When I sing in church I think the words deserve attention. I don't pay attention merely to achieve proper pronunciation but to discern what I am declaring. Being a Methodist I even have instructions for singing. For those who may not be familiar with Methodism, it was founded by John Wesley and he gave the following instructions; Sing all; Sing lustily, and with a good courage. Beware of singing as if you were half dead, or half asleep; but, Sing modestly. Do not bawl, as to be heard above, or distinct from, the rest of the congregation, that you may not destroy the harmony; but strive to unite your voices together, so as to make one clear melodious sound; Sing in time; and Above all, sing spiritually. Have an eye to God in every word you sing. Aim at pleasing Him more than yourself, or any other creature. In order to do this, attend strictly to the sense of what you sing, and see that your heart is not carried away with the sound, but offered to God continually; so shall your singing be such as the Lord will approve of here, and reward when he cometh in the clouds of heaven.
I sang a new hymn today, a hymn being a song or ode in praise or honor of God, a deity, a nation, etc. The title was "Our God".
The chorus is:
Our God is greater, our God is stronger
God You are higher than any other
Our God is Healer, awesome in power
Our God, Our God…
The bridge is:
And if Our God is for us, then who could ever stop us
And if our God is with us, then what can stand against?
And if Our God is for us, then who could ever stop us
And if our God is with us, then what can stand against?
What can stand against?
Thinking about these lyrics I was struck by the possessiveness of the words. Our God is greater, Our God is stronger, as if I am in possession of the Almighty. These words seem to say I own something and therefore am in some manner superior to others who don't possess this deity.
I would never presume to establish nor even declare to exist a condition wherein I possess God. If anything, I pray that my speech and actions will declare me humbly satisfied to be claimed by Him, through Jesus, in grace. He has provided me with the means to redemption but I find no justification for a proclamation of superiority. Rather, a call to share that which has so graciously, and at great expense, been provided for me.
And Our God is stronger and greater than what, your God? I would hold there is only 1 God and subsequently there would exist no relationship of stronger or greater.
God is for us and with us? If anything, I hope I am for and with God. How many teams have both armies claimed that God is with them? Who could ever stop us? What is the concern being expressed here? Nothing can stop God. Exclusively it is us who reject the blessing and bounty which the Lord has desired to provide to us. Who can stand against? We are not defeated by opposing force but by fear and ignorance. I think G. K. Chesterton had a point when he said "Christianity has not been tried and found wanting, it has been found difficult and not tried".
We do not need to be worried about who has the best God, nor who is against us, nor what is going to stop us. Let us be concerned about how we will be the best we can be for God, how we will be for Him, and what we will do to discern and act to execute His will. The song I sang tonight certainly gave me pause, and in that, provided for my spiritual growth but I don't really think is serves as a hymn.
As an aside, my favorite hymn is "It is well with my soul", penned by Horation G. Spafford in 1873. I would reccomend you read the lyrics and make known to yourself the circumstances which spurred him to write this song.
Please feel free to peruse previous posts and do not hesitate to leave your thoughts. Thanks for reading and God Bless You.
Saturday, August 20, 2011
Friday, June 10, 2011
A few words
Depending on what version of the bible you peruse, Jesus is quoted as speaking about 2000 words. The average person speaks several times that many words every day. Jesus' ministry lasted for about three years, so I know he had more to say than what we have, but we do have about 2000 words and they are important.
However, the issue I wish to discuss, is that since there are only 2000 words can His message really be that difficult to ascertain?
Give it a few minutes thought. What did He say? OK, we got a couple of really important commandments, Love the Lord and Love your neighbor. If you are a Christian, Jew, or Muslim you know who the Lord is. If you are not a member of the aforementioned parties, then the Christians have been tasked with informing you. That task is one of the thins Jesus is quoted as saying(Mk 16:15). Jesus told us how to identify our neighbors with the parable of the Samaritan(Luke 10:30-37). He told us to feed the hungry, clothe the poor, visit the sick and imprisoned, be generous and hospitable to the stranger (Mat 25:34-36). He said to love your enemies(Mat 5:43-48).
