NowTHINK!AboutIt

Avoiding Hackneyed...Making Sense

Unrestricted Choice? Don’t Kid Yourself!

by Leave a Comment

Choosing Not To Choose
Is A Choice

“Choice” has been relevant to every person in every era and is part of everyone’s daily life. You can’t get out of bed in the morning without making choices.

Life’s pathway is not pre-scripted. Moving from start to finish involves many electives and the ultimate outcome for each person is the sum of those choices.

Unfortunately, choice-making isn’t fun and games. The difficulties associated with the exercise was illustrated best in Hamlet’s “to be or not to be” speech and every major philosopher has added their two cents as well. Clever sayings abound.

Choices are the hinges of destiny.

Attributed to both Edwin Markham and Pythagoras

Hindsight is 20/20

Author unknown.

And choices come in all shapes and sizes: easy, obvious, hard, intentional, blind, well thought out and so on.

You really can’t escape it. You can ignore the issue but that requires a choice, a poor one. You can choose to rely on “chance” or live “under” the circumstances but that is like choosing not to choose.

“Choice” is an essential part of human nature and history shows that it cannot be bound. Humans go places, do things, learn through experience, expand their understanding, overcome obstacles and become qualified, and all of this growth is fueled by choice. One way or another humans will exercise their abilities to choose.

Unquestioned Authority Opposed

“Choice” is the reason the Protestant Reformation came about. People refused to accept what they were told without explanation or obey bastions of authority unquestioningly. Trading our ability to reason for blind compliance is a choice human nature doesn’t easily swallow.

During the reformation the idea that authority was right simply because it was authority was rejected. Society came to realize that no one has the right to think, believe or understand for the rest of us and they chose to protest.

Tradition Rejected

The Modernist and Post Modern eras began in the mid 19th century and are characterized by the tendency to question traditional ideas in every form: religion, politics, art, and on every level. No ideas are considered sacred.

The individual became more significant and personal taste, feelings, perspectives or inclinations became dominant factors in the choices we made. The democratic approach in the extreme.

“Individualism,” the ultra antithesis of tradition, does more than just question tradition. It endorses and encourages unbounded free thinking. Now we attempt to move the boundaries to accommodate whatever choices a person happens to make.

The fixed values of tradition are no longer accepted only because “it has always been done that way.” Everything is subject to individual inspection.

The Question

But the question is: just because authority and tradition are no longer seen as guiding lights must all the choices they recommend also be recategorized?

Because authority figures couldn’t give reasonable explanations or didn’t allow for individual tastes does that mean the choices they recommended were wrong?

Should we throw out recommended choices or would it be better to vigorously investigate the reasons behind these choices? [Read more…] about Unrestricted Choice? Don’t Kid Yourself!

Jonathan Edwards Talked Hell, Promised No Heaven

by 4 Comments

If people are condemned to hell without recourse, why torment them before they go.

When Edwards Described Hell
You Felt The Flames

I’m not sure what you would call it but the congregation’s response to Jonathan Edward’s famous sermon, Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God, was not a revival.

He wasn’t speaking to heretics, hecklers or blasphemers. In fact, his hearers weren’t even skeptical. They were regular congregants and they were anything but slack. They endured long, dry, complicated, and often irrelevant or condemning discussions on Bible topics every week.

Deadening, yes, but showing up every week was a sign of determined commitment. They weren’t indifferent.

The services were probably lifeless – the effect had to be numbing – but we can’t blame the attenders for that and there is no reason to accuse them of being spiritually casual.

Mr. Edwards was clearly a very intelligent man with a remarkable ability to articulate his thoughts. But in spite of these abilities those who heard him found his theology difficult to assimilate. [Read more…] about Jonathan Edwards Talked Hell, Promised No Heaven

Calvinism – Devil Doesn’t Believe It!

by 5 Comments

Sinners are born sullied not senseless.

The Devil Thinks Calvinism
Is A Great Idea!

And why not? One of his tricks is to make people think they can’t get saved, so anything that encourages doubt works right into his hands.

But, even though he thinks Calvinism is a good idea he doesn’t believe it.

In case you’re not familiar with the tenets of Calvinism it is a philosophical concept – nothing theological about it, although some would argue otherwise – that says God selected certain people to be saved and consigned everyone else to hell. His choices were made in eternity past and are fixed. No appeals allowed.

Yes, if you are a thinking person the logical inference is any individual not chosen for salvation IS chosen for hell. Offensive thought, hey? Calvinists think so too and have responded with long drawn out discussions designed to camouflage the reality. They even came up with a term for it, “double election.”

Google it and read for yourself. One post admits to the offense and suggests ways to soften it, without admitting any error, of course. I won’t take time to explore it here.

But, getting back to my original thought, the Devil doesn’t buy it. Not only does he focus on EVERY person – not just the elect or non-elect – he also works to blind them all to the truth of the Gospel – a condition Calvinists suggest is already existing and is curable only by a special, mystical, enabling by God.

Instead, however, the Bible says the following: [Read more…] about Calvinism – Devil Doesn’t Believe It!

How Does God’s Sovereignty Work?

by 1 Comment

Pharaoh was chosen for destruction in this life, not hell in the next.

Omnipotence And Sovereignty
Are Two Different Things

God was omnipotent before creation, He became sovereign afterward.

As Omnipotent, God possesses all power. As Sovereign He shares it.

