Deeper Waters

One of the topics that I went to at church last night for a teaching session we were having was on preparing to teach. I like the guy who did it. It was my favorite session of the night, but there was one part I really disagreed with. He spoke of how prayer was important, which I agree with, and he said we should pray for transformed lives, which I again have no problem with, but then said “And if you do that, God will do it. After all, he says if you ask anything in my name, I will do it.”

Okay. Now we’ve got problems.

My thoughts immediately went to people who would be praying for transformation. What about that young man who is struggling with internet pornography and prays again and again for God to change him and it never seems to happen. What is he to assume about the power of prayer?

What about the girl who wants to lose weight and prays for God to help her because she wants to feel attractive, and yet she doesn’t seem to be able to do it successfully? What is she to assume?

What about the wife who is praying that her husband won’t come home drunk that night? What is she to assume about prayer when that doesn’t happen?

Now, I realize all of these have a factor of human free-will, but I think the problem is that transformation does not always come immediately. The young man will probably spend much time trying to get over internet pornography before he does so successfully for instance. It could help him to get a good counselor and good friends.

God can transform us, but prayer I do not believe is meant to be used as an immediate cure-all. We can even think of other cases where this doesn’t happen. Not everyone who is physically sick and prayed for is healed. There are Christians who have died of hideous diseases though people prayed they wouldn’t.

If we turn prayer into a blank check, we set up a misnomer idea of what the Christian experience is to be. If we don’t get what we pray for, then it is just assumed that we must not be good at prayer or God doesn’t love us, or we’re not good Christians, or any combination or more.

We can even think of things God cannot do for they violate his nature. Could we pray for God to turn evil into good in Jesus’s name or vice-versa? Could we pray for God to make a square circle in the name of Jesus? Could we pray that God will cease to exist in the name of Jesus?

Too often, that phrase “in the name of Jesus” turns into a mantra of sorts where we think we are twisting God’s arm when we say those words. That is not a Christian view of language though. We cannot force God to do anything by our words. We can only ask him to do things.

So what did it mean? It meant that back then, you would want to speak to a patron (The Father in this case) and to do that, you needed a mediator, a benefactor. (The Son) If your will was in accordance with what the patron wanted, he would grant your request. The Benefactor was the one through whom the request was made.

That’s it. It is not a cure-all. Instead, it is a piece of advice to stay in the moral will of God and pray from that position. We cannot make prayer what it was never meant to be lest we distract it from the awesomeness that it is.

I was at church tonight listening to a talk on leadership. I don’t remember how that point was reached, but somehow, there was talk about Christ and the Holy Spirit and the speaker said that you could even speak of “Christ, the Holy Spirit.” Naturally, my mind was locked on that the rest of the talk and afterwards, I did go and talk to him and it was agreed that my point was correct.

I said that we can’t speak of Christ in that way because when we say “God, the Holy Spirit”, we are speaking in a way to clarify which person of the Godhead we mean. There are not multiple persons in Christ though. Christ is Christ. We can say “Jesus is God” or God the Son” but we cannot say stuff like “The Holy Spirit, the Father.”

I understood where he was coming from though for I do know he does believe in the Trinity. Every now and then though, we can all slip up in that area and I think it’s important to catch it each time. (An interesting way is in prayer. Consider how many prayers in church can begin by speaking to the Father and then say something like “And we thank you for dying on the cross.” It’s important that we keep in mind who each person in the Godhead is.)

What was being talked about though where passages that speak about Christ sending the Holy Spirit and then saying that he will come to us. The language is quite similar. I think this is an important point to raise in a Trinitarian framework so let’s take a look and see what is going on.

He didn’t give any passage, but I’m quite sure John 14 would be included:

15“If you love me, you will obey what I command. 16And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever— 17the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you. 18I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you. 19Before long, the world will not see me anymore, but you will see me. Because I live, you also will live. 20On that day you will realize that I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you. 21Whoever has my commands and obeys them, he is the one who loves me. He who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love him and show myself to him.”

Alright. The Holy Spirit will come and be in you and yet, Christ says that he will not leave them as orphans. He will come to them.

