Ushering In The Kingdom

Many evangelicals think of geopolitical considerations concerning the faith as if the social gospel (actually a misnomer) or political reform were the Second Great Commission.  "Seek the prosperity of the city..." (cf. Jer. 29:7).  This a social mandate, not a social gospel.  We are its salt and light, not its savior.  America is a secular nation and not a Christian one, no matter how many believers make this land their home.  Always keep the main thing the main thing and save souls as Job One. 


We are not to stoop to the level of radical or fundamentalist Islam and institute Christian Shari'ah law, which forces everyone to live like a Christian, whether they are Christian or not.  Our nation established freedom from religion, as well as freedom of the exercise of religion, and no sect has the right to impose its views on the others--note that secular humanism and atheism are considered religions. We may have started out with our forefathers as a predominately Christian nation, but today it is highly multicultural and diverse ethnically and religiously.  We are the salt as preservatives of morality and to give meaning and enjoyment to life, and also as light to show the way and how people should live in spiritual darkness--not political darkness, but moral depravity and in need of salvation, as the Bible sanctions no specific or certain type of government or economy.


What is legal is not always moral or right and could be sin or evil, and what is illegal may be the moral thing to do in an act of civil disobedience to unjust laws.  The state may recognize gay marriage, for example, but that doesn't mean God recognizes it--it doesn't become right or moral by an act of governmental decree.  We cannot legislate morality, law is merely the majority vote that licks all others, according to Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, though Christians differ because they believe that God is the only Legislator and all law must comply with Him.    Christians should never cease to drive basic morality in society as salt and light, but be aware that there are gray and doubtful or questionable areas where people should be free to make their own personal choices.  Government is a "social contract" according to John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, whether we want to be in it or not, or knowingly or not, according to contract laws.  The Bible sees government ordained by God to restrain evil in the world.


Jesus alone will usher in His kingdom and His kingdom is not of this world--we are not to get too comfortable in this life and become too much at home, for our conversation and real citizenship is in heaven!  Remember, at your homecoming you are not home yet!  Oliver Cromwell failed in making England a Christian nation.  The Puritans also attempted to make a Christian nation and John Calvin even tried his hand at it while mayor of Geneva--both utter failures and examples that the Great Commission is to spread the gospel and change lives, not to change the government--the Bible is a beacon of light unto salvation, not a social tool for government reform.


In summation, Governor William Bradford of Plymouth Colony wanted to advance the kingdom of Christ when he settled here, but he misunderstood the Great Commission and the doctrine of eschatology.  It is a well-known fact that the Salem witch hunts showed the failure of instituting the Christian faith and making the Bible itself the law of the land.  Jesus will bring about His kingdom in due time when the body is full and complete with all His lost sheep saved.   Soli Deo Gloria!  

Not Believing In God

"I think, therefore God is." (Rene Descartes, Father of Modern Rationalism)

Not believing in God doesn't make Him not exist and is not evidence that He doesn't exist: He exists whether one believes it or not. The Bible starts out: "In the beginning God...." It assumes God and makes no attempt at proof; however, we don't kiss our brains goodbye in believing, nor believe despite the evidence, but there is compelling and convincing evidence enough for one who wants to believe and is willing to do His will--man doesn't have intellectual problems, which he feigns as smokescreens and objects, but his problem is moral and a matter of surrender to God. 

The act of believing something doesn't make it true, and disbelieving something doesn't make it false. Man simply doesn't want to believe, though he can believe; he's in a state of moral rebellion and defiance against God (Jer. 17:9 says, "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked, who can know it?"). Answer this: If there were no God, would men be angry at Him?


The fool has said in his heart that he doesn't believe in God per Psalm 14:1. Jesus said some are "slow of heart to believe," (cf. Luke 24:25).   Note that he has a problem in his heart or will; it's not really an intellectual thing, for all his doubts could be answered and he'd still refuse to believe. To address the issue one must ascertain what God he is referring to (the Judaeo-Christian one?) or is it some generic deity or default God? What if someone said, "I don't believe in words!" You would think it was absurd because he was using words to say it. "In the beginning was the Word: Words make up thoughts and thoughts come from a thinker or a mind and the higher the thought the higher the mind--eventually we face the Ultimate Mind or the Supreme Thinker of the cosmos.


If there was no Higher Mind, there would be no thoughts, and all ideas would merely be random atomic reactions without rhyme or reason and helter-skelter. We know that the cosmos appears to be one gigantic mathematical equation according to astronomers. There are purpose and order to it, or you could call it teleological. If there were no minds, there would be no thoughts and we couldn't use thought to disprove God's existence and couldn't even trust thought--without God, life makes no sense, and everything reasonable is up for grabs.


I make no exhaustive attempt to rationalize God, as it were, but to show the fallacy of such denial and its logical conclusion--there's no purpose in anything and everything is meaningless. Fools and infidels are seldom convinced by argument; however, God has set eternity in the hearts of man (cf. Eccl. 3:11) and every culture and tribe or people group recognizes some form of divinity or deity--how did this happen, if not based in truth? The deepest and most profound inquiry one can make is whether there is a God and how this affects him. What do we owe God in return for all His mercy, grace, and goodness?


