A Sad Reality in the Body: Subjective -vs- Absolute

I was scrolling through Facebook recently and stumbled across a fellow believer who posted a strong (and some would say biased) statement. Yet, the statement isn't what caught my attention, it was the 20+ comments underneath. I'm one of those people who when I see a lot of comments for a status or a blog or an article, my investigator senses (which my wife calls my "nosy senses") go off. So I'll scroll down, quickly glancing at the comments until I get the gist of what's being commented and then I move on. Well in this particular case, some of the comments from the believers made me cringe. Some of the believers who commented spoke of truth as being "subjective"--that is, "we all can have our own interpretations and still call it truth". I exercised self-control and wisdom and chose not to meddle (thankful for the Holy Spirit, because I sho' did want to meddle). But I could not stay silent, so here I am.

What are we upholding?
We have to uphold the absolute Truth of God, but not simply for those outside, but for those inside all the more. The sad reality is too many members in the Body uphold subjective truth and "my truths" but are devoid belief in absolute Truth. That is a dangerous, destructive, and unbiblical position. It's too much of the "reader's intent" and not the "author's intent" on what Truth is in Scripture. The human authors were the ones sovereignly selected and inspired to write God's truth, not us. Our aim should always be to find out their intent not ours or anyone else's.
         Most believers are devoid of proper biblical interpretative methods. That's part of why truth is subjective to many believers. It's hard to believe in absolute Truth when you're never taught there is absolute Truth nor shown how to understand it in Scripture. Of course then Scripture becomes "what you make of it" (i.e. "reader intent") rather than "what the Divine Author intended and used His human instruments to convey" (i.e. "authorial intent").

What are we striving towards?
Yes, we should strive to agree on every absolute Truth in Scripture. But we won't agree on everything because our sinful nature presents that incessant hurdle of pride.
         So what do we do?

• We seek to find agreement in the essential truths.
• We seek to be objective (i.e. open and unprejudiced) where Scripture is open-ended.
• We seek to become like Jesus in our upholding His truth, in our exercising grace toward ours and others imperfections, and in our love for one another.
• And we seek to discuss, seasoned with grace and love, those hard things like understanding Scripture properly where we disagree---even if we still end disagreeing.

Conclusion
We are to graciously fight for God's absolute truth because we were saved by His absolute truth (Jam. 1:16-18). But let's do so not with a spirit of dissension, but a spirit of grace.

_____
Below are 3 other blogs I wrote and a sermon. The first one discusses truth and what it is. The second one discusses the need for proper biblical methods of interpretation. The last one is a debate I had with someone who held to "subjective truth", and a glimpse of how dangerous, destructive, and unbiblical it is. And the sermon is on upholding God's truth in our thinking.
1. Let's Talk About Truth
2. The Need for Hermeneutics (Part 1 of 2)
3. Blog Debate
4. Uphold The Truth pt. 1

10/16/12

The Need for Hermeneutics (Part 1 of 2)

“All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.” (2Tim. 3:16-17, NKJV)

How do you know what you believe is “the” truth? Is it by faith? Don’t other beliefs say faith is there answer too? How do you know which “Faith” is right? There has to be something that distinguishes one from another, truth from false, right?
     How do you know that what you believe in your belief is true? Is it by faith again? Wouldn’t that mean that anyone can say their opinion of their belief is true? How do you know what is truth in your belief, and can you be sure it is? There has to be something that distinguishes one from another, truth from opinion, right?
     In Christianity everything cannot simply be answered with “faith”. As I just showed, through those series of questions, faith cannot make those distinguishments by itself. There has to be some reasoning, evidence, and methods of distinguishing the “true Faith” from the “false faiths”, and the actual truth within a Faith from the falsehoods, opinions, misinterpretations, or misunderstandings within the same Faith. Christianity is the only belief to have reasoning, evidence, and methods accompanying our faith to show itself as true (i.e. apologetics). However, as for the internal distinguishments (i.e. polemics), it is most divisive. Yet, whatever we do agree on is only because of our understanding of the fundamental who, what, when, where, why, and how’s of our Faith’s origins (i.e. hermeneutics).

“Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you...” (Lk. 1:1-3, NIV)

     So why have I shared all of this? Because as Christians we have been charged by the Word of God to learn apologetics (a reasoned defense of what and why we believe for those outside our Faith- 1Pet. 3:15), polemics (which is apologetics for false and bad teachings within our Faith- 2Tim. 2:24-26, 1Jn. 4:1), and hermeneutics (the method of how we properly interpret the Bible- 2Tim. 2:15). Though I must note, apologetics requires hermeneutics, polemics requires hermeneutics, and proper application of the Word of God also requires hermeneutics. You cannot sincerely read, study, follow, or teach the Bible without hermeneutics. And here’s why:

If you misunderstand verses and passages in the Bible and you seek not the proper method of interpreting it you will most likely misinterpret scripture, thus you will falsely apply the Bible, and possibly lead others astray. If you interpret the Bible based on your opinion in any capacity you will almost certainly misinterpret scripture, thus falsely apply the Bible, and presumably lead others astray.

Anytime we ask a who, what, when, where, why, or how question about something within the Bible we have just crossed over into hermeneutics. Furthermore, in order for us to apply, when we attempt to apply, and when we do apply anything the Bible tells us to do we have just crossed over into hermeneutics. Hermeneutics is a must for every Christian and inseparable for reading, studying, and applying the Bible! You cannot get away from it. Either you will apply biblical hermeneutics (the proper method of interpretation) or you’ll replace it for your opinion and your own interpretation—which will lead you and others in error.

     “Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” (2Tim. 2:15, NKJV). The NASB says, “accurately handling the word of truth.” The NIV says, “a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth.” The actual interpretation of this single verse is exactly where the biblical concept of the method of proper interpretation (hermeneutics) is born. Paul prescriptively charges Timothy to study (be diligent–labor) to show himself approved by God, and as a master workman (or in our time it would be a skilled professional) would accurately, rightly, and correctly handle his tool or craft (just as Paul did at tent making- Acts 18:1-3; 20:31-35), so is Timothy to do so with the Word of Truth!
     For any Christian to know this and willfully choose not to accurately, rightly, and correctly handle the Word of Truth like Paul charged is disobedience and disrespect to God and the distinctive people of a distinctive time He chose to use to write this divine 66 book love letter we now have! Remember how Luke started his gospel, “they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word,” and “I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning.” If within a couple of decades after Jesus Luke himself “carefully investigated everything from the beginning”, how much more us thousands of years later? For any Christian who now knows this and still believes that they don’t need or have to learn at least basic hermeneutics is in error, selfishness, and pride all to their loss. If this is you, I plead for you to repent from these sinful attitudes or suffer the consequences!

“For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables.” (2Tim. 4:3-4, NKJV)

     My fellow family of God, the only way to keep yourself from falling victim to 2Timothy 4:3-4 (and other scriptures alike) will be to follow the prescription of Paul in 2Timothy 2:15 so to properly follow the rest of Scripture. Just as God has given us the instruments of doctors, medicine, and so on to help us in our infirmities, He has given us hermeneutics (the method of how to properly interpret His Word) as the instrument the Holy Spirit uses to help guide us into all biblical truth (Jn. 16:13). This is to our benefit, and any true child of God is going to want to be led into truth by the Holy Spirit (Rom. 8:14).

___________
“The How for Hermeneutics” (Part 2 of 2)
In Part 2 I will cover what exactly is hermeneutics and some “how to’s” for hermeneutics so all can be equipped and edified.

4/2010

A Defense for the Hope: Does God Exist?

