Jul 2009
Nature's God is the human Messiah!
28/July/2009 08:26 Filed in: Weekly Column
In the article a couple of weeks ago we mentioned the quotation from Gandhi where he stated that he did not have a problem with Christ but he did have a problem with Christians. As time has past since that article I have been pondering in a similar vein, why so many people don’t seem to have a problem with Nature’s God but they also have a problem with His Christians.
Now an easy answer would be that the gospel is offensive to sinners, thus when they see Christians for some reason they are turned off. Of course the underlying premise behind this hypothesis is that pagans find Christian piety offensive. But this begs a much deeper question. “Is the piety in question genuine humble piety, or some sort of self-righteous legalism accompanied by a smug superior attitude?”
Of course those who live lives of self-righteous legalism and a smug superior attitude will answer, that pagans are turned off by their personal humble piety. So we can quickly see that any meaningful discussion here achieves nothing of substance.
Growing up in the Lutheran Church one of my favorite hymns was Beautiful Savior. In many other churches it is known as “Fairest Lord Jesus.” It seems to stem from Jesuit roots about 1677, but for some reason it has achieved the common title as the “Crusader’s Hymn,” but has no connection to the actual Holy Land Crusades.
Beautiful Savior, King of Creation
Son of God and Son of Man!
Truly I’d love Thee, truly I’d serve Thee,
Light of my soul, my joy, my crown.
Fair are the meadows, Fair are the woodlands,
Robed in the flowers of blooming spring;
Jesus is fairer, Jesus is purer,
He makes our sorrowing spirit sing.
Fair is the sunshine, Fair is the moonlight,
Bright the sparkling stars on high;
Jesus shines brighter, Jesus shines purer
Than all the angels in the sky.
Beautiful Savior, Lord of the nations,
Son of God and Son of Man!
Glory and honor, Praise, adoration
Now and forevermore be Thine!
The song in its four short verses ties a strong bond between Jesus the human Savior and the Creator Jesus and Creation. What is extremely interesting is in what we have seen is the non-Christian disconnect between the Creator and the Savior or Messiah of humanity. Putting that in the same construct as with Gandhi and others, “I don’t have a problem with Creation, but I do have a problem with the Creator. What they don’t seem to get is that the Christ Jesus that they don’t have a problem in the Gandhi context is in the other context the one and the same Creator.
Read More...
Now an easy answer would be that the gospel is offensive to sinners, thus when they see Christians for some reason they are turned off. Of course the underlying premise behind this hypothesis is that pagans find Christian piety offensive. But this begs a much deeper question. “Is the piety in question genuine humble piety, or some sort of self-righteous legalism accompanied by a smug superior attitude?”
Of course those who live lives of self-righteous legalism and a smug superior attitude will answer, that pagans are turned off by their personal humble piety. So we can quickly see that any meaningful discussion here achieves nothing of substance.
Growing up in the Lutheran Church one of my favorite hymns was Beautiful Savior. In many other churches it is known as “Fairest Lord Jesus.” It seems to stem from Jesuit roots about 1677, but for some reason it has achieved the common title as the “Crusader’s Hymn,” but has no connection to the actual Holy Land Crusades.
Beautiful Savior, King of Creation
Son of God and Son of Man!
Truly I’d love Thee, truly I’d serve Thee,
Light of my soul, my joy, my crown.
Fair are the meadows, Fair are the woodlands,
Robed in the flowers of blooming spring;
Jesus is fairer, Jesus is purer,
He makes our sorrowing spirit sing.
Fair is the sunshine, Fair is the moonlight,
Bright the sparkling stars on high;
Jesus shines brighter, Jesus shines purer
Than all the angels in the sky.
Beautiful Savior, Lord of the nations,
Son of God and Son of Man!
Glory and honor, Praise, adoration
Now and forevermore be Thine!
