An idea about bounded-vs-centered Christianity.

I am borrowing this part from:
Is the question for Christians "Out or In?" or "Farther or Closer?"
by John Ortberg

Bounded is to set up boundaries that define a Christian. If you do this or that you are not a Christian, but if you do this or that other thing you are.
Centered is to have something at the center that defines and all positions around that center define those things as more or less like or a part of the center.

The rest of this is my explanation of what I think that is saying.

I would like to try explain this in a simple way by using love as the center.

Jesus is love. He isn't solely an example of love. He isn't merely one who loves or loved (depending on how you look at it). He is love.

Anyone who loves is closer to the center (Jesus) in proportion to the love with which he is loving. Non-Christians and Christians alike can all love. But not all do and not all love the same.

The destiny of mankind is to be in the center with Jesus. To perfectly love is to be perfectly with him. If a person isn't trusting Jesus, she may still move towards her destiny but will not be able to complete it without trusting Jesus.

When we are trusting in Jesus, he gives us something that is otherwise missing. He puts himself in us in the form of the Holy Spirit. Then, we have the center in us and actively moving us toward our destiny.

The Holy Spirit will produce in us what Jesus is because that is who the Holy Spirit is.

To get closer towards the center than we can naturally is always dependent on our trust in Jesus to conform us to his likeness.

Category: | 0 Comments

Arthur Dunlap


I plan to use my 20+ years experience to strengthen the overall infrastructure and supporting processes for the company I am employed with.


Sr. UNIX Administrator

August 2004 - present

Hollywood Entertainment Corp | Wilsonville, OR

Entertainment Venues and Theaters

Worked with several infrastructure teams to improve and maintain the processes that support the business.

* Maintained AIX versions 4, 5.1, 5.2 and 5.3 via upgrades, patches, add-on software products and Perl scripts.
* Supported IBM Dynix installation, creating more reliable disk space usage, and backup options via Perl scripts that monitored for problems, alerted technicians and executed solutions.
* Supported installation of NetBackup 5.2 to retain data integrity across Windows, AIX, LINUX and Dynix platforms.
* Upgraded NetBackup 5.2 to 6.5.4.
* Worked with IT team to plan and execute the migration off of the Dynix machines to the newer AIX machines.
* Worked with IT team to plan and execute the migration off of Shark F20/800 SAN to Hitachi 9585 and ultimately to our existing Hitachi USPV.
* Managed LUN assignments from Shark/Hitachi SAN through the fiber switches to the AIX hosts.
* Instituted, wrote and managed clear, concise, procedures. The goal was to produce and keep continuity to minimize administration overhead.


Unix Administrator 2

April 1996 - December 2003

Electric Lightwave, Inc. | Vancouver, WA

* Installed remote HP-UX hosts. Installed and configured VMS and billing software.
* Automated manual data collections via Perl scripts and Autosys. Installed, configured, monitored and maintained Autosys.
* Set up Autosys jobs for customers to process data for the Arbor billing system. * Installed, upgraded, configured and maintained VPO (ITO) on HP, Linux and Solaris equipment.
* Diagnose various Unix problems and performed repairs.
* Installed, upgraded and supported Enterprise/EDISwitch System by GE, automating the collection and distribution processes via Perl scripts and Autosys.
* Installed patches for HP-UX and Solaris as required to fix problems.
* HP-UX 10.2 and 11.x Solaris 2.5, 2.6 and 7. Set up automated notification of host problems for off hours via paging and email current on-call technicians.
* Maintained and used NetBackup to backup information from 110+ hosts. Approximately 40 were enterprise systems while the rest were smaller servers and work stations.

Perl scripting, HPUX, Solaris, Linux AIX management, HTML Markup, Apache, