Currently Reading 1984 (Signet Classics) By George Orwell see related

Movin' Out

   During these past couple of days I have been working on moving into my first apartment. The idea is exciting for me. I finally get to be outside of a christian "bubble" and be in the world so that I can witness to the world. I'm not saying that a "bubble" is a bad thing, but it does have its cons. No one in the normal world really knows what's happening inside of a Christian bubble. The Word of Life Bible Institute and Baptist Bible College are two bubbles that I am reffering to. Most of the people in the surrounding have never heard of such intitutions and if they do know of the institution, they know very little of what happens at such places. I find this to be very sad because the things that happen inside institution like BBC and WOLBI are amazing. People come to know the saving grace of Christ and have their life changed in such a manner that it affects other believers in the church. The surrounding community should know what's happening and be jealous of the relationship that we believers have with our Creator. The people of the church do not live in communes together but in the community to impact the community. So my point is that I am happy that I can be part of community so that I can have the opportunity to share my testimony and my reason of the hope that is within me.

   I like being off campus for another reason though,-- I am not in the dorm at night. I hate being in a college dorm at night. No one wants to go to sleep. I do not understand college students feel the need to stay up into the wee hours of the morning and then complain about how early they have to wake up the next day. I say stop complaining about a lack of sleep, stop taking two hour naps in the afternoon and go to bed a decent time. I see no reason to stay up till two o'clock in the morning so I can play my guitar, or listen to music, or to surf the net, or to even study. One just needs to be a wise steward of his time.

   Moving to my apartment did bring an odd feeling to mind though. I have never been totally indepent before. I am not uncomfortable with the idea, but I feel like I finally am growing up. I may change my mind later though. I have been wanting to be have a voice that will be heard. I feel like no one ever does listen to me sometimes which can be frustating, especially for a person with the message of the gospel. I know that I am entitled to my own opinions, but my opinions are no good if no one is responsible to listen to such opinions. I understand that the mind is a terrible thing to waste, but this happens on a consistent with the philosophy of modernity. I know that what I have is radical truth that can change the world because it is transcendant above the world. Yet will the world listen to the message of faith, hope and love? No, probably not, but God always His remnant and His Word will not return to Him in vain. I guess this rant mainly comes from my desire to be a professor at a college, university or some Bible institute.

   Overall, I do think that my first apartment is pretty nice. The place is no palace, but feel that I am getting my bang for my buck with this apartment. The apartment is in a nice neighborhood and it is decently sized. I do not think there would be a point in getting anything bigger than what I have now.

   I really need to praise God for how He has been providing for me. He promised to meet my needs according to His riches in glory and He has kept His promise. I have two recliners, couch, desk, full size bed, bedroom set, hutch, almost all the kitchen cooking utensils, microwave, and a laptop computer, all these things were given to me at some point in time. I never had to spend a single penny for any of this. I told my Dad that I was expecting my first apartment to have milk crates for the furniture and I really was not expecting any of this to happen. My Dad only replied saying that's called Jehovah Jireh; God supplies.

   My next step into maturity, at least for me, is marriage. The wedding is only a little more than a month away and I can't wait. I will be entering into a perfect union with the woman I love. What an amazing God ordained covenant.

   Surely my cup is running over.

Currently Reading The Soul of Science: Christian Faith and Natural Philosophy (Turning Point Christian Worldview Series) By Nancy Pearcey, Charles Thaxton see related