The song in its four short verses ties a strong bond between Jesus the human Savior and the Creator Jesus and Creation. What is extremely interesting is in what we have seen is the non-Christian disconnect between the Creator and the Savior or Messiah of humanity. Putting that in the same construct as with Gandhi and others, “I don’t have a problem with Creation, but I do have a problem with the Creator. What they don’t seem to get is that the Christ Jesus that they don’t have a problem in the Gandhi context is in the other context the one and the same Creator.
Read More...
July 26th - The difference between the Lord's supper and the papal mass.
25/July/2009 13:23 Filed in: Heidleberg Catechism
Lord's Day 30
80. Q. What difference is there between the Lord's supper and the papal mass?
A. The Lord's supper testifies to us, first, that we have complete forgiveness of all our sins through the one sacrifice of Jesus Christ, which He Himself accomplished on the cross once for all;[1] and, second, that through the Holy Spirit we are grafted into Christ,[2] who with His true body is now in heaven at the right hand of the Father,[3] and this is where He wants to be worshipped.[4] But the mass teaches, first, that the living and the dead do not have forgiveness of sins through the suffering of Christ unless He is still offered for them daily by the priests; and, second, that Christ is bodily present in the form of bread and wine, and there is to be worshipped. Therefore the mass is basically nothing but a denial of the one sacrifice and suffering of Jesus Christ, and an accursed idolatry.
[1] Matt. 26:28; John 19:30; Heb. 7:27; 9:12, 25, 26; 10:10-18. [2] I Cor. 6:17; 10:16, 17. [3] Joh. 20:17; Acts 7:55, 56; Heb. 1:3; 8:1. [4] John 4:21-24; Phil. 3:20; Col. 3:1; I Thess. 1:10.
81. Q. Who are to come to the table of the Lord?
A. Those who are truly displeased with themselves because of their sins and yet trust that these are forgiven them and that their remaining weakness is covered by the suffering and death of Christ, and who also desire more and more to strengthen their faith and amend their life. But hypocrites and those who do not repent eat and drink judgment upon themselves.[1]
[1] I Cor. 10:19-22; 11:26-32.
82. Q. Are those also to be admitted to the Lord's supper who by their confession and life show that they are unbelieving and ungodly?
A. No, for then the covenant of God would be profaned and His wrath kindled against the whole congregation.[1] Therefore, according to the command of Christ and His apostles, the Christian church is duty-bound to exclude such persons by the keys of the kingdom of heaven, until they amend their lives.
[1] Ps. 50:16; Is. 1:11-17; I Cor. 11:17-34.
80. Q. What difference is there between the Lord's supper and the papal mass?
A. The Lord's supper testifies to us, first, that we have complete forgiveness of all our sins through the one sacrifice of Jesus Christ, which He Himself accomplished on the cross once for all;[1] and, second, that through the Holy Spirit we are grafted into Christ,[2] who with His true body is now in heaven at the right hand of the Father,[3] and this is where He wants to be worshipped.[4] But the mass teaches, first, that the living and the dead do not have forgiveness of sins through the suffering of Christ unless He is still offered for them daily by the priests; and, second, that Christ is bodily present in the form of bread and wine, and there is to be worshipped. Therefore the mass is basically nothing but a denial of the one sacrifice and suffering of Jesus Christ, and an accursed idolatry.
[1] Matt. 26:28; John 19:30; Heb. 7:27; 9:12, 25, 26; 10:10-18. [2] I Cor. 6:17; 10:16, 17. [3] Joh. 20:17; Acts 7:55, 56; Heb. 1:3; 8:1. [4] John 4:21-24; Phil. 3:20; Col. 3:1; I Thess. 1:10.
81. Q. Who are to come to the table of the Lord?
A. Those who are truly displeased with themselves because of their sins and yet trust that these are forgiven them and that their remaining weakness is covered by the suffering and death of Christ, and who also desire more and more to strengthen their faith and amend their life. But hypocrites and those who do not repent eat and drink judgment upon themselves.[1]
[1] I Cor. 10:19-22; 11:26-32.