Somewhere around 6,000 years ago someone declared, from a personal encounter, there is only one true Higher Power/Supreme Being– also known as, GOD. This declaration of theirs they passed on to the generations after them and told them to do the same, and it has gone on until this present day in time.
     From this point in history on people have made it a life endeavor attempting to prove this age old claim to be false. Now some will say that this age old claim was made from an assumption taken from independent reasoning. With this said, we can now see from the studies of certain things like *Astronomy, *Cosmology, and *Biology that those centuries ago who declared God exists aren't looney; which in turn means the burden of proof is truly on those who oppose this claim to not simply show reasonable doubt but “foolproof” doubt. Yet, if one who accepts the existence of God can show even an ounce of solid, concrete evidence for it the case against it, no matter how sophisticated it may be, is no more. For who can truly prove that something doesn’t exist if there is even one shred of solid evidence that says it does?
     Here are three things I believe is solid and simple evidence for the existence of God.

The Universe
Scientists say, by way of their “Big Bang Theory”, that the universe has always existed, originating in a coalition of energy: gravity, electromagnetic, strong nuclear, and weak nuclear. Well, using their theory, energy––an effect and also a cause, but in this case an effect because of its four manifestations––cannot exist (come to be, occur) without the direct result of some other “cause” (action). In order for this such “cause” (i.e. action by somebody or something else) to create/cause this such “effect” (i.e. energy [and eventually matter] that makes up this immeasurable universe), this such “cause” would have to be something absolute––the origin/starting point of all “CAUSE”, something that always was, is, and will be. Otherwise, this universe remains an effect (a state) of energy (and eventually matter) without a sufficient “cause” (action by some “thing” completely separate from the “effect”), and that’s scientifically impossible. In all of the efforts to explain the “Big Bang” (the origin of the universe aside from a Higher Power), it still doesn’t and will never be able account for how the “Big” was provided for the “Bang” to take place.

The Earth
Earth is too perfectly placed within this galaxy. Any closer to the sun it would be too hot for life and any further away it be too cold for life, and it’s not blocked by the Asteroid Belt having a perfect view to view the rest of the universe. It's too perfectly suited for the different kinds of life forms on it to be an accident, chance, or luck. The percentage of that happening is in the billions times billionth percentile. Again, this is far too scientifically improbable to explain with certainty without some Higher/Supreme Power causing it.

Humankind
Evolution? Scientists from the same field aren’t all on the same page with evolution. (Scientists from the same field aren’t all on the same page on a lot of things, but that’s for another discussion). Scientists can only tell us educated guesses (empirical claims) not precise, absolute facts. They theorize from pictures of space, equations, certain species, and so forth of how life on earth came to be. (The same is to be said for their explanation for the universe and earth as well). For example, stories and reenactments from ages ago where we do not have anything credible or tangible to support them are fictitious and speculative not absolute or necessarily true. So the stories and reenactments we read and watch about dinosaurs, life ten’s of thousands to millions and billions of years ago, and so on, have no such support for how they are being told or described. Thus they are speculative not definite. They cannot tell us from a first person position only a third person position, and a third person position is not solid enough to be accepted as first-hand facts (in this case); which is exactly why they’re still called theories and not absolutes. Therefore, there is no “fail-safe” scientific way to explain the existence of humankind except for a Higher/Supreme Power; that is, atleast starting the process of “evolving” or something of the sorts. Again, humankind is such an “effect”, like that of the universe or the position of earth within the galaxy, that it needs such a “cause”.


Conclusion
I read somewhere, “People claim to not believe in God because it is “not scientific” or “because there is no proof.”” Yet, we can see that not believing in a Higher Power is actually what is “not scientific”. These three alone give ample enough evidence that there is a God out there who atleast is the cause for the universe, the positioning of and the situating of life on earth, and then humankind; as well as reasonable doubt on the allegation that there is no existence of God. It’s after acknowledging the existence of a Higher Power that we have to ask the question of, does this Higher Power want something to do with us, or did it start it all and leaves it to it’s own devices? This is where I believe some of the different faiths/beliefs come from, trying to answer this question. Nonetheless, the reality of the existence of God is much more credible than that of those who adamantly disagree. Even well-known, non-Christian scientists agree. Renowned astrophysicist and evolutionist Stephen Hawking said,