If there is no God, where did this idea come from, known as ontological proof, and if there is no morality or standards of right and wrong, where did we get this from? There seems to be some person behind the universe who we can relate to that is the source of noble and good behavior, such as courage, integrity, good faith, altruism, love, unselfishness, fair play, truthfulness, and honesty, etc. Surely, there is a personality behind everything that cares a lot about right and wrong, just as if they were scientific or mathematical laws.


Everyone believes in and worships something (we are referred to as Homo religiosis and Homo divinus, religious beings or divine). We worship what we admire and if we don't worship God, we will find something or someone to worship. To deny that you worship something is to say you worship yourself, and some megalomaniacs do. Humanism is the philosophy of deifying and exalting man, and dethroning God--it is religion minus God. It implies man is the measure of all things and, we start with man and understand the cosmos, not with God; however, Scripture says, "In the beginning God...."


Instead, we begin with God and explain everything. You cannot come to a clear and coherent understanding of reality and metaphysics without accepting a Higher Being and someone who is transcendent or out there removed from creation and controlling, guiding, and preserving it. You can tell a lot about a person by knowing what he admires; if not God, there must be something to fill the void and vacuum created, that can only be satisfied with a personal relationship and fellowship with the Lord. Augustine said our hearts are restless till they find rest in God. 

Pascal said there is a "God-shaped vacuum only God can fill!" The only way to have fulfillment in life is to know God because this is our purpose and meaning in life: "The chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoy Him forever" (The Westminster Shorter Catechism). We are made for God and exist for His purpose; He doesn't exist for ours.


When someone says he doesn't believe in God, he is acknowledging God in his assertion: Who said there was a God? How did you find that out? Like one saying he doesn't believe in words saying them or in the air while breathing it! Where does he reckon he came from, why is he here, and where is he going? The answers to life's fundamental questions cannot be satisfactorily answered apart from personal knowledge of God. God, according to AA, is any Higher Power (not necessarily a supernatural one), and everyone has one! We are responsible to obey what we know, and if we do, God will show us more. 

God isn't obligated to prove Himself to anyone; He owes no one anything and has given sufficient evidence, for all creation has His imprint and fingerprint in DNA, the missing link of intelligence. Why can't man produce life? The missing link is intelligence and God has a monopoly on it--His knowledge is perfect. If we made life someday in a petri dish or test tube, it would only prove that it must be by intelligence and design. The design of the cosmos only proves a Designer and all the order seen everywhere only proves an Orderer!


The beginning or the Big Bang only proves a Beginner! The scientific theory of an eternal universe is untenable. Who got the ball rolling and fired the shot of the Big Bang? As the Greeks called God, the unmoved mover or first cause. Paul said on Mars Hill in Acts 17:29, ESV: "... In Him, we live and move and have our being...." He is the necessary one to exist, while nothing else needs to exist for reality to exist. We aren't necessary, the earth isn't necessary, but God is because for something to exist there must be something necessary to exist or nothing would exist and it would be that nothing was necessary or had a cause. The law of causality or of cause and effect says all effects must have a cause, and everything that begins to exist has a cause; God isn't an "effect" and didn't begin to exist, being eternal, and therefore has no cause outside Himself. The Big Bang had a beginning and therefore had a cause to bring it about.


Atheism is a bankrupt religion (and it was declared a religion by a federal court), and it cannot be defended, it raises more questions than it answers since logicians will tell you that you cannot prove a universal negative, because you'd have to be everywhere at the same time (like proving there are no little green men), and only God could do this--so it's logically absurd and a contradiction. The only motive for being an atheist (cf. Psalm 10:4) is because one doesn't want to be responsible and accountable to a God, living without a Lawgiver, Judge, and Ruler to control his destiny. They believe they are only animals because they want to act like animals! Soli Deo Gloria!

A Sense Of Oughtness

"Love must be sincere.  Hate what is evil; cling to what is good"  (Rom. 12:9, NIV).
"Do not be overcome with evil, but overcome evil with good"  (Romans 12:21, ESV). 




We are all born with an innate conscience capable of discerning right from wrong and applying abstract laws and rules to specific and concrete situations.  Romans 2:15 says our conscience either excuses or accuses us:  We all know God's law (natural law) but we flaunt it!  Knowing better we still do wrong:  "I know the better things and I approve them, and I follow the worst" (Ovid, Roman poet). Paul said, "...Who will deliver me from the body of this death?"(Rom. 7:24).   "For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing"  (Rom. 7:10, ESV).  None of us satisfies or fulfills our own expectations and standards--we all stand self-condemned.  There are as many systems of ethics as there are worldviews, but basically, the Christian one assumes man is not basically good, but inherently evil and needs revelation and salvation from God to be convicted of right and wrong.



There is no such thing as perfectionism, or reaching a state of sinless perfection (cf. Prov. 20:9; Ps. 119:96). We all do things that we should've known better not to do!  The law of Moses was given to convict us and show we cannot meet God's standards of righteousness, not to be a code of conduct to live by and earn salvation by merit.  The requisite for salvation is to realize you cannot save yourself by good behavior and you need a Savior because of your sin, that you have fallen short of God's glory and standard.




Ethics with a capital E is nebulous for those who deny God--they dodge the no-absolute-truth thesis: "The absurd is, sin without God," said Albert Camus.  Dostoevsky said that without God all things are permissible!  Immanuel Kant said that God is necessary for ethics to be possible.  The Nazis justified themselves socially and didn't think we had the right to try them for war crimes, but the allies appealed to "natural law."  In academia, they teach you that ethics is about the good press (spin) and not getting caught!   Social studies and psychology teach you to have good reasons for what you do and to have responsible decision making, as you make your own choices in life.



In antiquity, might made right and there was no universal ethic, and that is why Pilate asked, "What is truth?"  Jesus claimed to be the epitome or embodiment of truth and also the way and the life to live. Postmodernists dodge the ethics issue, by saying there is no absolute truth and it is a nebulous thing to have one standard for everyone, as it evolves with society and situation (ethics).  In other words, ethics are only relative!  Today most students judge the usefulness of an idea, by its consequences or results, not its truth value--is it practical?   Christians are urged to "overcome evil with good," and as the summation of ethics:  "Follow Me [Christ]!" We are held to a higher standard and are the witness of Christ in the world as lights in the darkness and salt to preserve it and add flavor.

Christianity is not a list of dos and don'ts, nor a system of ethics; it's a living relationship of knowing a personal God.  Ethics is the application of right doctrine and living it out by faith as our duty to God and man (cf. Gal. 5:6, NIV, which says:  "The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.").  The faith you have is the faith you show!  The law is written in all men:  "The work of the law written in their heart, their conscience"  (cf. Romans 2:15).  People try to make up their own voluntary initiatives or codes of conduct to live by, but they are always ones they think they have kept or can.  Christian ethics is based upon the exemplary, unequaled personality of Christ as the one to emulate, and He has no flaws--what a standard!



We all need a moral compass, and Humanists insist that they can have ethics without God, but Humanism is precisely that: Being as good as possible without God--which is a definition of evil. New age people will tell you to listen to the inner voice and to be in touch with yourself, and tolerance is the key, so don't be judgmental; if it feels like the truth to you, it is!  the codes of conduct range from the Golden Rule (cf. Matt. 7:12), to the Brazen Rule of reciprocity or tit for tat, to the Silver Rule of not treating others the way you don't want to be treated--a negative Golden Rule, to the Iron Rule of treating others as a bully, where might makes right, and the survival of the fittest or social Darwinism is the rule.  Most nonbelievers design their own ethics and don't adhere to an absolute standard of morality.  Something they can comply with to their standards.



In the final analysis, the only true morality or ethics is when the motive, as well as the end result or goal, is pure and good: the means to the ends must be right, because the means do not justify the ends; and utilitarianism, or the greatest good for the greatest number, is another evil that has justified the murder of millions in communist countries.  The premise that secular worldviews have is that man is basically good and can redeem himself, or lift himself up by his own bootstraps.  Soli Deo Gloria!

Is Knowledge Power?

"I know from experience what a passion for God they have, but alas, it is not a passion based on knowledge"  (cf. Rom. 10:2, J. B. Philipps).   
"...I do not want you to be uninformed"  (1 Cor. 12:1, ESV). 
"So whoever knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, to him it is sin"  (James 4:17, ESV). 
"Whoever loves discipline loves knowledge"  (Prov. 12:1, NASB). 
FOREWARNED IS FOREARMED! 


Sir Francis Bacon, who formulated the scientific or empirical method, said that "knowledge is power"; which he got from Prov. 24:5, NASB, which says, "A man of knowledge increases power."  Some think that its a virtue to be ignorant and that ignorance is bliss, so to speak; however, God condemns the neglect of knowledge as culpable and will hold us accountable for what we could've known and should've known better for.  Paul says in 1 Cor. 8:1 that "knowledge puffs up, but love edifies," and I'm sure he's talking about worldly knowledge, not knowledge of the Lord, which is about the Lord of love.  We are never to get arrogant and think we're smart as Paul says in Romans 12 but to think of others as more important than ourselves.



Knowledge is not the measure of a man and has no inherent virtue unless properly applied and shared.  The knowledge in the body as a gift isn't meant to be for the sake of the recipient, but also for the benefit of the body at large.  A wise man stores up knowledge, Proverbs says.  You never know when you might need some info and when something might come in handy--a useful education is a wise investment of our resources and God may give us the opportunity to use it to His glory.  Note that scripture wasn't written to increase knowledge (trivia, facts and figures, info about it), but to change lives! 


We live in the age of anti-knowledge, where truth is relative, and tech-savvy people who think they can ignore the rules and conventions of centuries of input and research to gain skill in rightly handling knowledge.  The president himself seems to be rejecting knowledge, wisdom, and even understanding, as he nominates cabinet members who seem to me to be unqualified, except ideologically.  You don't want to surround yourself with a bunch of yes-men and sycophants in the situation room at zero hours.  We are close enough to nuclear midnight as it is, to be taking chances on the inexperienced and those who even despise and mock experience.  To be ignorant of your ignorance is the epitome of foolhardiness.  To begin learning, said Socrates, you must admit your ignorance!  



The correct use of knowledge is called wisdom.  It's also knowledge put into action!   Don't let your bro stumble because of your "knowledge."  We, who are strong, ought to bear with the weaker bro and not to allow him to fall because he is less enlightened and doesn't quite see the light of day.  Some people do have wisdom beyond their years, while others are retarded and have never grown up.  The weaker bro needs to grow in knowledge, and the wise guy needs to grow in love.  Don't allow your so-called knowledge become an occasion of stumbling.  


I actually believe that the president doesn't realize the inaccurate statements he's made, and what damage control he's had to do unnecessarily--often the problem is in delivery or communication ability and public relations control.  In my humble opinion, and I don't normally play the psychobabble card, but he seems a little off, unbalanced, or out of touch with reality to me and that he actually believes these gross distortions of the truth, like the idea that 3 to 5 million "illegals" voted for HRC to defeat him in the popular vote. [Note:  no humans are illegal!]  The fact is that he should be cognizant of, is that he doesn't have a mandate to reform America, and America is highly divided on account of him; despite a brief honeymoon, he's managed to stir debate, protest, and partisan schisms.


Are we entering a new age of protests a la the 60s?  Is this the new norm?  Are we going to have the ignorant tyrannize us for the entire administration?  He does tend to use strong-arm and scare tactics like a godfather or thug in the underground.  The fact is that his base lives in an alternate universe of denial of the facts and they are completely taken in by a colossal propaganda program and don't even know it--I witnessed this personally myself watching interviews of people who are Trump supporters and they were asked how things were going for them!


Gnosticism is heresy:  we aren't saved by being enlightened with secret knowledge only accessible to an inner circle or a crowd of fortune seekers.  God's gospel is straightforward, simple, clear, and not ambiguous or obtuse; however, we aren't saved by knowledge per se--Christ didn't teach anything in secret to be later revealed by those "in the know."  There is no scoop or skinny to be disseminated to secret disciples!  We don't need to "discover" the truth; on the other hand, he opens our eyes to the truth that sets us free (cf. John 8:32).  


A word to the wise is sufficient:  "The lips of the wise spread knowledge..." (Prov. 15:7, NASB).  Only true ignorance, where one couldn't possibly have known, is an excuse; however, no one can claim insufficient evidence to believe in God--all are found guilty as charged!  Caveat:  "The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge; fools despise wisdom and instruction"  (Prov. 1:7, NASB).  Though never an end in itself, we begin with God as the foundation of all knowledge.  Soli Deo Gloria! 

Transcendent Truth...

"If we are not governed by God, we will be ruled by tyrants." (William Penn)

NB: TRANSCENDENT TRUTH IS ABSOLUTE AND OBJECTIVE, NOT DEPENDING UPON OPINION OR POPULARITY, TRUE WHETHER BELIEVED OR NOT.


Morality is based upon transcendent truth and is not subject to debate.--it's not based on private opinion or feelings, but on God's inner law that we all have in our conscience. God's truth is objective truth and is true regardless of whether believed or not! All the foundations of society come apart by destroying the basis of truth based upon the facts, whether they like them or not, and whether they support their worldview and opinions or not. In denying truth, like Oliver Wendel Holmes did, "law is the majority vote that can lick all others--[how bleak an outlook!]."

Christians believe in a supreme entity of truth that is personified or incarnated in Christ as its exemplar. All we need to know is in Him and revealed by knowing Him. Every academic discipline is fulfilled in Him. Some things are true, but not truth; all truth meets at the top and is God's truth, which has the almighty power to transform, not just inform. In our day politics is leaning toward pragmatism, in which belief system truth is irrelevant and is not the test of an idea--whether it works is the litmus test (known as pragmatism)! Does it work for you? New Age believers think truth is whatever they "feel" is right for them. Postmodernism denies any Truth with a capital T and sees it all as relevant--that may be true for you, but not for me!

Is is any wonder that the governmental spin disregards truth and that it's absolute? Now we have to deal the post-factual world and the alternative fact, which is something related to an opinion, not substantiated--unfounded allegations and truth claims. When you destroy the validity of truth, as Pilate cynically asked Jesus: "What is truth?" you destroy the very foundation of all knowledge. We have nothing to have agreement on and cannot even compromise because we cannot agree as to what the facts are and how to arrive at truth.

Science is only one way to ascertain truth, divine revelation is another; for the fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge. It is fallacious to believe that only religious people have taken a leap of faith; all worldviews start with some assertion they cannot prove--even nihilists have faith and scientists believe irrationally in science and have made a religion out of it. Faith in science is still faith--it's not a matter of faith versus reason, then, but faith in which set of presuppositions you wish to make your starting point and an axis of learning or foundation.

It is a sad commentary on our culture that truth is being filtered and downgraded to such ideas as "fake news." If the facts don't fit their opinions they automatically reject them as fake news. We don't accept or reject evidence according to whim or our worldview but make our opinions up according to the facts. Some facts may seem like a hard pill to swallow, but we must align our faith and worldview according to reality, and not a parallel universe in a fact-free bubble or reality.