82. Q. Are those also to be admitted to the Lord's supper who by their confession and life show that they are unbelieving and ungodly?
A. No, for then the covenant of God would be profaned and His wrath kindled against the whole congregation.[1] Therefore, according to the command of Christ and His apostles, the Christian church is duty-bound to exclude such persons by the keys of the kingdom of heaven, until they amend their lives.
[1] Ps. 50:16; Is. 1:11-17; I Cor. 11:17-34.
Capitalism's Cancer
22/July/2009 12:14 Filed in: Weekly Column
A number of years ago I was familiar with a pastor that regularly told his congregation not to be surprised when they were confronted with sinners sinning. He likened the sinning to their job description. The pastor had a little trouble however understanding that Christians sin also. In his theology by shear hard work, diligence, and a little empowerment from the Holy Spirit all saints could lead the victorious life.
Somewhat as the members of the pastor’s congregation, we should not be surprised when capitalists make lots of money. It is their job description. Just like with the church and sin, it is likewise with capitalism. Just how much money is the just fruits of one’s labor and when does the fruit turn to greed? We are not going to handle that debate other than to comment it pretty much depends, as in church, on whether you are on the outside looking in, or on the inside looking out.
Humans, as stated in the Declaration of Independence, are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Beginning with Scottish jurisprudence, defining British common law, and codified by American legal precedents, we give corporations personal judicial standing – to make money. This legal standing is the basis for the economic system we call capitalism. However to say the corporation is evil by design is to levy our present sins upon these enterprising ancestors.
When you hear or read critics of capitalism, for the most part the critique says that corporations have no soul, all they want to do is make money, where is the social justice, or an now popular term, empathy? However western civilization never endowed corporations with such human attributes. Corporations are a person in the sense of a very limited individual pursuit of happiness, directly flowing from the process of generating monetary capital to produce human wealth. That wealth that flows to humans, is hence supposed to be utilized for the pursuit of happiness, liberty, and life; including benevolence, stewardship, and charity among a host of others.
It logically and legally follows that the outward folly in capitalism is not with its structure, but more to the reality that the persons who obtain that wealth do not apply it to any means other than reinvestment to make more money and by extension produce greater wealth, essentially only for themselves.
Going back to 1776 and Adam Smith’s “Wealth of Nations” there was an “invisible hand” that guided this wealth production. It was and is still generally assumed that free (laissez faire) markets are the manifestation of that invisible hand. Those markets defined a basket of goods and services, in recent history emphasizing the consumer.
Read More...
Somewhat as the members of the pastor’s congregation, we should not be surprised when capitalists make lots of money. It is their job description. Just like with the church and sin, it is likewise with capitalism. Just how much money is the just fruits of one’s labor and when does the fruit turn to greed? We are not going to handle that debate other than to comment it pretty much depends, as in church, on whether you are on the outside looking in, or on the inside looking out.
Humans, as stated in the Declaration of Independence, are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Beginning with Scottish jurisprudence, defining British common law, and codified by American legal precedents, we give corporations personal judicial standing – to make money. This legal standing is the basis for the economic system we call capitalism. However to say the corporation is evil by design is to levy our present sins upon these enterprising ancestors.
When you hear or read critics of capitalism, for the most part the critique says that corporations have no soul, all they want to do is make money, where is the social justice, or an now popular term, empathy? However western civilization never endowed corporations with such human attributes. Corporations are a person in the sense of a very limited individual pursuit of happiness, directly flowing from the process of generating monetary capital to produce human wealth. That wealth that flows to humans, is hence supposed to be utilized for the pursuit of happiness, liberty, and life; including benevolence, stewardship, and charity among a host of others.
It logically and legally follows that the outward folly in capitalism is not with its structure, but more to the reality that the persons who obtain that wealth do not apply it to any means other than reinvestment to make more money and by extension produce greater wealth, essentially only for themselves.