Now, the preceding is not meant to be read as comprehensive. However, it does give you the gist of His message.
Jesus chastised His disciples in not understanding His message(Mk 8:21). I cut them some slack because they only had 3 years with Him. We've had access to this message for the past 2000 years in addition to the works and words of His disciples and we still act like we don't understand.
I don't think Jesus provided the message of the Lord to allow us justify our own actions in His name. Rather, He provided this message to enable us to live completely.
I can't find citations in the bible which instruct me to condemn those with whom I disagree nor even those who do me harm. I have read that I am to turn the other cheek. I have read that I am not to judge nor to condemn. In fact, I am called to forgive(Luke 6:37).
We have spent 2000 years rationalizing how the message Jesus gave us allows us to act in manners which do not accord with His message. I find it hard to believe we can't grasp a concept which is wholly expressed in 2000 words.
We are not called to visit our will on others through coercion, economic might, nor force of arms. We are called to do justice, not to impose justice. We are not called to exploit the weak, poor, and unlearned. We are called to care for them and provide for them as we can and as they may require without stripping them of their dignity nor imposing obligation. The stranger among us, citizen or alien, is not an usurper of resources, but rather a precious brother or sister to be cherished and honored as we are able.
The crusade of Jesus is composed not of steel and shell but word and deed. There is no concept of Mutually Assured Destruction but Mutually Assured Redemption.
I hold His truth to be self-evident. It is a simple message. I do not argue that simple is the same as easy. Neither do I think we should try to make it so complicated.
However, the issue I wish to discuss, is that since there are only 2000 words can His message really be that difficult to ascertain?
Give it a few minutes thought. What did He say? OK, we got a couple of really important commandments, Love the Lord and Love your neighbor. If you are a Christian, Jew, or Muslim you know who the Lord is. If you are not a member of the aforementioned parties, then the Christians have been tasked with informing you. That task is one of the thins Jesus is quoted as saying(Mk 16:15). Jesus told us how to identify our neighbors with the parable of the Samaritan(Luke 10:30-37). He told us to feed the hungry, clothe the poor, visit the sick and imprisoned, be generous and hospitable to the stranger (Mat 25:34-36). He said to love your enemies(Mat 5:43-48).
Now, the preceding is not meant to be read as comprehensive. However, it does give you the gist of His message.
Jesus chastised His disciples in not understanding His message(Mk 8:21). I cut them some slack because they only had 3 years with Him. We've had access to this message for the past 2000 years in addition to the works and words of His disciples and we still act like we don't understand.
I don't think Jesus provided the message of the Lord to allow us justify our own actions in His name. Rather, He provided this message to enable us to live completely.
I can't find citations in the bible which instruct me to condemn those with whom I disagree nor even those who do me harm. I have read that I am to turn the other cheek. I have read that I am not to judge nor to condemn. In fact, I am called to forgive(Luke 6:37).
We have spent 2000 years rationalizing how the message Jesus gave us allows us to act in manners which do not accord with His message. I find it hard to believe we can't grasp a concept which is wholly expressed in 2000 words.
We are not called to visit our will on others through coercion, economic might, nor force of arms. We are called to do justice, not to impose justice. We are not called to exploit the weak, poor, and unlearned. We are called to care for them and provide for them as we can and as they may require without stripping them of their dignity nor imposing obligation. The stranger among us, citizen or alien, is not an usurper of resources, but rather a precious brother or sister to be cherished and honored as we are able.
The crusade of Jesus is composed not of steel and shell but word and deed. There is no concept of Mutually Assured Destruction but Mutually Assured Redemption.
I hold His truth to be self-evident. It is a simple message. I do not argue that simple is the same as easy. Neither do I think we should try to make it so complicated.
Saturday, May 14, 2011
Majority Rules
In the Greatest country in the world, the United States of America, the majority rules. Every citizen has a voice, and every vote counts.