Journalists must keep each other honest and seek the truth behind the story--just the facts without putting a spin on it like an administration does for damage control. The truth will eventually be known so why not be on the side of the truth? You can fool some of the people some of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but not all the people all the time, they say!

There are two kinds of law: natural law or God's law (according to His nature) and legal positivism (that which the powers that be make up as they go along and force on the masses). Just because some power elites decide to make a law and enforce it doesn't make it right in God's eyes. Some laws are unjust and Christians ought to oppose them with civil disobedience because they violate transcendent law from God, which we all know in our conscience.

The ancient Greeks sought for truth, beauty, and goodness. You can make any truth claim you desire; however, it must be substantiated to be true. Many conclusions are possible from truth claims and conclusions are not true or false, but valid or invalid, depending upon the line of reasoning and the premise or foundation facts. Truth is not elusive, but God-given and we can personally know it by virtue of an encounter with the living God, via believing in Jesus and enjoying that relationship.
Since Jesus claimed to be "the Way," He is the gateway and starting point in our pilgrimage seeking truth--it all begins by knowing Him!
Soli Deo Gloria!

The Rise Of Scientism

Scientism is defined as the act of harnessing science for unscientific endeavors or academic disciplines. It's when one thinks the only reliable truth is from science.

Some secularist scientists believe all our problems can be scientifically resolved and that science has the answers to our dilemmas if given enough time. Excuse me: Science does not have all the answers! Scientism, by definition, is when you make statements that science has no right to make, or are out of its domain or sphere of knowledge. One notable example is humanist astronomer Carl Sagan saying that "the cosmos is all there is or ever was or ever will be!" This is a metaphysical statement that scientists have no authority to answer.

History, by its very nature, is nonrepeatable, and no one was there at creation or the Big Bang so we have no eyewitnesses to verify the evidence. It's speculation, not science--history is not science, because you need to be able to control variables and have laboratory conditions, as well as repeatability and measurability.

Science is not a source of ethical, metaphysical, or philosophical truth. This is why evolution is out of its realm of knowledge--no one saw life begin and all attempts at creating life in the lab have failed. There is no final conflict between science and the Bible, in fact, it was Christianity that made science possible by promoting an orderly and law-abiding cosmos. The first scientists, such as Sir Francis Bacon, were Christians, and you don't have to deny your faith to be a good scientist--the majority of astronomers today are not atheists at all. Galileo and Copernicus were Christians and they were among the earliest of scientists.

Eastern religions never would've given birth to science, since they believe reality is an illusion called Maya. Christians affirm a Lawgiver, orderly and predictable laws and consequences for violation. Christians believe all truth is God's truth, and that includes scientific truth, and that it all meets at the top as Aquinas said. The Bible has never been proven to be in scientific error, and the scientific statements it does make are accurate: for instance, the water cycle was described long before we figured it out.

Scientism is when scientists hijack their views in the name of science to make philosophical, ethical, and metaphysical claims that it doesn't have any right to make. Several Nobel scientists have written a book called Cosmos, Bios & Theos, and have agreed that God is necessary to explain the complexities behind creation; we are not some fluke of nature!

To show the vanity of putting faith in science, the French Academy of Science published a brochure listing fifty-one "scientific facts" that controverted the Bible--today none of the so-called facts are believed! The Bible doesn't need correction, just faith in its self-attestation--if it appealed to some outside source for authority and legitimacy, then it couldn't be the Word of God, as it needed a higher authority for verification. What we say is that you don't have to defend a caged lion, it will take care of itself--and so the Bible can prove itself, it just needs to be read or reread. When they ask you to prove it, you tell them, "No way! You prove it, just try reading it--it will prove itself!"

In sum, all science can do is discover the know-how and learn by the scientific method, whereas to find the know-why you need religion or philosophy--don't confuse the two domains! It is a sad commentary on our society that science has become a religion. Faith in science is still faith, and is no different than putting faith in God or religion--you just have different presuppositions as your starting point and all knowledge begins in faith. Soli Deo Gloria!

A Primer On Epistemology

"The law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ" (John 1:17, NIV).
"Eliminate the impossible, and whatever remains, no matter how improbable, is true." (unknown).
"Tell me your certainties, I have enough doubts of my own." (Johann Wolfgang von Goethe).
"We have found all the questions, now let's find the answers." (G. K. Chesterton).
"... and a people without understanding shall come to ruin" (Hos. 4:14, ESV).
"Therefore my people go into exile for lack of knowledge..." (Isaiah 5:13, ESV).
NOTE THIS PHILOSOPHICAL AXIOM: ALL KNOWLEDGE BEGINS IN FAITH (FAITH PRECEDES REASON!). REMEMBER: A CHRISTIAN WITH FAITH HAS NOTHING TO FEAR FROM THE FACTS AND SCRUTINY.