Going back to 1776 and Adam Smith’s “Wealth of Nations” there was an “invisible hand” that guided this wealth production. It was and is still generally assumed that free (laissez faire) markets are the manifestation of that invisible hand. Those markets defined a basket of goods and services, in recent history emphasizing the consumer.
Read More...
July 19th – Bread and Wine
18/July/2009 13:11 Filed in: Heidleberg Catechism
Lord's Day 29
78. Q. Are then the bread and wine changed into the real body and blood of Christ?
A. No. Just as the water of baptism is not changed into the blood of Christ and is not the washing away of sins itself but is simply God's sign and pledge,[1] so also the bread in the Lord's supper does not become the body of Christ itself,[2] although it is called Christ's body[3] in keeping with the nature and usage of sacraments.[4]
[1] Eph. 5:26; Tit. 3:5. [2] Matt. 26:26-29. [3] I Cor. 10:16, 17; 11:26-28. [4] Gen. 17:10, 11; Ex. 12:11, 13; I Cor. 10:3, 4; I Pet. 3:21
79. Q. Why then does Christ call the bread His body and the cup His blood, or the new covenant in His blood, and why does Paul speak of a participation in the body and blood of Christ?
A. Christ speaks in this way for a good reason: He wants to teach us by His supper that as bread and wine sustain us in this temporal life, so His crucified body and shed blood are true food and drink for our souls to eternal life.[1] But, even more important, He wants to assure us by this visible sign and pledge, first, that through the working of the Holy Spirit we share in His true body and blood as surely as we receive with our mouth these holy signs in remembrance of Him,[2] and, second, that all His suffering and obedience are as certainly ours as if we personally had suffered and paid for our sins.[3]
[1] John 6:51, 55. [2] I Cor. 10:16, 17; 11:26. [3] Rom. 6:5-11.
78. Q. Are then the bread and wine changed into the real body and blood of Christ?
A. No. Just as the water of baptism is not changed into the blood of Christ and is not the washing away of sins itself but is simply God's sign and pledge,[1] so also the bread in the Lord's supper does not become the body of Christ itself,[2] although it is called Christ's body[3] in keeping with the nature and usage of sacraments.[4]
[1] Eph. 5:26; Tit. 3:5. [2] Matt. 26:26-29. [3] I Cor. 10:16, 17; 11:26-28. [4] Gen. 17:10, 11; Ex. 12:11, 13; I Cor. 10:3, 4; I Pet. 3:21
79. Q. Why then does Christ call the bread His body and the cup His blood, or the new covenant in His blood, and why does Paul speak of a participation in the body and blood of Christ?
A. Christ speaks in this way for a good reason: He wants to teach us by His supper that as bread and wine sustain us in this temporal life, so His crucified body and shed blood are true food and drink for our souls to eternal life.[1] But, even more important, He wants to assure us by this visible sign and pledge, first, that through the working of the Holy Spirit we share in His true body and blood as surely as we receive with our mouth these holy signs in remembrance of Him,[2] and, second, that all His suffering and obedience are as certainly ours as if we personally had suffered and paid for our sins.[3]
[1] John 6:51, 55. [2] I Cor. 10:16, 17; 11:26. [3] Rom. 6:5-11.
Brute' admonishes humans to return to the real Golden Rule!
17/July/2009 08:08 Filed in: Et Tu Brute'
Three Medicines
15/July/2009 13:05 Filed in: Weekly Column
Somewhat building on last week’s model of hummingbirds as a natural model for humans in this new century, this week we will attempt to break down that model into three specific paradigms. Paradigm is a pretty generic concept that today we would probably call worldviews. In the past and spun through western culture they would probably call them three religions. Broadening the concept and making it, what we the enlightened would call primitive or not evolved, those indigenous peoples would probably call them three medicines.
This concept came to mind as I was reading a book on the Protestant Reformation. In that book Person A says to Person B, “You know there are two religions present in this world. One religion is true Christianity, which rests entirely upon the unmerited grace of the Savior, Jesus Christ and life, death, and resurrection to provide justification for a person’s righteousness before God.