These are very widely held assumptions and popular beliefs in the United States. However, they are extremely misleading. Although very quaint sentiments it can only be the misguided or deluded who would hold these concepts to accuratley and honestly reflect life in the U.S.
The majority rules. How can the majority rule if the majority either does not or cannot participate.
These are very widely held assumptions and popular beliefs in the United States. However, they are extremely misleading. Although very quaint sentiments it can only be the misguided or deluded who would hold these concepts to accuratley and honestly reflect life in the U.S.
The majority rules. How can the majority rule if the majority either does not or cannot participate.
Saturday, April 2, 2011
musing
I cannot speak to the relationship the "Rev" Terry Jones has with Christ. He has chosen to desecrate the holy text of a substantial portion of the world. I have searched but not located anything he has said or written as to the purpose of this act. I assume he meant this to be an act of condemnation of Islam.
I can speak to the relationship of Christ to the world. According to John 3:17 God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Condemning others for what they are is a rather ineffective means of effecting any desired change . Rather, in my opinion, it would seem to be more effective to share an image of what one can be and achieve, and the benefits of a spiritual Christian life. This does not seen to be the tack Rev. Jones has chosen.
He is to be commended for providing credence to the argument that The United States is waging war, not against terrorism, but against Islam. I would not argue that his action caused the attacks upon the United Nations personnel. I do not think you can deny that it served as a justification by the instigators and coordinators of these attacks.
I abhor the actons of both Terry Jones and the killers in Afghanistan. Jones does not represent Christianity any more than the killers represent Islam. Christian, Muslim, or Jew we are all children of Abraham. However dysfunctional, we are a family of the One true God.
I can speak to the relationship of Christ to the world. According to John 3:17 God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Condemning others for what they are is a rather ineffective means of effecting any desired change . Rather, in my opinion, it would seem to be more effective to share an image of what one can be and achieve, and the benefits of a spiritual Christian life. This does not seen to be the tack Rev. Jones has chosen.
He is to be commended for providing credence to the argument that The United States is waging war, not against terrorism, but against Islam. I would not argue that his action caused the attacks upon the United Nations personnel. I do not think you can deny that it served as a justification by the instigators and coordinators of these attacks.
I abhor the actons of both Terry Jones and the killers in Afghanistan. Jones does not represent Christianity any more than the killers represent Islam. Christian, Muslim, or Jew we are all children of Abraham. However dysfunctional, we are a family of the One true God.
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
A Day of Peace
I just became aware of a social movement calling fro March 4 2011 to be a day of peace.
This calls for all people to avoid the harsh word. For each of us to at least look past what we consider to be others shortcomings, if not to actually embrace them in spite of their differences. We can spend an entire day being kind to each other.
Do you think we could stand the shock to our systems?
I don't think Peace on a personal level is sufficient, but it is a start. Just imagne how little news coverage there would be if we could, just for 1 day, put down the guns, leave the bombs in their bunkers, and let the bullets rest.
Look it up, give it a shot. We gotta start somewhere.
This calls for all people to avoid the harsh word. For each of us to at least look past what we consider to be others shortcomings, if not to actually embrace them in spite of their differences. We can spend an entire day being kind to each other.
Do you think we could stand the shock to our systems?
I don't think Peace on a personal level is sufficient, but it is a start. Just imagne how little news coverage there would be if we could, just for 1 day, put down the guns, leave the bombs in their bunkers, and let the bullets rest.
Look it up, give it a shot. We gotta start somewhere.
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Practice Preemptive Forgiveness
Practice preeemptive forgiveness.
You will be offended, betrayed and failed by others.
Do not be dismayed, disgusted, or seek vengenace. These things only serve to fill your life with bitterness, despair, and longing.
Forgiveness provides you the opportunity to love, and in that state, to live as an example of Christ to others.