They were "always learning and never coming to a knowledge of the truth" (cf. 2 Tim. 3:7)! That's probably why Socrates said that you must "admit your ignorance" to begin to learn. Sophomores in college think they know so much, but they have only begun to learn. Education is going from an unconscious to a conscious awareness of one's ignorance. Augustine said that he believes in order to understand; indeed faith comes before reason! We all have faith, whether in God, mankind, nature, science, logic, or religion, because everyone starts out with some presupposition they cannot prove. Faith in science is not inherently superior knowledge--it's still faith.

People erroneously have blind faith that science has disproved creationism or Christianity, and this is dangerous to all of us. We erroneously assume that believing something makes it true and not believing something makes it false; there is no universal belief, but there is universal truth. We must always be ready to back up our allegations and assertions with facts.

By the way, science is becoming "scientism," thinking it is the only true source of truth, and consequently, it's becoming a religion according to Carl Sagan, a professor at Cornell Univ. in astronomy. Science is not meant to answer philosophical, historical, legal, ethical, or religious issues, but restrict itself to the logical, observable, measurable, and repeatable. The scientific method, as invented by Sir Francis Bacon, is only one way to find truth. You can't have your minds made up so that you don't want to be confused with the facts! If you are a know-it-all that is unwilling to admit you could be wrong, you will never know the truth of the matter at hand.

There are facts that have evidence and can be proved by various means, then there are allegations and accusations that are unsubstantiated. When someone disseminates unsubstantiated so-called facts, it is slander, not news! Journalists know what sources are and their credibility factors. Unreliable sources are ignored and so are those that have lost credibility. Anonymous "leaks" are not good sources to publish as gospel truth and are fake news services that are the tabloids of the internet and unworthy, unreliable sources.

We don't have faith in faith for its own sake, but the object of our faith makes all the difference. We must be willing to admit we could be wrong to find the truth and also be willing to go wherever the evidence may lead, no matter how unpalatable. Sometimes truth is something we couldn't have guessed and is stranger than fiction--who wouldn't have thought the Godhead or Deity was triune. In examining the evidence we fit the theory to match the facts, we don't fit the facts to fit our theory! In short, there is Truth with a capital T and all truth meets at the top because it's God's truth according to Augustine and Aquinas. Remember that Jesus announced: "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life..." (cf. John 14:).

Jesus, being the incarnation of truth itself proves we can know it and that it doesn't change--truth is timeless and always relevant. Truth is nonnegotiable and isn't a short-term contract and we have a right to our own opinions, but not our own truth or fact (there are no "alternative facts" as Kellyanne Conway and Trump say). We all have the right to our own opinion but not to fabricate our own facts. The thing about truth is that Jesus promised us we'd find it if we searched for it with the right attitude. "You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free" (cf. John 8:32). Jesus also said that if we are willing to do His will we shall know whether it is of God (cf. John 7:17).

Unbelievers are those who "reject the truth" (cf. Rom. 2:8) and repentance will be granted to some that they may "come to a knowledge of the truth." A sign of a true believer is that he is thirsty for and loves the truth: "... because they refused to love the truth and so be saved" (2 Thess. 1:10, ESV) they were judged and condemned.

Pseudo faith: Some people would say something is true because it works for them or feels right, these are fallacious presuppositions; John Dewey actually thought you couldn't evaluate the truth of an idea, only its usefulness (if it works!); the biggest misunderstanding is that all truth is relative and this would have to be a relative statement, making it meaningless! Ever since Pilate asked Jesus what truth is man has wondered if there is some absolute, universal truth for everyone everywhere--in antiquity "might made right!" There is truth in Christ who came to "bear witness of the truth" (cf. John 18:37). We must avoid the fallacious assertion that something may be true for one person, but not another and that everyone has their own truths that are only relative--we don't the right to fabricate our own truths! The Bible is truth and has the power to change or transform (cf. John 17:17) lives by virtue of that power.

In sum, Jesus said (cf. John 18:37) that everyone who is of the truth hears His voice--His sheep hear and recognize His voice and follow Him (John 10:27). In the final analysis, we need to be workers approved by God, who are "rightly handling the Word of truth" per 2 Tim. 2:15. Caveat: Beware of academia teaching the so-called theory of evolution as unquestioned scientific fact, when it's only a time-honored scientific tenet of faith!

"The Christian position is not that the truth is unknowable or that we are confused; it is that truth is knowable and we have rebelled," according to David Noebel. In application consider George Lucas' faith: "The conclusion that I've come to is that all religions are true." This is nonsensical and has no truth value, period; I rest my case! Soli Deo Gloria!

What Good Is History?

"Of the sons of Issachar, men who understood the times, with knowledge of what Israel should do, their chiefs were two hundred..." (1 Chron. 12:32, NASB).
"What experience and history teach is this--that people and governments never have learned anything from history, or acted on principles deduced from it." (Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Philosophy of History).

We must realize that history is God's redemption story told in real time and God involves itself in history that is called interventionism and he is in control of history as he orchestrates it to the very detail determining the boundaries of the nations in the rise and fall kings. History goes in a direction that is not circular but linear it is headed towards a culmination and a climax when Christ comes and it can be interpreted we must learn from history.  The Bible says history can repeat itself. 