“The second religion, and much more popular, is one in which people perform all sorts of works by which they think they can merit God’s generosity to save them from eternal damnation.
At the conclusion of that statement Person B agrees with Person A. In this particular example the first example referred to those who were part of the reformation medicine, while the second religion referred to the papists, which we would call Roman Catholics.
What the context of this conversation shows is the subtitle ascendancy through time of another worldview, religion, or medicine for it is as old as human life itself. The Bible speaks to it in the Book of Genesis as the “Fall of Man.” That story is told begins in Chapter 3 and is the underlying theme throughout the rest of the whole Bible. That medicine, promoted by the serpent, is the human desire not so much to be religious, but to be the author of religion, to become God personified.
Therefore in the flow of time and the development of human culture, we see in the light of human evolution the upward progress of humanity developing from three medicines at the beginning, to two medicines during the Reformation, until today the model to be emulated, as the highest and best representation of humanity, is our unique personal godliness. We have no need for a savior, for we will save ourselves, both individually and collectively.
So why do we need to discuss three medicines rather than just a discussion of worldviews, or religions?
Read More...
This concept came to mind as I was reading a book on the Protestant Reformation. In that book Person A says to Person B, “You know there are two religions present in this world. One religion is true Christianity, which rests entirely upon the unmerited grace of the Savior, Jesus Christ and life, death, and resurrection to provide justification for a person’s righteousness before God.
“The second religion, and much more popular, is one in which people perform all sorts of works by which they think they can merit God’s generosity to save them from eternal damnation.
At the conclusion of that statement Person B agrees with Person A. In this particular example the first example referred to those who were part of the reformation medicine, while the second religion referred to the papists, which we would call Roman Catholics.
What the context of this conversation shows is the subtitle ascendancy through time of another worldview, religion, or medicine for it is as old as human life itself. The Bible speaks to it in the Book of Genesis as the “Fall of Man.” That story is told begins in Chapter 3 and is the underlying theme throughout the rest of the whole Bible. That medicine, promoted by the serpent, is the human desire not so much to be religious, but to be the author of religion, to become God personified.
Therefore in the flow of time and the development of human culture, we see in the light of human evolution the upward progress of humanity developing from three medicines at the beginning, to two medicines during the Reformation, until today the model to be emulated, as the highest and best representation of humanity, is our unique personal godliness. We have no need for a savior, for we will save ourselves, both individually and collectively.
So why do we need to discuss three medicines rather than just a discussion of worldviews, or religions?
Read More...
July 12th – The Lord's Supper
11/July/2009 19:02 Filed in: Heidleberg Catechism
Lord's Day 28
75. Q. How does the Lord's Supper signify and seal to you that you share in Christ's one sacrifice on the cross and in all His gifts?
A. In this way: Christ has commanded me and all believers to eat of this broken bread and drink of this cup in remembrance of Him. With this command He gave these promises:[1] First, as surely as I see with my eyes the bread of the Lord broken for me and the cup given to me, so surely was His body offered for me and His blood poured out for me on the cross. Second, as surely as I receive from the hand of the minister and taste with my mouth the bread and the cup of the Lord as sure signs of Christ's body and blood, so surely does He Himself nourish and refresh my soul to everlasting life with His crucified body and shed blood.
[1] Matt. 26:26-28; Mark 14:22-24; Luke 22:19, 20; I Cor. 11:23-25.