“The universe and the laws of physics seem to have been specifically designed for us. If any one of about 40 physical qualities had more than slightly different values, life as we know it could not exist: Either atoms would not be stable, or they wouldn’t combine into molecules, or the stars wouldn’t form the heavier elements, or the universe would collapse before life could develop and so on.”*

And again he said,

“It would be very difficult to explain why the universe should have begun in just this way, except as the act of a God who intended to create beings like us.”*

Even Charles Darwin himself said,

“The impossibility of conceiving that this grand and wondrous universe, with our conscious selves, arose through chance, seems to me the chief argument for the existence of God … I am aware that if we admit a first cause, the mind still craves to know whence it came, and how it arose.”*

There’s an old saying I like to close with, “A fool says in his heart, there is no God.”* And that’s because you’d have to be a fool to not see the evidence of the existence of a Higher/Supreme Power, or dim-witted enough to cover ones eyes and say, “I don’t see anything.”


Here's a link to another site that shares a lot of information on this same topic:
http://www.bcrevolution.ca/collapse_of_evolution.htm
_________________________________________________________________

*1 - Astronomy is the scientific study of the universe, especially of the motions, positions, sizes, composition, and behavior of celestial objects.
*2 - Cosmology is the scientific study of the origin and structure of the universe.
*3 - Biology is the science that deals with all forms of life, including their classification, physiology, chemistry, and interactions.
*4, 5, 6 - One Heartbeat Away, Mark Cahill. Retrieved from http://audio.markcahill.org/Heartbeat.pdf, pg. 22, 24, 25.
*7 - Psalms 53:1

2009

Blog Debate: Is the Word of God literal, spiritual, or both?

I’ve had numerous blog debates. This is one I had in April 2008. I believe it can serve to edify the Body. I’ll be posting other blog debates later on. They are long, but they are worth the read.

Michelle: The stories [in the Bible] are not literal, but symbolic. They have complete Spiritual meaning. We know this is true when we apply the spiritual meaning to our lives - Not the literal. The literal would be silly... I myself can not ‘hear’ the literal any longer...

Me: “The stories are not literal, but symbolic”, by what means? Are you familiar with the historical educational and generational system of the Jews? Because if you were, you would be aware of how and what they took literal and symbolic by way of they’re writing. From Genesis to Esther are considered by Jews as historical (with respect to the Torah). They take the accounts recorded within these books as literal, not symbolic. The Poetic, Wisdom, and Prophetic books contain historical and symbolic language. These you can argue about what to take literal or not, but the first 17 books are considered by the people who God used to present the Bible to us as historical not symbolic. They know better than us of what’s written in it is literal and symbolic. Ask any Jewish rabbi about the Garden of Eden, the Genesis account of Creation and so on, I guarantee you they say it is literal not symbolic.

And what’s so “not so” about a snake talking? In the story of Balaam the donkey spoke. I guess you’ll question that story’s reality as well huh? What about the burning bush, not literal? Mount Sinai, not literal? The Passover, not literal? Jesus in the wilderness with Satan, not literal? The Resurrection, not literal? Pentecost, not literal? His second coming, not literal?

“As you therefore have received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in Him, rooted and built up in Him and established IN THE FAITH, as you have been taught, abounding in it with thanksgiving. BEWARE lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ.” (Col. 2:6-8)
___________
IF I based my reverence for God/Jesus Christ on any speck of His professed believers, then I wouldn’t believe in Him either (like those who don’t for this exact reason), because His people do a horrible job of representing Him. We’re all over the board when it comes to explaining Him and His Word. No wonder they think we’re simple or gullible, we can’t even come together on one Book.

------------------
Michelle: I agree there is a very real Jewish history, and Moses account of history. However, the problem is that Christians take the whole bible literal - Heaven, Hell, the fire, Satan, streets of gold, etc. The truths of the Kingdom are hidden in the literal things all around us (trees, relationships, look at all Jesus parables - not litereral, symbolic!). Trees are literal, yet Jesus uses them for our understanding of a deeper truth - This is my point!!!