Preemptive forgiveness acknowledges the shortcomings and deficiencies inherent in all humankind. Recognizing we all share faults, is it not more productive to accept our brothers and sisters in love and strive to live above our nature than to exist in conflict and condemnation? When we are slighted, and this is inevitable, we can respond with anger and seek retribution. In that response exists the basis for turmoil, conflict, and the inablility to live in harmonious relationship.
Such discord has been, arguably, the defining characteristic of society since the development of agriculture. Examples abound throughout history, (e.g. Cain and Abel, Alexander and Persia, Egypt and Rome, Mongols and Europeans, Crusaders and Muslims, Civil War, WWI and II, Cold War) and a plethora of other conflicts. These events did not occur spontaneously in a societal vacuum. They derived from the desires and acts of individuals, Cain, Alexander, Genghis Khan, Peter the Hermit, Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot. Neither could they have taken place without at least the implicit consent of the citizens of the time. We are those citizens.
The argument is made that selfish, destructive, evil courses of events cannot be be adequately responded to by such a pacific endeavor as preemptive forgiveness. I am not aware that such an attempt has ever been conscientously applied.
What might happen if we, as the citizens and individuals currently able to make our voices and desires heard, declined to act in the same manner as those who have come before?
I don't know what decision you will make, nor what you may be inclined to think. For myself, I have chosen to practice preemptive forgiveness..
Whaduyathink?
You will be offended, betrayed and failed by others.
Do not be dismayed, disgusted, or seek vengenace. These things only serve to fill your life with bitterness, despair, and longing.
Forgiveness provides you the opportunity to love, and in that state, to live as an example of Christ to others.
Preemptive forgiveness acknowledges the shortcomings and deficiencies inherent in all humankind. Recognizing we all share faults, is it not more productive to accept our brothers and sisters in love and strive to live above our nature than to exist in conflict and condemnation? When we are slighted, and this is inevitable, we can respond with anger and seek retribution. In that response exists the basis for turmoil, conflict, and the inablility to live in harmonious relationship.
Such discord has been, arguably, the defining characteristic of society since the development of agriculture. Examples abound throughout history, (e.g. Cain and Abel, Alexander and Persia, Egypt and Rome, Mongols and Europeans, Crusaders and Muslims, Civil War, WWI and II, Cold War) and a plethora of other conflicts. These events did not occur spontaneously in a societal vacuum. They derived from the desires and acts of individuals, Cain, Alexander, Genghis Khan, Peter the Hermit, Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot. Neither could they have taken place without at least the implicit consent of the citizens of the time. We are those citizens.
The argument is made that selfish, destructive, evil courses of events cannot be be adequately responded to by such a pacific endeavor as preemptive forgiveness. I am not aware that such an attempt has ever been conscientously applied.
What might happen if we, as the citizens and individuals currently able to make our voices and desires heard, declined to act in the same manner as those who have come before?
I don't know what decision you will make, nor what you may be inclined to think. For myself, I have chosen to practice preemptive forgiveness..
Whaduyathink?
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
How much DID they cost?
I saw an ad today which advertised $50.00 off a pair of khakis. My first thought was if they could take $50.00 off and not be giving me a pair of pants and some money they must be exorbitantly overpriced. My second thought was this was a perfect example of what the Soviets referred to as American decadence. My third thought was, wouldn't it be nice if before we manufacture pants that cost more than $50.00 we insure that none of our citizens go to bed hungry, or any die because they are poor.
I was advised the manufacturer is entitled to make a profit. I recognize this as a concept which exists. I do not recognize it as valid.
Is profit the worthiest goal? Do we strive to achieve profit at the expense of our humanity? Can the argument be legitimately made that a CEO is more entitled to obscene compensation than a poor child is entitled to basic nutrition and health care?
Whaduyathink?
I was advised the manufacturer is entitled to make a profit. I recognize this as a concept which exists. I do not recognize it as valid.
Is profit the worthiest goal? Do we strive to achieve profit at the expense of our humanity? Can the argument be legitimately made that a CEO is more entitled to obscene compensation than a poor child is entitled to basic nutrition and health care?
Whaduyathink?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)