Exceedingly, Abundantly, Above All

            Today I had a moment of an epiphany concerning the love of God within the salvation experience of a Christian. Christians sometimes forget where they have come in God’s perspective and where there are now. If Christians were to keep their salvation experience always in the front of their minds then some revolutionary thinking and actions would take place. I am trying to speak as in a way to model after the epistle of Ephesians; for the epistle presents doctrine and correct thinking (chapters 1-3) before it discusses the actions of the believer and the church (chapters 4-6). However, the epiphany was when I concluded that salvation is much more than just what first comes to mind. Salvation does much more than just resolving the issue of the depraved man traveling the broad road of destruction. What Christians forget about on a frequent basis is the second half of the “Good News.” The idea is of an “A what is more B.” At the first look of the gospel, a person sees action of God “A,” but what is even greater is action of God “B.” Action of God “A” resolves the issue of the unsaved, but action of God “B” is the bestowing of God’s riches to the believer. For example, what makes the “Good News” great is not just that I am now free from sin (action of God A), but that I am able and entitled to pursue righteousness (riches from God B). This demonstration of God’s love in salvation continues, for salvation is much more than the mercy of God, but the grace that super-abounds. Salvation is more than the propitiation of God satisfied at the cross of Christ, but the justification of the believer. Salvation is more than being no longer condemned to eternal damnation, but the promise of eternal life and a union with Christ. Salvation is more than the rescue from the grave, but it is the resurrection of the believer at the sounding of the last trumpet. Salvation is more than no longer being an enemy of God, but that believers have been adopted and are called His children.

            These extensions of God’s love in salvation are the riches of Christ, not material wealth. When Paul tells the believers in the epistle of Ephesians that “God is able to do exceedingly, abundantly, above all that we ask or think,” Paul is speaking of the position of the believer in Christ that results from salvation (3:20). Therefore, a believer can easily understand why the love of Christ passes knowledge for man would have been able to think of the redemption plan on his own. Try to think of the width of God’s love and know that it wider. Try to understand the length of God’s love and know that it is longer. Try to comprehend the depth of God’s love and know that it is deeper. Try to reason the height of God’s love and know that it is higher.

Currently Reading Bonhoeffer Speaks Today: Following Jesus at All Costs By Mark Devine see related

Harmony of Science and Scripture

            For decades, the church has struggled with how it should respond to the science of the origins. Typically, there are four responses a person can choose when he encounters the debate of theism versus naturalism. One, he can forsake all theology because the mainstream scientific community has persuaded him to naturalism. Two, he takes the authority of science over scripture by rejecting any Biblical teaching that does not fit within the realms of mainstream science. Three, the person takes the authority of scripture over science by refuting any science that does not fit within doctrine. Lastly, a person will educate himself only with scripture and ignore anything science may have to offer in any way. An unbeliever will always make the first response. The atheist will claim that there is no God and any religion is superstition. Therefore, the atheist is intolerant to the idea of a theistic theory of origins and the debate ends there. The person with the fourth response made a conscience decision not to listen to the argument. Therefore, the debate cannot even begin because he is intolerant as well. Responses three and four are theistic theories of origin and are concerned about what authority supersedes the other authority. The debate focuses on whether the authority of science should be taken over scripture or visa versa.

            There are two main theistic theories of origin. There is the day-age theory and the young-earth theory. The Day-age theory proposes that the earth is billions of years old and that the days of Genesis chapter one are ages or periods of time. Young-earth creationists believe that the earth is only about seven thousand years old and take the days of Genesis chapter one to be literal twenty-four hour periods. The choice of the best theory is based on three areas of concern: the application of hermeneutics, the choice of superior authority and the incorporation of soteriological theology. Ultimately, young-earth creationism wins because it keeps a consistent hermeneutic, has proper priority of authority, can be accepted with operational science and creates a foundation for soteriological theology.

            The first area of concern in the debate is hermeneutics. A hermeneutic is the style of interpretation used upon a text. Both views of theistic origin believe they are using a literal hermeneutic of Genesis chapter one. However, both disagree on the interpretation of the word “day.” Young-earth creationists claim the word “day” represents a literal twenty-four hour period. Even the phrase “the evening and the morning were the same day” appears multiple times throughout Genesis one. Also the word “day” is used with a number indicating a measurement of time. Lastly, the word “day” in Genesis one seems to be a twenty-four hour period because it is a model set for man to follow in his calendar. The reason for man to follow God’s example in the workweek is found in the Ten Commandments. “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work… For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and on rested on the seventh day” (Exodus 20:8-11). Day-age theorists have a problem with the days of Genesis one interpreted as twenty four hours periods. According to day-age theorists, “science proves an old earth [therefore,] the text must be reinterpreted” (Sarfati 58). In order for the text to fit science, the word “day” comes to mean an age or a long period of time; hence, the name for day-age theorists.