In what God has shown me TODAY, the Spiritual meaning applies individual for my understanding of how awesome He is... Yes, I believe much of the bible has a literal history, but how does that change me from the inside (the letter?), No, it is the Spirit that gives life!!!

Gods creation is so amazing that whats around us has Spiritual meaning (the changing life, seasons, times, etc.) - The question is do we have Spiritual eyes and ears or carnal?

Me: Hey, I get what you are saying and have no problem with what you stated, but... “the problem is that Christians take the whole bible literal - Heaven, Hell, the fire, Satan, streets of gold, etc.”

How can you not take the existence of Satan (i.e. the Devil, Lucifer, etc.) literally? Again, do you deny Jesus’ wilderness experience with Satan? What about when Jesus said He saw Satan fall from heaven (Lk. 10:18)? Right there He takes care of Satan and heaven as literal. How do you explain not taking that literal?

Now whether Hell is really called hell with fire and brimstone or whatever is not worth going back and forth over. But by saying it’s a problem taking Hell (i.e. “the place where the eternal separation from God is served”) literal, you just rejected a number of passages within the Bible that clearly affirms this. How do you explain not taking that literal?

Streets of gold and such, that’s no big deal if some take it literal and others not. But to say it’s a problem taking Heaven (i.e. the promised New Heaven; also the paradise of being in a place with the presence of the Almighty for eternity) literal, again is rejecting a number of passages within the Bible that clearly affirms this. Even Jesus Himself affirms this (Jn. 14:3). How do you explain not taking that literal?

Yes we should be mindful of the literal and the symbolic. Yes we should know what scriptures fall in what category. YET, we should not water down one just to further emphasize the other. That was the problem with the second and third century Church. Paganism crept in and tried to emphasize on the symbolic and ignore (even deny) the scriptures that were literal. What happened as a result of that was “sacramentalism” and a host of other junk that sent the Church into a serious sick symbolic state for 1300 years, right up ‘til the Reformation.

Be careful not to over spiritualize the Bible, just as one needs to be careful not to over literalize the Bible. There are times, places, and things to take literal, and there are times, places, and things to take it symbolic. We have to be very careful teetering on that line and not make what is absolute as relative, and what’s relative as absolute.

Oh and it takes “Spiritual eyes and ears” to be able to receive what is literal, as literal (1Cor. 2:1-5, 13-14).

------------------
Michelle: Just two little things, How can I overspiritualize God, He is Spirit! God has shown me the Spirit gives life, not knowledge! Carnal mind is the enmity...

And I do not ignore scriptures when I study a topic or the bible, I just read them with different glasses now....

It may come to surprize that I do not find it required to read and study the bible to find God - His word is not letters on a paper, but His Word is Chirst in me, and ears to hear His Word for me personally,

God Bless

Me: I didn’t say over spiritualize God, I said don’t over spiritualize the Bible.

Yes the Spirit gives life, but what life is that? Is it not the life that our eyes, ears, hearts, and minds have been opened? Did not Jesus say that eternal life is that they (that would be us) may *know* the Father and Jesus Christ whom He sent (Jn. 17:2-3)? God even said my people perish for the lack of *knowledge* (Hos. 3:6). The knowledge God desires is knowing Him. This is not a bad or carnal thing, it is what God wants from us (Hos. 6:6).

“Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom,
Let not the mighty man glory in his might,
Nor let the rich man glory in his riches;
**But let him who glories glory in this,
That he understands and knows Me,**
That I am the LORD, exercising lovingkindness, judgment, and righteousness in the earth.
**For in these I delight**,” says the LORD.” (Jer. 9:23-24)


I agree with your last statement. His word is more than simply words, they are words of Life and words of Truth! Without His word, how would we have known Truth or Life?

-------------------
Michelle: We need to have our own testimony of God and Know Him (not just words on paper), I agree!!! This knowledge comes from our own personal experience and testimonies, not others. (not even those who wrote the bible). To know God is to know love and to deny self absorbant ways. To me God has made this wisdom much easier then the bible scholars have through His Holy Spirit and Word in me. The change is inward, not outward - thats about all in a nutshell, at least the way I have come to know God.