76. Q. What does it mean to eat the crucified body of Christ and to drink His shed blood?
A. First, to accept with a believing heart all the suffering and the death of Christ, and so receive forgiveness of sins and life eternal.[1] Second, to be united more and more to His sacred body through the Holy Spirit, who lives both in Christ and in us.[2] Therefore, although Christ is in heaven[3] and we are on earth, yet we are flesh of His flesh and bone of His bones,[4] and we forever live and are governed by one Spirit, as the members of our body are by one soul.[5]
[1] John 6:35, 40, 50-54. [2] John 6:55, 56; I Cor. 12:13. [3] Acts 1:9-11; 3:21; I Cor. 11:26; Col. 3:1. [4] I Cor. 6:15, 17; Eph. 5:29, 30; I John 4:13. [5] John 6:56-58; 15:1-6; Eph. 4:15, 16; I John 3:24.
77. Q. Where has Christ promised that He will nourish and refresh believers with His body and blood as surely as they eat of this broken bread and drink of this cup?
A. In the institution of the Lord's supper: The Lord Jesus on the night when He was betrayed took bread, and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, "This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me." In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, "Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me." For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until He comes (I Corinthians 11:23-26). This promise is repeated by Paul where he says: The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread (I Corinthians 10:16, 17).
75. Q. How does the Lord's Supper signify and seal to you that you share in Christ's one sacrifice on the cross and in all His gifts?
A. In this way: Christ has commanded me and all believers to eat of this broken bread and drink of this cup in remembrance of Him. With this command He gave these promises:[1] First, as surely as I see with my eyes the bread of the Lord broken for me and the cup given to me, so surely was His body offered for me and His blood poured out for me on the cross. Second, as surely as I receive from the hand of the minister and taste with my mouth the bread and the cup of the Lord as sure signs of Christ's body and blood, so surely does He Himself nourish and refresh my soul to everlasting life with His crucified body and shed blood.
[1] Matt. 26:26-28; Mark 14:22-24; Luke 22:19, 20; I Cor. 11:23-25.
76. Q. What does it mean to eat the crucified body of Christ and to drink His shed blood?
A. First, to accept with a believing heart all the suffering and the death of Christ, and so receive forgiveness of sins and life eternal.[1] Second, to be united more and more to His sacred body through the Holy Spirit, who lives both in Christ and in us.[2] Therefore, although Christ is in heaven[3] and we are on earth, yet we are flesh of His flesh and bone of His bones,[4] and we forever live and are governed by one Spirit, as the members of our body are by one soul.[5]
[1] John 6:35, 40, 50-54. [2] John 6:55, 56; I Cor. 12:13. [3] Acts 1:9-11; 3:21; I Cor. 11:26; Col. 3:1. [4] I Cor. 6:15, 17; Eph. 5:29, 30; I John 4:13. [5] John 6:56-58; 15:1-6; Eph. 4:15, 16; I John 3:24.
77. Q. Where has Christ promised that He will nourish and refresh believers with His body and blood as surely as they eat of this broken bread and drink of this cup?
A. In the institution of the Lord's supper: The Lord Jesus on the night when He was betrayed took bread, and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, "This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me." In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, "Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me." For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until He comes (I Corinthians 11:23-26). This promise is repeated by Paul where he says: The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread (I Corinthians 10:16, 17).
Hummingbird Humans - The Model for a New Century?
08/July/2009 10:02 Filed in: Weekly Column
Hummingbirds enjoy a drink of sugar nectar at the Wal-Mart feeder before a coming rain.
Hummingbirds are one of the most interesting of God’s creatures. In the forested regions of the American West, human residents provide feeders for hummingbirds stocked with sugar water nectar as a favorite pastime.
On my property I have two such devices both of which attract the little fellows, but they do it much differently. Both feeders have glass reservoirs to hold the juice, and both have red plastic bodies, and flowers with yellow accents. Both a the bottles hold a little less than a quart of nectar which is all made in large batches, so the juice is essentially identical in each jug. (See the website article for pictures of hummingbirds and the feeders.)
One feeder has six feeding stations and came from Wal-Mart. The other, a much more sophisticated and engineered design, with four stations, was purchased from a farm and ranch supply known as Big R.