Later in that chapter Christ says:

23Jesus replied, “If anyone loves me, he will obey my teaching. My Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him.

So all of them will come? What is going on?

Most likely, it’s saying that the one sent is acting on behalf of the one he is sent by. This happens in the NT with the Centurion’s servant. Consider this from Matthew 8:

5When Jesus had entered Capernaum, a centurion came to him, asking for help. 6“Lord,” he said, “my servant lies at home paralyzed and in terrible suffering.” 7Jesus said to him, “I will go and heal him.”

8The centurion replied, “Lord, I do not deserve to have you come under my roof. But just say the word, and my servant will be healed. 9For I myself am a man under authority, with soldiers under me. I tell this one, ‘Go,’ and he goes; and that one, ‘Come,’ and he comes. I say to my servant, ‘Do this,’ and he does it.”

10When Jesus heard this, he was astonished and said to those following him, “I tell you the truth, I have not found anyone in Israel with such great faith. 11I say to you that many will come from the east and the west, and will take their places at the feast with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven. 12But the subjects of the kingdom will be thrown outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”

13Then Jesus said to the centurion, “Go! It will be done just as you believed it would.” And his servant was healed at that very hour.

So in that one, the Centurion shows up. Alright. Let’s see the parallel account in Luke 7.

1When Jesus had finished saying all this in the hearing of the people, he entered Capernaum. 2There a centurion’s servant, whom his master valued highly, was sick and about to die. 3The centurion heard of Jesus and sent some elders of the Jews to him, asking him to come and heal his servant. 4When they came to Jesus, they pleaded earnestly with him, “This man deserves to have you do this, 5because he loves our nation and has built our synagogue.” 6So Jesus went with them.
He was not far from the house when the centurion sent friends to say to him: “Lord, don’t trouble yourself, for I do not deserve to have you come under my roof. 7That is why I did not even consider myself worthy to come to you. But say the word, and my servant will be healed. 8For I myself am a man under authority, with soldiers under me. I tell this one, ‘Go,’ and he goes; and that one, ‘Come,’ and he comes. I say to my servant, ‘Do this,’ and he does it.” 9When Jesus heard this, he was amazed at him, and turning to the crowd following him, he said, “I tell you, I have not found such great faith even in Israel.” 10Then the men who had been sent returned to the house and found the servant well.

Well? Did the Centurion come or not? The answer is probably that in the first case, a servant came but was acting on the behalf of the Centurion. This sounds just like verse 26 of John 14:

But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.

Now why do I interpret it this way? I’ll grant if these were the only verses, we could argue for modalism maybe. However, we have several other passages that show Trinitarianism instead. (Notice the constant distinctions between persons in the Upper Room Dialogue itself.)

However, since I do see evidence of the Trinity, and that’s a blog for another day, I must find another way to interpret these passages. Of course, in a sense, Christ is in us seeing as he is omnipresent, but the Holy Spirit is not Christ. We must be clear on our terminology. We are Trinitarians.

I have recently seen a non-Christian saying that when it comes to miracles, Christians will believe that all other miracle reports past and present in non-Christian religions are false, but when it comes to Christian miracles, these are true. Why? Well just believe that they are and it will suffice.

First off, I don’t think any Christian should say “Just believe” insofar as one is taking a leap of blind faith. I do think that there are reasons to believe that the miracle accounts in the gospels did happen. However, that is a secondary issue. The primary issue is in the question itself.

Am I as a Christian, obligated to an all-or-nothing scenario? Let’s suppose that I believe X miracle account is false, such as the account of Mohammad splitting the moon in two in Islam. Because I believe that, am I obligated to believe that the resurrection is false? Secondly, am I, in reverse, obligated to believe that since Jesus rose from the dead, that Mohammad split the moon in two?

To begin with though, the evidence in favor of the miracle of Jesus rising from the dead is far greater and this must play a part. We have the manuscript evidence of Scripture being early, the textual evidence that it is what was written down, the philosophical evidence of the coherence of the worldview, the prophetic evidence that the OT prophecied Christ, the archaeological evidence that the Bible has been shown to be reliable, etc. There is more than enough evidence for anyone who wants to believe.