Me: Yeah, we just have to be careful not to water down or give little weight to the Word of God. If the Bible was removed from the planet, a whole lot more of professing believers would fall sway to the ways, ideas, philosophies, and teachings of the world and/or false teachers. It’s bad enough a whole lot are already falling sway now with the Bible available, and that’s because they water it down and/or don’t take it seriously.

The Bible is our guideline/boundary, kind of like the lane dividers on the street that keep us in our respected lanes for our safety. If the lines begin to blur, vanish, or people just stop regarding them, how much more chaos and disorder would our streets be filled with? And how safe would we truly be on the road? That’s how life would be without the Word of God, or even a failed respect for the Bible- ex. what we see today.

Yes there is a personal responsibility to our testimony, but the Bible also plays a part in our development and relationship with God. Again, we wouldn’t truly know who we are believing in if it were not for the Bible. God has presented and preserved the Bible for us for a reason much greater than it just being words on paper.

4/2008

Let's talk about... "TRUTH"

Here's a piece I wrote in response to a blog I was reading and discussing on myspace in like '07. Just wanted to share it. Thought it was a good read.

So, let's talk about truth shall we...
1. Truth is something that cannot be “concretely” denied. That’s what makes it TRUTH.
2. Truth is something that has or can be proven to be true. Otherwise, if it cannot be proven to be TRUTH, then it is subjectable to being denied (ex. theories).
3. Truth can be a person’s perception. One cannot tell me that what I perceived was not true, because it is what “I” perceived; therefore it now becomes “my truth”, whether you believe it or not. Now does this mean that what “I” perceive to be true is right, no. It is simply “my” truth, and not “the” TRUTH. For example, you can say you do not believe there is a such thing as an outer space. “You” hold this to be “the truth”. However, before scientist were able to look into “outer space” to prove that there is an actual “outer space”, all one would have to do (if they were not blind) is look up in the sky and see there are things (which we came to know as stars, the sun, and the moon) beyond our earth, thus proving there is a “space” out of our realm of earth––“outer space”. This would then make what “you” believe to be truth simply “yours” and not “the” actual TRUTH. It is on the “my truth’s” where we as people become divided.

     If “the” TRUTH cannot be concretely denied, can it then be proven to be undeniably true? Can there be concrete evidence to prove that this (whatever it is) is the TRUTH? Emphatically yes! TRUTH is a reality––something that is and can be known, even with our limited knowledge on certain things. Again, outer space is a perfect example. Only a fool can and would deny the existence of “outer space”, but no one can or ever will be able to offer a shred of concrete evidence to deny “the” TRUTH of an outer space. It is a reality. The “my truths” are individualistic and subjective. The TRUTH is absolute. It is true regardless of opinions or perceptions. The question that should be asked is, what do you do when “the” TRUTH is presented and proven to be true?
     TRUTH is a reality, period. Those who deny its reality, actually affirm its reality. Someone once told me, “…no matter what is told to a person or even “proven” to being true, that individual can and will accept whatever they care to as “the” truth.” Here’s my response, a person's perception is not “the” TRUTH but simply “their” truth.
     Where the problem or contention enters is when “the” TRUTH doesn’t fit with a person or persons “my truths”; which in turns leads them on a quest to deny the specific truth that has been presented. But if that which has been presented is “the” TRUTH, they will not be able to concretely deny it. Thus they just come up with theories and their pot of so-called “reasonable doubt” to mislead those who are already looking for a scapegoat not to believe “the” TRUTH, or mislead the gullible, non-researching folk.

     A wise man from Tarsus once wrote, “Since they refuse to trust truth, they’re banished to their chosen world of lies and illusions.” This is the end result of those individuals that can and will accept whatever they care to as “the” truth.
     The greatest commandment says to love the LORD God not just with our heart, strength, and soul, but also with our mind! Go educate yourself with the things, history, and people of God or you will find yourself being––whether you want to or not––educated with the things, history, and people of this world.

2007