It does in a sense rhyme it comes back in different ways to learn and teach us new lessons and we don't learn them. Like what happens in Germany could happen here we must realize that we are not above being judged by God.  We must hope that history has a turning point and we can change directions we can still redeem ourselves and reclaim ourselves for God's sake in the world and be a light to the world as we once were as America. We can find meaning and history and learn our lessons even to apply to a person alive not just a story and it's not meant to entertain or be entertaining but to teach us wisdom and make us realize that God is in control of history it is his story.

Henry Ford said, "I don't know much about history, and I wouldn't give a nickel for all the history in the world." Businessmen have little use for academic subjects since their line of work is largely practical and commonsensical. It matters little whether Ford knew about the Civil War, except that he mistakenly named one of his cars the Lincoln! (I'll say tongue in cheek!) It has been said (by Georg W. F. Hegel, et al.) that the one thing we learn from history is that we don't learn from it! Christianity is a religion of historical significance and is based on history and is dependent upon it as God's redemptive narrative that is headed in a direction at the culmination of Christ's Second Coming and Judgment Day to end all history.

Some erroneous views of history include uniformitarianism (God doesn't intervene miraculously, such as in the Deluge) and cyclical conceptions or views, whereby it's repeated in cycles---we hold it's going in a direction towards a consummation or is linear in conception. History is not the judge, as Communists believe, but a lesson to be studied and learned. We're not doomed to repeat our mistakes! We dare not discard our common heritage and legacy! Why? Our men in uniform have given the ultimate sacrifice to secure a place in the world's stage of nations. Marx thought the point of history was to change it, not just study it! 

However, the world is not as simple as a business transaction or the bottom line--diplomacy is a skill to be sought out and valued. We have a heritage of relationships in our nation with other nations that have taken decades, and many administrations to mold. To throw away and start from scratch every administration would be ill-advised, as well as disastrous. To be specific, we have made treaties and trade pacts that need to be honored, to keep the good faith and integrity of our nation intact. The president really has no right to start from scratch and issue all new treaties unilaterally, just because he disagrees with them. The honorable thing for one president to do is to honor the commitments made by his predecessors. We are finding out too late that George Washington may have been right to warn us of foreign entanglements and treaties, and even of political parties, that tend to divide.

The point of continuity in our foreign policy is to keep credibility and our friends from becoming our competitors and potential enemies or even adversaries by virtue of their alliances. What they say is that a friend of our enemy is our enemy! Don't even flirt with danger! Don't create the vacuum to make this possible! This is no time to be sucking up to our adversaries and trying to mold breakthrough relationships and alliances that are revolutionary and even upset the world order. It is vital that we recognize the world order and the balance of power in the world and not upset the apple cart. America doesn't have to remain the world's police, but we are without a doubt the leader of the free world and this comes with the territory. When America speaks the world listens!

What we have is a failure to learn from history: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it," according to George Santayana. The U.S. is not a business venture run by corporate CEOs and is not immune to the lessons of history. Instead of making friends of our enemies, we seem to be making enemies of our allies in one sense of the word. 

Be that as it may, I am mainly concerned that we don't dissolve treaties, and end up going to war because of a lack of foresight or wisdom through good counsel. Do we have to end up in war before we learn our lesson that diplomats and statesmen know something and that it's not all about the bottom line or the pulse of the people, as a populist president seems to think? Soli Deo Gloria!

Is There A Social Gospel?

"When Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature, do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law" (cf. Rom. 2:15, ESV).

We have been given the Great Commission and the Great Commandment, but is there a Great Cultural Mandate? Some refer to a social gospel, but this is a misnomer. Our ultimate allegiance is to Jesus, naturally, not to the government, and Jesus did say that His kingdom is not of this world--that He was no threat to Caesar.  His kingdom is not of this world!   What kind of social calling do we conclude from Scripture? Some Christians believe this society isn't worth saving, some believe politics can't change the human condition, some believe the Bible is not relevant to civil government, and some do believe we should secure and take back society for Christ or reclaim America for Christ! Is it our calling to save America?

You can get too involved in the politics of this world that you are getting nowhere spiritually and getting your eyes off Jesus, but there are evils in society that must be rooted out and the government is instituted to overcome evil, restrain it, and contain it. Look at some of the greatest social movements in history, such as ending the gladiator fights, ending slavery, ending child labor, and giving women their rights, are the result of Christian influence--so there is a place for Christians to get involved with a divine calling.

We also need Christian influence in the government, i.e., as elected officials and public servants influencing for the good as salt and light. Christ's kingdom is one of the hearts of men and is not visible, it will be set up visibly at His second advent and we will rule with Him in glory. But some Christians believe we should try to take over and impose our way of life on the infidel: making him behave or live in a Christian manner and standard. Christian law has been tried and failed several times in history: Calvin's Geneva; Bradford's Plymouth; Winthrop's Massachusetts' Bay Colony; Cromwell's England, among others. We frown upon Muslims saying that tomorrow belongs to Islam and when they set up Shariah law, they aren't recognizing the rights of minorities, i.e., Christians. How can we expect non-Christians to live like Christians? This is really Christian Shariah law (like blue laws, gambling restrictions, and prohibition).