            The second area of concern in the debate between day-age and young earth theorists is what each side decides as the superior authority. This was somewhat hinted upon earlier. Young earth creationists believe the Bible to the supreme authority and nothing should come in the way of interpreting scripture. Young-earth creationists believe scripture to be historically sound. Some common names among historical apologists are Josh McDowell and Lee Strobel. Young-earth creationist would point to these men to get such historical proof. Also, they claim that all scripture is inerrant (cf. 2 Peter 1:21; 2 Timothy 3:16). Day-age theorists, however, do not accept Genesis chapters one through eleven as history. “There is no possibility whatsoever that theistic evolutionists will accept the Genesis account as literal history, since to do so would align it squarely against evolution. Eventually, then, the events recorded in the first eleven chapters of Genesis somehow must be relegated to the status of a myth or an allegory” (Thompson 136). Day-age and theistic evolutionists will agree on the authority of science because science, in its own way, presents a false idea of inerrancy. Charley Dewberry explains by stating “Our culture’s assumption that science is the ultimate authority has deep roots. ‘Objective science’ refers to the idea behind this authority, that the scientific method (virtually) eliminates the influence of the scientist’s subjectivity, thereby producing a certain result” (19-20). Later in his book, Charley states, “there are no such things as objective facts and objective science” (103). No matter how hard a person may try, the person presuppositions will get in the way of the data. Therefore, science cannot be the supreme authority.

            The last topic of the debate is the incorporation of sotierological theology. This is an issue of concern because the origin of sin must be clearly defined in order to state the reason for salvation. Both parties agree that there is the need for salvation that comes from a sinless Savior, Jesus. Yet some factors are inconsistent in the day-age theory of the origin of sin. Young-earth creationists will immediately point to the Fall of Man as the beginning of sin. Before the Fall, mankind never felt the effects of sin, because sin was not yet committed. This meant that there was no death for both man and animal (cf. Genesis 2 and 3). To say that death did not happen becomes a problem for day-age theists. They believe a day would have lasted for at least thousands of years and that evolution was taking place during that time. Therefore, according to day-age theorists, death would have occurred before Adam and Eve were in the Garden of Eden. However, as stated previously, day-age theorists do not accept the first eleven chapters as historical fact. They will accept the account of the Fall as “‘a true myth’ – that, though Eden is on no map and Adam’s fall fits no historical calendar… we are fallen creatures, and the story of Adam and Eve is the story of you and me” (Ryrie 230). Therefore, day-age theorists may agree on the depravity of mankind but will not agree on the sin nature started in the first place. There is still no answer as to where sin came from in the first place.

            If a theory has multiple inconsistencies and faults, then a person should not believe such a theory. Day-age theorists struggle with keeping consistency in hermeneutics, priority of authority and theology. Therefore, a person should not consider the day-age theory to be the proper theory of origins. Young-earth creationism is the only theory of origins that remains consistent in these three areas. Therefore, a person is forced to choose young-earth creationism as the only acceptable theory of origins.

Works Cited

Dewberry, Charley. Intelligent Discourse. Eugene, Oregon: Gutenberg College Press, 2006

Holy Bible: New King James Version. Nashville, Tennessee: Thomas Nelson Inc., 1985

Ryrie, Charles. Basic Theology. Chicago, Illinois: Moody Press, 1999

Sarfati, Jonathon. Refuting Compromise. Green Forest, Arkansas: Master Book Inc., 2004

Thompson, Bert. Creation Compromises. 2^nd ed. Montgomery, Alabama: Apologetic Press Inc., 2000

Currently Reading Stop Dating the Church!: Fall in Love with the Family of God (Lifechange Books) By Joshua Harris see related