However, the point of the skeptic is still flawed once I accept the resurrection. I do not believe the resurrection because it is a miracle. I believe it for the same reason that I believe Hannibal crossed the Alps. It has shown itself to be true, and I would say far more so than Hannibal crossing the Alps even.

I legitimately look at the evidence for the resurrection and conclude that it happened. In fact, this is what we can do with any question. We can look at the evidence and see if the case holds up or not. We do not again believe something because it is miraculous. We believe it because it is true.

Now I can turn to a miracle like Mohammad splitting the moon in two. Do I really have any evidence to believe this? Well, no. The Qu’ran for instance tells me that Mohammad did no miracles save for the delivering of the Qu’ran itself.  I also see the Hadith tradition is quite distant from Mohammad as well. Then, I see no external evidence that such an event occurred. I am justly allowed to disbelieve it.

Some might think that that is a simple one. What about some accounts of miracles in other religions on a less than global scale? Are they all false? Not necessarily. Why should I believe that a miracle cannot happen in a non-Christian religion? Am I to deny that God can do a miracle for an atheist for instance?

There are several explanations for miracles in non-Christian religions. God could be giving light to those in those religions to seek him out. There could be demonic powers at work that are causing events to occur. There could be witnessing going on that is accompanied by true miracles. Any one of these is legitimate.

Point? It’s not all or nothing. It’s like any other claim. I look at it and see if it’s true. If the skeptic asks you about miracles in other religions, go ahead and say “Sure.” Who are you to say God can’t do them? Be open to examining the evidence for the claim though just as you should examine your own faith. As Paul said, test all things. Hold to what is true. (1 Thess. 5:21)

I’ve recently written on the Space Trilogy of C.S. Lewis and I’ve written a few blogs on the Harry Potter craze as well. I have also recently read the Brothers Karamazov. I don’t really read that much fiction, but I do think it’s good to every now and then. I can picture some people wondering why.

Should we not spend our time in educating ourselves and learning all that we can? Well, I can see the point some, but I don’t think it’s valid. I see the people in the Bible doing a lot more than having their nose in books. (I say this as someone who has a book propped open in the bathroom so I can read while shaving and brushing my teeth.)

I see Jesus in the Bible regularly teaching and then at times having meals with the people. I have no outright evidence of this, but I don’t think theology was always the topic of discussion. They probably chatted about any number of things much the way that we would do so today.

I also think if we all took this approach, the human race wouldn’t last much longer. Many fine scholars are married. That would mean that they’re spending some time going out there and finding a spouse and if they have kids, well, we can be sure that other things are being done besides reading.

So let’s suppose we’re talking about the person who likes books but thinks all fiction is a waste of time. To them, I again disagree. Fiction goes back much farther than we realize. It was written as a teaching tool as well and not primarily for entertainment, although it was meant to be entertaining.

When we get to the Greeks, we find them writing plays. While this was entertainment, it was not in a vacuum. Worldviews were being expressed and lines were being drawn. The greatest ideas of the time were being shown. I even think of a line from the play Antigone that shows a belief in a moral law outside the king.

What’s the point? It’s something to make an argument for objective morality and it should be done. The value of fiction is that fiction allows us to see the living out of ideas. You want to argue that morality is above the king and that all of us are subject to it. Great! A play like Antigone though shows how that might look if it is lived out.

That is a real gift of fiction. It also enables us to live out adventures so that when the time comes, we’ll be ready. Want a mystery? Go to the library. Want an adventure? Go there as well. This can apply to movies and TV shows as well. We can get to experience things on a unique level as well as get to see ideas lived out.

I do enjoy non-fiction reading the most, but I can’t deny that I do learn much from Fiction. Is it a waste of time? I don’t think so. Of course, some fiction probably is. Some non-fiction probably is. However, God gave us imaginations. Pity us if we don’t take the time to use them and enjoy them.