“Sovereignty,” of course, implies relationship and is often defined in terms of control, i.e., how much control the Sovereign – in this case God – exerts over His subjects. Obviously, God as Sovereign has absolute authority – He is still all powerful – but He has chosen not to exercise that authority absolutely. Control is a part of the picture but only a part.

Omnipotence is power without limits, shape or application. God has always had “all power” but before creation it was only an unexpressed attribute. It couldn’t be measured, categorized or used by others. Before creation there was no one else to use it.

Designing and assembling the created order changed all that. Power management – sovereignty – became an issue after creation and it involves more than one person. In fact, it involves every person.

There are many power processes neglected, abused or well managed only by humans:

  • We maintain the garden, ecology.
  • We maintain emotional health, sociology.
  • We maintain physical health, medicine.
  • We maintain safe living conditions, civil engineering.

Or not…

God created vegetation and maintains the laws of agriculture but delegates garden maintenance, along with many other responsibilities, to humans. [Read more…] about How Does God’s Sovereignty Work?

The Devil Can’t Do That

by Leave a Comment

Well, actually he can – he really does have that kind of power – but there are very good reasons to think he can’t use all that power at will.

The actions of “demons” are attributed to the “devil” in this post since demons follow his lead – making him master – and always act under his authority. Because demons only represent the devil’s agenda it isn’t wrong to say the devil is responsible for their actions.

The Devil’s Names

Unfortunately, while the Devil is not a mythological character – he is a very real person – there are many mythological ideas floating around about him. His many names contribute to the confusion:

  • Serpent – stemming from the devil’s embodiment of a snake in the Garden of Eden. The word is associated with stealth and deceitfulness for obvious reasons.
  • Beelzebub – literal meaning: “Lord of the flies” but was originally the name of the deity worshiped by the Philistines. In the NT the Pharisees used the name as a clear reference to the devil when they illogically accused Christ of using Beelzebub’s power to cast out demons. Christ’s response ratified their meaning while exposing their bad logic.
  • Devil – from the Greek “diabolos” meaning slanderer or acccuser. As the devil, he is completely cynical. He views everyone the way he sees himself – only bad. Psychologically, slandering and accusing others makes him feel better about himself but it has no judicial value even when the accusations are true. He cannot condemn anyone.
  • Satan – this name speaks of his adversarial nature. He obstructs and opposes those who faithfully serve God’s purposes. There are several instances of this in the Bible.
  • Murderer – a moniker given by Jesus in John 8:44 indicating his malicious intent from the beginning. However, while murder is clearly his intent and he definitely has the power to murder anyone at will he is not allowed to do so.
  • Liar and father of lies – another name given by Christ and the characterization is reflected in his many interactions with God and humanity starting with Adam and Eve in the Garden.
  • Belial – meaning worthless. There are no direct references clearly identifying the devil as Belial. This term is used to refer to people who by their own choices have adopted the mindset of the devil and by that choice become the children or sons of Belial. But since the people so referenced are the worst kind – idolators, rapists, murderers – it isn’t a stretch to suggest Belial is in fact the devil.
     

Note: Every person is born with a sinful nature and therefore vulnerable to his influence but not every person who commits a terrible sin like murder becomes his child. Those who do commit such sins and regret it CAN still become God’s child. Those who, by personal choice, commit to murderous intent are the ones who become officially the devil’s child.

     

  • Prince of this world – Jesus called him this three times in John (12:31, 14:30 & 16:11). Similarly Paul referred to him as the “prince of the power of the air, the spirit that works in the children of disobedience” (Ephesians 2:2) and as the “god of this world” (2 Corinthians 4:4).
  • Dragon – while “serpent” depicts the more quiet, subtle, apparently harmless expressions of Satan’s destructive nature “dragon” symbolizes the more fearful, powerful expressions of his ill will. This name is used only once (Revelations 12) and is associated more with his response to end time events than his everyday activities. As time runs out he becomes desperate and expresses himself in more violent ways.
  • Apollyon – the Greek form of the Hebrew word “Abaddon” which literally means “place of destruction” otherwise known as “the abyss” or “bottomless pit.” As king of this pit Satan was awarded the name Apollyon (Revelation 9:1-11) thus associating the place and a person with destruction.
  • Lucifer – of all the names this one is the most misunderstood. The Latin meaning, “light bearer,” and English rendering, “morning star,” speak of beauty and glory. The original meaning of the name characterized the state in which Satan was first created but with his reversal of character has taken on a sinister feel.
     

    His original created state, described in Isaiah 14:12-14 and Ezekiel 28:12-18, depicts artistic ability (light, color and music), wisdom and strength. Although these passages are referring directly to the King of Babylon (Isaiah) and the King of Tyre (Ezekiel) there are clear indications that another personality is being defined.
     
    Isaiah’s king fell from “heaven” and Ezekiel’s was in the Garden of Eden. Either the devil is being referenced or these human kings have supernatural powers. And since both these kings were quite evil – and were destroyed because of it – and the devil does have political influence it isn’t difficult to see him as the personality behind the personalities.

But, there is a lot of overlap in the characterizations of these names. They don’t each represent uniquely different qualities and taken together they describe him mostly as the ugly person he is.

They aren’t all about supernatural power.

Yes, some of the names suggest powers that are well beyond the scope of human ability but taken in context those powers operate with limitations. No where is he ascribed the power to do whatever he wants, whenever he wants to whomever he wants. [Read more…] about The Devil Can’t Do That