The purpose of government is not to outlaw sin but basically to protect freedoms, protect property, punish crime, securing justice. We are to "render to Caesar that which is Caesar's" (cf. Matt. 22:21) for sure, and we are never told to eschew society, start a revolution, or join hands with the powers that be as partners in crime either. We don't have carte blanche to wreak havoc on the social order. If we lived in a communist nation, we are not to become involved in a subversive underground of resistance but be model citizens and fulfill our mission of being salt and light.

However, there does come a time when the government tells us to do something immoral or forbids the free exercise of our faith, then it's imperative to disobey in an act of defiance and civil disobedience. Here's the rub: "We must obey God rather than men" (cf. Acts 5:29; 4:19). This is amply demonstrated by Daniel refusing to pray to the statue and being thrown into the lion's den; he neither flaunted nor privatized his faith as a prime minister who was salt and light.

The Bible makes it clear that our primary mission is to change hearts through the gospel message, and hopefully, society will be revolutionized as a direct result. Paul didn't make it his mission to overthrow slavery, but with the spread of Christianity, its demise was certain as believers rejected it and had more influence--not forced change. We are not called to set up a theocratic government or experiment with a nation ruled by religious leaders. It was Christian influence that said we have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness--rights are conferred from God and recognized by the state.

However, the conclusion of the matter is that we represent Christ to the world as His hands, feet, heart, and voice and we have the power to make a difference by being that salt and light, which preserves and shows the way in the darkness. The church shouldn't get overly obsessed with turning stones into bread or mission work unless the gospel is propagated with it, we are not to become mere do-gooders and must remember and not lose focus of the fact that we are "aliens and foreigners" and our real "citizenship is in heaven" (cf. Phil. 3:20). Christians do have a duty and responsibility to the state, though, as Edmund Burke phrased it: "All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
Soli Deo Gloria! 

Refuting Error And Polemic Technique

Gen. George S. Patton wrote a book, Patton's Principles: A Handbook for Managers Who Mean It.  The point he makes is that we need to pick our battles and not get into disputes for no good reason when we have nothing positive to gain.  If we have everything to lose and nothing to gain, avoid it!  Some arguments generate more heat than light, and subsequently, aren't worth the adrenaline. 


The Bible says that God's servant must not be quarrelsome, and forbids us to be contentious, argumentative, judgmental, or divisive; the strategy of the devil is to divide and conquer and we need not be ignorant of his schemes.  We must learn the art or discipline of agreeing to disagree, and to disagree without being disagreeable!  Some people avoid all arguments like the plague, but an argument is simply showing someone his error or falsehood.



There are rules of debate and etiquette to keep arguments civil and under control, so as not to alienate and do irreparable damage to the relationship:  they say you shouldn't ever talk politics or religion, according to the American maxim, but how do we ever arrive at truth without doing that?  Truth is not relative but absolute and we need to be devoted to the truth; the unbeliever rejects the truth, but he who is of the truth hears God's voice--Jesus came to bear witness of the truth and truth came through Him, the personification of it.  A good lawyer can argue both sides of the case and knows the arguments pro and con, but we also hone our skills at learning and speaking by the principle that "iron sharpens iron" (per Proverbs 27:17). 


We all tend to be opinionated and some people don't want to understand, just express opinions, but just as we hold opinions, convictions hold us and we would consider laying down our lives for them.  We all have a right to our own private opinions, but not to fabricate our personal facts. The Bible doesn't forbid controversy, just godless controversy.  A point in fact:  John Stott wrote a book, Christ the Controversialist, to show that he didn't shy away from hot topics and wasn't afraid to upset the apple cart and the security of the Pharisees' turf, so as to make them jealous of His fame and popularity. We must not avoid controversy because it's not an option; to avoid it is to avoid Christ and the truth, letting heresy take over the church.   



We must aggressively confront heresy and confute those in opposition to sound doctrine--a good deacon can defend the faith and confront heresy, even smelling false doctrine a mile away, as it were. Edmund Burke said, "All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing." Let's not lose by default because we conceded and didn't come to the rescue and aid of our errant brothers.  The truth of the Bible is fully defensible and we need to be equipped to rightly divide the Word of Truth and to study to show ourselves approved unto God, as workmen without shame (cf. 1 Tim. 2:15).


Republicans insist there's no "evidence" of a cover-up; there's plenty of it, but they don't know what evidence in a court of law is:  it doesn't necessarily mean "proof" but only an argument or case to consider in making the decision of guilt or innocence.  There is often evidence pro and con in every case.  There is evidence of a cover-up because Trump told the Russians that he got rid of the "crazy nut job" to ease the pressure on the Russia issue.  He also admitted to Lester Holt on TV that the reason Comey was fired was an attempt to end the Russia investigation (by intimidation).  


Obstruction of justice, by the way, doesn't have to be successful, to be considered obstruction, all one has to do is make the attempt, even if it fails.  It isn't just one staff member that's under suspicion, but eighteen and there is evidence according to the FBI of a cover-up, and this implies there's a crime to cover up!  As they say, where's there's smoke, there's fire.  Soli Deo Gloria!