I just recently finished reading C.S. Lewis’s Space Trilogy. The last book in the series is called “That Hideous Strength” and is about an organization called N.I.C.E. (National Institute of Co-ordinated Experiments) coming in and pretty soon, they have a worldwide following where they plan to use the blessings of science to remake man into God.

I won’t tell what happens in it. I really think that each person should read the trilogy for himself. The last book wasn’t entirely a page-turner, but at the same time, it sucked me in somehow. I wasn’t sitting on the edge of my seat until we got right to the end, but yet I had to know what happened. Lewis is just a masterful writer in that way.

There is one character that when I think about him, he is the most frightening character to me in the book. Is it the evil leader of the N.I.C.E.? No. Is it the Bent One himself? (referring to Satan) No. Is it the Deputy Director of the organization? It is not him either. This character only appears in a few places, but he has a rather significant role.

That is Reverend Straik.

Reverend Straik was once a good man, but then he had suffering in his life that was profound. He joined the N.I.C.E. and applies anything that has to do with power to being the will of God and fully supports the N.I.C.E. as being the will of God. He is willing to twist Scripture to fit this belief. At the end of the story, he shows exactly how depraved he has become. I shall not tell you what happens, but my blood runs cold thinking about it.

Why does he scare me the most? Simple. The other characters I know are evil. I expect them to be evil. However, I think of a reverend and think “Him as an evil figure?” However, it is true. The one who seems to have such zeal that the prophecies are being fulfilled is a man of darkness.

These are the most dangerous threats in many ways. The Apostle Paul knew that he was going to death when he spoke to the Ephesian elders. He didn’t choose to warn them though about persecution from Rome or the Jews so much as persecution coming from within for wolves would enter and devour the flock. This is the same one who said Satan’s servants masquerade as angels of light.

This is what makes Straik so dangerous and it’s harder when I think on how he used to be good. I know of many people who used to be good in ministry but then something happened and they want to the dark side. Today, they usually become agnostics and atheists. I think Straik is more dangerous though. At least with the others, you know where the line is. By Straik maintaining his title, the line is not so clear.

There are several Straiks running around today. Now they’re not out there trying to make humanity deity entirely. (The Mormon church though…..) However, they are bringing in false teaching and the real danger is they look legit. They look like devoted Christians. They may say they’re only studying the Bible, but be cautious.

A lady today told me about a church she started attending. She told me that they only say what the Bible says. They don’t have any opinions. The pastor just says what it says and that’s it. I want to look closer at this place. I would hope it’s legit, but the idea of no opinions bothers me. It is as if this one person is the final authority on what the Bible says.  Such is breeding ground for a cult.

Friends. We can’t afford to be risky today in theology. When someone comes to you wanting you to join a new church or a new mission or movement, be sure to find out what they believe. Make sure that they mean what you mean when they use the words. Mormons will say they believe in the Trinity. Don’t think they mean what you mean by that word though.

Be on your guard. Straik does not exist only in fiction after all.

One charge brought up against Christians many times is that we’re superstitious. This is also said when speaking about the ancients. If we went back to the times of the Bible, all of them were superstitious people. It’s quite entertaining what happens when you ask people what they mean by this. Does it simply mean believing in God? What does it mean?

I see a superstition as a way of controlling nature. It is a way of trying to appease to the powers that be so that you will not suffer. It is also a way of avoiding them. If X happens, you throw salt over your shoulder. You also in a negative fashion, try to avoid having a black cat cross your path or walking under a ladder.

In some sense, that did go on in a polytheistic society. It wasn’t without basis though. The conclusions were wrong, but they had reasons for thinking what they did. These weren’t idiots though. The Babylonians were polytheists, but they also were incredibly intelligent in their time and we still use some of their wisdom today.

Not all Greeks were polytheists. The gods could be seen more as ideals. It would be foolish of us to deny the intelligence of the philosophers. While we may think some of their conclusions are wrong today, some of them were quite right. The ancients did not have the technology we have today and yet predicted so much that if it isn’t correct, in many cases, it’s very close.