The Fruits of Adam

             Every person has witnessed other people suffer. A mother dies of a heart attack at the age of forty-five and leaves behind a fourteen-year-old son crying out for her. A teenager struggles with cutting herself, but tells no one who can help her. Another mother is carried to the front of the church while crying, “My baby, my baby,” while staring down at the lifeless body of her daughter who died in a car accident. Another teenager struggles with suicide and today she lives with the father of her future child. These people are real and their stories are real. All of the above-mentioned people have the same question. They want to know why. Everyone has questioned why there is suffering in the world. To answer this question one must find when suffering and death started. The one book that records the start of suffering is the Bible. The Bible starts with why the world suffers and experiences death. The Bible tells the reader of man’s own decision to allow sin into his world. For it was man’s decision, not God’s, to have the world suffer and allow death. The Fall of man is the reason for having physical death, spiritual death, an inheritance of a sin nature and suffering for both humanity and nature.

            The Fall of man, or sometimes referred to as just the Fall, happened in the Garden of Eden. The event is in Genesis chapter three. The pretext of Genesis 3 is God creates the universe and places Adam in the Garden of Eden. The Garden of Eden was a perfect place and the whole world was without death and suffering before the Fall. John Calvin states that before the Fall we lived, “that we might cultivate a holy and honorable life, and regard a blessed immortality as our destined aim (book 2, chap. 1, sec, 1). Adam and his wife, Eve, were given only one commandment: not to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. If any of the two were to eat of the tree, they would die (Genesis 2:17). In the next chapter of Genesis, Satan deceives Eve and eats of the tree that God had commanded not to eat of. Eve then gives some of the fruit to Adam and he willingly eats the fruit with full knowledge of what he is doing (I Timothy 2:14). God visits Adam and Eve in the Garden and puts a curse not on just Adam and Eve, but on all of man and nature for what Adam and Eve have done.

            The results of the Fall are still seen today. Physical death is the most visibly seen effect. As stated before, before the Fall man had eternal life. However, God cannot tolerate sin.  Physical death started at the Fall because it was the first sin committed. “For the wages of sin is death” (Romans 6:23). Physical death is found in the curse in Genesis chapter three verse nineteen. “For dust you are, and to dust you shall return.” The hope of an eternal life on earth is now dismal. Paul writes about physical death in two separate epistles. “Therefore just as through one man [Adam] sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned” (Romans 5:12). “For since by man [Adam] came death… For as in Adam, all die” (I Corinthians 15:21-22).

            The biggest concern for the authors of the Bible was not physical death but spiritual death. God told Adam that in the same day he would eat the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, he would surely die (Genesis 2:17). Adam did not die physically for years to come, but Adam did die in a spiritual sense. Ryrie explains by saying, “This [the Fall] also brought both spiritual and physical death to the race. Death is always separation; immediately Adam and Eve experienced spiritual separation” (234). The spiritual separation between man and God can be seen very easily immediately after the Fall. “And they heard the sound of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God among the trees of the garden” (Genesis 3:8). Adam and Eve were ashamed of themselves for what they had done. Before the Fall, Adam was openly communicating with God. After the Fall, Adam did not want to be seen by God.

            Another result of the Fall is suffering in humanity and nature. As mentioned before, physical death is a result of the Fall. Furthermore, death not only extended to man but to the rest of nature. Animals now have to struggle for survival because of the Fall. The curse went further than just death for nature. “The ground was cursed because of Adam’s sin so that it would grow thorns and thistles” (Ryrie, 235; Genesis 3:17). One of many examples of suffering in humanity is that God caused pain in childbirth. Another example is ground beginning to grow thistles to make things difficult for farming. (cf. Genesis 3:16).

            The most theologically debated effect of the Fall is the inheritance of a sin nature. Every person is born with a sin nature. A person does not have to try to be sinful; the natural desires of a person are immoral and heinous. David wrote in the Psalms that, “I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin my mother conceived me” (51:5). Even scripture shows the nature is passed to Adam’s offspring when the genealogy was written stating, “And [Adam] begot a son in his likeness, after his image” (Genesis 5:3). Calvin stated that, “Augustine, labored to show, that we are not corrupted by an acquired wickedness, but bring innate corruption from the very womb” (book 2, ch.1, sec. 5).