For reasons known only to the hummingbirds, the feeder from Wal-Mart continually feeds many more birds than does the Big R station. At times there is well over a dozen birds humming around the Wal-Mart, zooming here and there, grabbing quickly their chance to snap up a taste of sweetness. “Zoom, zoom, drink, and flit! Flit, flit, gulp, and zoom!”
Mean while at the Big R, three or four birds are sitting on the little perches drinking nectar at their leisure and to their fill. “Ah, life of a little hummingbird sure has good times such as this!”
Hummingbirds stop for a big gulp at the Big R feeder.
Do the hummingbirds for some reason seem to think that the nectar is different at Wal-Mart than at Big R? Just as in the real world, the prices for similar items are pretty much the same at both Wal-Mart and Big R. And just as in the real world, where the prices at Big R are a little more, those increased prices are generally reflected in higher quality. There is no difference in the nectar at either feeder.
There must be something that attracts more hummingbirds to the Wal-Mart feeder than the Big R feeder. Which brings up two questions for this article. Are hummingbirds similar in their marketing taste to their human counter parts? Second and potentially of deeper meaning, are hummingbirds as smart as humans, or have humans in this new century digressed to the intelligence of hummingbirds?
Before we look at these questions, it must be said that both humans and hummingbirds are still known for their industry. For humans to go to either Wal-Mart or Big R they must journey to Colville. The closest other locations for Wal-Mart or Big R are on the northern fringes of Spokane about sixty miles distant.
How far hummingbirds journey to my feeders I do not know, but it must be a comparable distance, in hummingbird scale, because I doubt that there is some grand design for hummingbirds to build hummingbird suburbs around human habitations. It would not be evolutionary wise to build such a sugar water paradise and then have the humans not show up on schedule to feed the little critters during the summer, or leave just when they have become accustomed to the free meals.
This evolutionary concept would also have to assume, as do many humans, that hummingbirds evolve in their lifetimes, not over eons of time. I would assume that hummingbirds adapt to their environment of that particular year and food supply. If there is a predominance of hummingbird homes near human habitation it may have to do with direct associations relating to natural habitat nothing more. So it seems just has with humans, hummingbirds seem to be attracted to Wal-Mart because it is showier than Big R.
Read More...
July 5th - Baptism
04/July/2009 12:52 Filed in: Heidleberg Catechism
Lord's Day 27
72. Q. Does this outward washing with water itself wash away sins?
A. No, only the blood of Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit cleanse us from all sins.[1]
[1] Matt. 3:11; I Pet. 3:21; I John 1:7.
73. Q. Why then does the Holy Spirit call baptism the washing of regeneration and the washing away of sins?
A. God speaks in this way for a good reason. He wants to teach us that the blood and Spirit of Christ remove our sins just as water takes away dirt from the body.[1] But, even more important, He wants to assure us by this divine pledge and sign that we are as truly cleansed from our sins spiritually as we are bodily washed with water.[2]
[1] I Cor. 6:11; Rev. 1:5; 7:14. [2] Mark 16:16; Acts 2:38; Rom. 6:3, 4; Gal. 3:27.
74. Q. Should infants, too, be baptized?
A. Yes. Infants as well as adults belong to God's covenant and congregation.[1] Through Christ's blood the redemption from sin and the Holy Spirit, who works faith, are promised to them no less than to adults.[2] Therefore, by baptism, as sign of the covenant, they must be grafted into the Christian church and distinguished from the children of unbelievers.[3] This was done in the old covenant by circumcision,[4] in place of which baptism was instituted in the new covenant.[5]
[1] Gen. 17:7; Matt. 19:14. [2] Ps. 22:11; Is. 44:1-3; Acts 2:38, 39; 16:31. [3] Acts 10:47; I Cor. 7:14. [4] Gen. 17:9-14. [5] Col. 2: 11-13.
72. Q. Does this outward washing with water itself wash away sins?
A. No, only the blood of Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit cleanse us from all sins.[1]
[1] Matt. 3:11; I Pet. 3:21; I John 1:7.