And lastly, Christians are not superstitious. (Well, we’re not supposed to be.) The Christian is usually seen as superstitious because he prays to a God he believes in. That is the opposite of superstition though. It is not an attempt to control fate as if God is at our mercy. It is properly placing us at his and saying “Thy will be done.”

There have been in history two ways of controlling nature. One is magic and the other is technique. Over time, man has chosen to rely more on technique. (Although I do think there is something to dark magic which would involve demonic powers.) Today, we refer to it as technology.

A Christian may pray for rain. A modern man will most often go up and seed the cloud for rain. Yet what is the purpose of all of this? Is man trying to fight against nature? Is man wanting to see nature as an ally or an enemy? Do we view nature at war with us in things like earthquakes and volcanoes and hurricanes and global warming. (The last of which, I don’t believe in.)

The ancients would not see it that way. They were the partners of nature working together on a noble path. I have been told that when the Native Americans were living in Florida, they did not build habitats on the seashore. Today, we send our senior citizens there. The Native Americans were smart enough to know that hurricanes come frequently and it’s best to work in tandem with nature than to try to resist her.

In many ways, in our attempt to control, we have become enslaved. No. We are not in the Matrix yet, but many of us could not live without our appliances that the ancients had no need of. Consider being in a car on the way to work and then stuck in traffic. You are far from home and far from work. What is meant to get you there in essence becomes your prison. You cannot really get out and just leave your car and start walking.

All of this  has simply been our way to try to control nature. Now I’m not saying it’s all bad. Technology has brought us some good things, but it’s important for us to realize that nature is not our enemy. This is sensible in a theistic worldview where God is in charge. In an atheistic one though, nature must be red in tooth and claw and only the strong survive.  Naturally, one will think that nature is an enemy then.

So what’s one to do? One will have to find a way to control nature. One will have to find a way to prevent evil from happening from the power of nature that be. One will have to set up precautionary actions in order to avoid suffering and when it happens, take the proper steps to deal with it.

In a way, one will have to become superstitious.

I have been considering some things lately. With my upcoming move, I have been in a sort of system shock and my personality is the type to second guess myself constantly. I was discussing tonight with a friend of mine who recently proposed to his girlfriend. He too said he was in system shock in so many words and during our prayer prayed that he would not back out of it. (With his girlfriend there! It’s a group Bible Study. I really admired that.)

I also think about recently talking to a friend of mine who was going through a hard time. This friend was talking about a circumstance going on and they were just worried about how it would all turn out. My response was that they were putting way too much pressure on themselves and that they were mistaking the temporary for the eternal.

Christ has said he has given us the power to move mountains. I believe many of us want to test this theory as many of us like to take the molehills in our lives and make mountains out of them. Perchance many of us have drama actors and actresses in us that make more of out what is. We could outdo Alexander Pope any day with his “Rape of the Lock.”

Yet all that we see, if it is not of God, it will fade. It is God that is eternal. The decision we are stressing out over now will not mean the end of the world. Whatever decision we make, we can be sure it will not thwart the plan of God. The universe will continue going on its path.

Our problem is that we take a temporary situation and we make it eternal. If we are in a temporary slump, we make it an eternal slump. We cannot understand how we got there but we immediately start crying out “How long O Lord? How long?” Now I’m not against praying to God in hard times, but as a friend of mine and I discussed earlier today, those hard times seem to make us lose sight of the good times. They seem far off and distant. That was a pleasant time gone by. This is reality today.

What if we thought from eternity though? Consider your life in Heaven. Do you think you’ll live it in regret over a dumb decision you made here? No. Do you understand how? If you do, please tell me. I can only guess that from the light of an eternal perspective, we’ll see it differently in a way we can’t now. However, if eternity is not spent in regret, why should I regret now?

Are you going to worry about the future in Heaven? No. Someone might say “But that’s God’s kingdom there. God is in control.” What? He isn’t here? Granted, stuff happens here that won’t happen in Heaven, but God is still in control. Do we think that something can happen in this lifetime that can thwart his plan? If his plan will not be thwarted, should we not rejoice?