            The curse from the Fall caused many effects for all of man and nature. Many of the effects of the Fall were not discussed. However, there is a promise found in the curse. “He shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise His heel” (Genesis 3:15). The “He” is Christ. The prophecy has only been halfway fulfilled. Satan bruised Christ’s heel at the cross, however Christ will crush Satan’s head when He returns to set up His kingdom. Christ will crush the curse as far as it is found. For Christ will make the earth be how it originally was in the Garden of Eden. Ryrie finished his chapter with this thought, “The Fall affected all human beings, bring depravity and death, and it will always be the darkest hour of all human history; yet where sin abounded, grace superabounds, and the one who does the will of God abides forever” (236). What a glorious day it will be when the believers will be able to the lion lay down with the lamb.

Works Cited

Calvin, John. Institutes of the Christian Religion. Vol. 2. <www.e-sword.net>. Ed. Rick Meyers. 2007. 4 Vols.

Ryrie, Charles C. Basic Theology. Chicago: Moody Press. 1999.

The Holy Bible. Nashville, TN: Nelson Publishers. 2005.

Mono and Diamonds

I know I haven't written anything on a more personal level, so this entry is a small update on what been happening with me since I got home for Christmas break.

I guess the best of my Christmas break would be getting engaged to Jordan. I asked her the big question on Christmas Eve. She was going to be leaving early on Christmas day so Jordan and I would not be able to celebrate Christmas on Christmas day. So we decided to do Christmas a day early for the gifts that my family bought her and what she got for my family, and of course what we bought for each other. She bought me a new three-button suit and I bought her a few little "comfort" items: the kind of stuff to make a girl feel spoiled. Anywho, after we all done exchanging gifts, I told her that I had one more thing for her. I reached under the chair for the ring I hid the night before. Meanwhile I told Jordan that the next was the promise of a lifetime. Then she got pretty curious as to what I was talking about. I needed to open the box for the ring without her realizing what I was doing, so I did what any romantic guy would do so she would be distracted from what I was doing. I kissed her and it worked. I got the box open before she relized I had something in my hands. I showed her the ring that she picked out six months earlier but never knew I bought and I asked her the big question, "Will you marry me?" I was going to say something a little more romantic like, " Will you let me be your Husband?" I was too nervous to think though, so the only thing that came out of my mouth was the standard, normal and traditional question. Of course Jordan said, "Yes." We hugged and she cried, but everyone else did not hear her say, "Yes." They knew she would, but figured they would tease us a little and asked if she said yes. I knew that she would say yes anyhow. I could have counted on her saying yes as much as counting on the sun to rise in the morning. Jordan then proceeded to make a dozen phone calls to let her friends know of the good news. I made two phone calls. One call to my best friend who was not home and one to my grandparents.

Ever since the engagement Jordan has been making a lot of headway on plans for the wedding. We have decided to have the wedding at Bethany Camp in this coming June. She of course is really excited about everything, so much that she and I have pretty well set on who is going to be in the wedding already and what the schedule is going to be like for that day.

On the other my health has not been fair to me. A couple of days before Christmas I came down with Mono. I have Mono. Right now I lymph node on the side of my throat that looks big enough to be a golf ball. My tonsuls are also about the same size as the stupid lymph node. I have a constant fever that wavers beteen 99 and 101 degrees and I have a rash that covers my entire body and make me look like a pizza. The rash is one of the worst parts. The dumb rash will itch to all hours of the night and won't let me sleep. I have had to bathes at three in the morning to try to relieve myself of the burning sensation. I guess the worst part about this thing is that the world does not stop moving just because I am sick. I was supposed to be working and seeing friends on the weekends.

I guess putting a diamond ring on Jordan's finger outweights my mono. So overall, I really should not complain about this past Christmas vacation. I back to school this coming Sunday.