-shaven face OK? Any feedback is greatly desired!

Whoring After Goat Demons

So they shall no more sacrifice their sacrifices to goat demons, after whom they whore. -Lev 17:7a

Sometimes I wonder why some of the random, obvious things have to be written in the Bible. Unfortunately it's because we humans are so creative in our sinning, and so blind of our sins' sinfulness. It's unimaginable that God would have to tell his chosen people that whoring after goat demons is a bad thing, but apparently he did. That's why we have Leviticus 17-19. . .

Bite and Devour

For the whole law is fulfilled in one word: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." But if you bite and devour one another, watch out that you are not consumed by one another. -Gal 5:14-15

Why do we need to warned about being consumed by one another in the context of controversy, but not in the context of love? Why does Paul simply tell us to love each other--with no qualifiers about taking it too far? But when it comes to arguing, he immediately tells us to be careful not to be consumed by it? I can think of two reasons:

1. Love doesn't threaten to consume us because it is contrary to our selfish nature. Whereas arguing and divisiveness is so natural too us that it easily will consume us if we aren't careful.
2. We can't take our loving too far. If we were somehow consumed by love, that would be a good thing, so there is no need to be warned against it.

Sennacherib, King of Assyria

(The Word of the Lord concerning Sennacherib, king of Assyria) "By your servants you have mocked the Lord, and you have said, 'With my many chariots I have gone up the heights of the mountains, to the far recesses of Lebanon, to cut down its tallest cedars, its choicest cypresses, to come to its remotest height, its most fruitful forest. I dug wells and drank waters, to dry up with the sole of my foot all the streams of Egypt.'

"'Have you not heard that I determined it long ago? I planned from days of old what now I bring to pass, that you should make fortified cities crash into heaps of ruins, while their inhabitants, shorn of strength, are dismayed and confounded, and have become like plants of the field and like tender grass, like grass on the housetops, blighted before it is grown.

"'I know your sitting down and your going out and coming in, and your raging against me. Because you have raged against me and your complacency has come to my ears, I will put my hook in your nose and my bit in your mouth, and I will turn you back on the way by which you came.'
(Isa 37:24-29)

This passage affects me on multiple levels. On the one hand, it thrills me to see the sovereignty of God. I love seeing how God is in such utter control that these mighty Assyrians are nothing to be feared and mere putty in His hands. The Israelites do not even need to pick up weapons because the angel of the Lord is going to strike 185,000 Assyrian warriors dead in the middle of the night!

But on the other hand, this passage challenges my understanding of God deeply. How can our "God of love" plan the destruction of cities and make the people like grass on housetops? This is obviously an oversimplification of God's character. He is so much more than merely a God of love. . .or maybe my finite, mortal, temporal mind cannot grasp all the intricacies of God's expression of his love.