Seen from eternity, things are very much different. 100 years of life here if we live that long is just a blip. In fact, it would hardly even register as a blip. Whatever the smallest measure you could think of for that unit of time, that is the way that it will be seen in the light of eternity.

Consider the wisdom found in 2 Corinthians 4:

16Therefore we do not lose heart. Though outwardly we are wasting away, yet inwardly we are being renewed day by day. 17For our light and momentary troubles are achieving for us an eternal glory that far outweighs them all. 18So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen. For what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal.

You know what Paul’s light and momentary struggles were? Go through the book of Acts. You’ll see them. Read 2 Cor. 11. He’ll tell you what happened. Go through the epistles and just look at the states of mind he describes. All of those are going on and what does he refer to them as?

Light and momentary troubles.

I want to scream if I have a case of the blues….

And why is that struggle light and momentary? Because troubles are not eternal. Paul chooses to not look at his problems but what is eternal. He looks to God. I often think in my struggles if I could take my eyes off of myself and get them on God, I’d be so much better off. Maybe you’re like that. If you are, you’re not alone.

Friends. Let’s fix our eyes on the author and finisher of our faith. What we are going through is temporary. No matter what it is. This too will pass. All that is true will remain. From eternity, if there is one thing we might think as we look back it is, “Why did we worry so much about that then?”

Pray for me as I try to look at the Lord in my struggles. I hope to pray for you as well.

I was planning to go to the pool this evening and I’m looking through my closet and what do I see but a shirt that I got from a friend at a convention last year. I hadn’t worn it in awhile, but I always wore it with pride. It was a reminder of a community that loves me and accepts me as I am and a great time of fun, fellowship, and faith that I had.

When I saw it, I could not help but smile and immediately, a flood of good and happy memories came. I wish I could say all troubles in my life evaporated at that point, but to say so would be lying. I will say though that that reminder did help me overcome them some and set me thinking about reminders.

The Bible is full of them. God always wanted his people Israel to know where they came from. The past was meant to strengthen and encourage them. In many ways, the past would often set the precedent for the future. God would be faithful and act in the present and future the way he did in the past.

“I am the Lord your God who brought you up out of Egypt.” How often is that said? When the kings of Judah and Israel went out and hired mercenaries or sought other forms of military help, did not God condemn them and say “Didn’t I do this for you in the past?” The problem was they did not realize they could trust that the God who did the wonders in the past was still around, and when they did obey, God did provide.

I was listening to Douglas Stuart at Biblical Training yesterday online as he was describing a writing found talking about Sennacherib’s conquest. He says that Senna said that he had Hezekiah trapped like a bird in a cage. Every other nation he tells how he totally destroyed. Of Hezekiah though, he just says “I trapped him like a bird in a cage.” Why? Because Hezekiah was trapped until an angel slew 185,000 of Senna’s men. God did provide.

In the NT, we see the same thing. We are told to look to the life of Christ first and foremost. The Hebrews writer especially draws us back to the past in reliving the lives of the saints as well. They are told to be faithful to the promises of the past and to be sure that what God has said, he will do in the future.

Isn’t this our trust today? Our record of faithfulness is with God’s past relations in dealing with his people.  We have to look at how God acted in Scripture. While there weren’t always miracles, can we point to a time when God was not faithful to his promise? The answer is no. If that is so, then surely we should trust him for today.

And you know, I think I’ll wear that shirt tomorrow to remind myself of things that are important as well.

We are in a far greater war than that which is going on in the Middle East. We are in a war of ideas. Some ideas are right and some ideas are wrong, but all ideas have consequences. The consequences of those ideas that are false are far too dangerous to allow happen. Unfortunately, too many of us are sitting on the sidelines.

This isn’t a friendly skirmish. There are real casualties. We cannot think that the forces of Heaven and Hell are giving this a half-hearted effort or just saying, “We’ll fight now, but in the end we’ll all shake hands and be the best of friends.” No. Real people spend eternity somewhere. Who knows what part our actions play in that?