73. Q. Why then does the Holy Spirit call baptism the washing of regeneration and the washing away of sins?
A. God speaks in this way for a good reason. He wants to teach us that the blood and Spirit of Christ remove our sins just as water takes away dirt from the body.[1] But, even more important, He wants to assure us by this divine pledge and sign that we are as truly cleansed from our sins spiritually as we are bodily washed with water.[2]
[1] I Cor. 6:11; Rev. 1:5; 7:14. [2] Mark 16:16; Acts 2:38; Rom. 6:3, 4; Gal. 3:27.
74. Q. Should infants, too, be baptized?
A. Yes. Infants as well as adults belong to God's covenant and congregation.[1] Through Christ's blood the redemption from sin and the Holy Spirit, who works faith, are promised to them no less than to adults.[2] Therefore, by baptism, as sign of the covenant, they must be grafted into the Christian church and distinguished from the children of unbelievers.[3] This was done in the old covenant by circumcision,[4] in place of which baptism was instituted in the new covenant.[5]
[1] Gen. 17:7; Matt. 19:14. [2] Ps. 22:11; Is. 44:1-3; Acts 2:38, 39; 16:31. [3] Acts 10:47; I Cor. 7:14. [4] Gen. 17:9-14. [5] Col. 2: 11-13.
Free Freedom!
01/July/2009 12:38 Filed in: Weekly Column
This Saturday marks the 233rd anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence in the land that became the United States of America. It is pretty well established these men believed that with their signatures they were setting a course for a form of government that would alter many future political structures. They also realized that their very lives were pledged to make this experiment in personal liberty a reality. There was no turning back.
This week there will be various forms of speeches, articles, blogs, and just plain conversations that express the point that “freedom isn’t free.” Of course the people making these statements mean that freedom requires some sort of effort to remain a viable, or even to generate an expanding form of expression of the human spirit.
The interesting thought in all of this is “if freedom isn’t free” why to we go to such great lengths to limit freedom in all aspects of life? Why not just “Free Freedom?”
There a bumper stickers that say, “Free Tibet” and other sorts of free lands, objects, animals, and social groups, but no one seems all that interested in just “Free Freedom.”
The real reason we don’t want to Free Freedom is because in order to Free Freedom we have to give up our personal license. Put more simply, Free Freedom is a whole greater than its parts. In order for Freedom to become Free, I have to give, or surrender my Freedom license to you, and the other way around. By doing such, a sort of synergistic Freedom is created which is much more grand that just each of our respective Free parts.
While none of us have really ever experienced Free Freedom, we know it is an awesome thing. In fact Free Freedom might not be a thing at all, but must be described as a beyond human personality. This personality we cannot comprehend, but must apprehend, or probably more correctly, we will be apprehended by Free Freedom himself.
Read More...
This week there will be various forms of speeches, articles, blogs, and just plain conversations that express the point that “freedom isn’t free.” Of course the people making these statements mean that freedom requires some sort of effort to remain a viable, or even to generate an expanding form of expression of the human spirit.
The interesting thought in all of this is “if freedom isn’t free” why to we go to such great lengths to limit freedom in all aspects of life? Why not just “Free Freedom?”
There a bumper stickers that say, “Free Tibet” and other sorts of free lands, objects, animals, and social groups, but no one seems all that interested in just “Free Freedom.”
The real reason we don’t want to Free Freedom is because in order to Free Freedom we have to give up our personal license. Put more simply, Free Freedom is a whole greater than its parts. In order for Freedom to become Free, I have to give, or surrender my Freedom license to you, and the other way around. By doing such, a sort of synergistic Freedom is created which is much more grand that just each of our respective Free parts.
While none of us have really ever experienced Free Freedom, we know it is an awesome thing. In fact Free Freedom might not be a thing at all, but must be described as a beyond human personality. This personality we cannot comprehend, but must apprehend, or probably more correctly, we will be apprehended by Free Freedom himself.
Read More...