One level we don’t often look at is language. I do believe words are important. Words speak about ideas beyond themselves. When I say the word “God” I mean something more than the letters, G, O, and D pronounced in that order to produce a sound. I mean a concept that I have in mind. (Of course, I do think the concept exists outside of my mind, but by my saying it, I mean God as I see him and not as the Hindu, Muslim, or Buddhist does.)

In this war we are in, I believe that whoever controls the language wins. If we can make words mean one thing that they don’t mean, we can make them mean anything. Now I’m sure some shift in languages is inevitable, but we have to watch how our culture takes words and makes them mean the opposite of what they mean or rephrases them.

George Orwell wrote along these lines in his essay, “Politics and the English Language.” One example he gave was euphemisms. Euphemisms or a nice way of saying something that is really bad. Orwell pointed out that the media would not use terms that have negative connotations, but that they would reword those terms in more pleasant language with the same idea behind them and so fool the people.

A modern example is the homosexual movement. I do not use the word “gay.” Why? Because I think gay means one thing and not what the homosexual movement takes it to mean. Homosexual though seemed to have a negative connotation so let’s take a light and happy term. No. I’m not one to want to give them even that much. At the same time, I don’t use words that would be seen as derogatory either. I simply say homosexual.

The same movement is also trying to do this with marriage. Friends. We can’t define marriage. We can only describe it. If marriage is taken to mean anything, then it means essentially nothing. This is the price we play when we try to redefine language. We end up with meaninglessness.

This is also going on in the postmodern movement. Postmodernism has been trying to tell us that words are meaningless. (All the while, using words to do it.) Each person defines what the words mean. This is one reason when I debate, I really like to first sit down and define the terms. I want to be sure I and my opponent mean the exact same thing.

The point? Whoever controls the meaning of words controls everything. The very battle takes place in words and we need to watch ours. We don’t need to be lax with them but use words in a way that will enable us to think.

We can’t afford to lose.

I really am quite certain how this exercise would go about if I ever did it. What I have in mind is going to the man on the street and having them give me a list of famous thinkers. I will write that down. Then, I will compare to the second list of famous entertainers. These can all be past or present. I have no doubt which list would be bigger.

Sadly, even for me, I think the second list could be bigger.

I’m not against entertainment of course. I am thankful there are people who can write good fiction and play musical instruments well and sing well and act well. There is nothing against that in itself. I am against our being so overwhelmed that we don’t know thinkers, but we do know entertainers.

Let us suppose we went to the origin of our thinking categories on Earth, the country of Greece. We land there and we want to go see the Parthenon for instance. How do we get there? The best method would be to ask someone who lives there? Why? They’re familiar with the land and can get us there. It’s not intelligence so much as it is familiarity.

Compare that to us today. Let us suppose we wanted to know how to think? How would we do it? Honestly, most of us don’t know and we probably get a headache trying to ponder it. We also don’t know how to stay focused in our world as there is so much going on. Few of us ever take the biblical advice to just “Be still.”

We might have more intelligence, but that doesn’t mean anything this time. Intelligent people can draw stupid conclusions. The problem is we don’t know how to think like the ancients did. Not everyone in Greece was an Einstein I believe. They could have been people of moderate intelligence who just applied what they had and actually thought.

Instead, while we get together today for entertainment, which I am not against of course, we rarely get together and discuss great ideas. We never really talk about the thought of the day or even more importantly, the thought of the past and try to tackle great problems. Would that we did!

We do not know the writing of De Caelo, but we do know how quickly an Oprah Book Club recommendation sells. We do not know who Alcibaides is in Plutarch or the dialogues of Plato, but we know who Tom Cruise is in love with this week. We do not know who Germanicus was, but we do know what is going on in 24 this week.

Again, I’m not saying to neglect the other entirely, but realize that that is not all there is. There are great thoughts out there and if we addressed them, we might find them quite enjoyable as well. In fact, I find when I engage people in such conversations, they usually do enjoy them.

Christianity is a faith based on objective facts and truth and it’s a philosophy on how to see the world with Jesus Christ as the centerpiece. It is a faith for the mind. We neglect that only at our own peril.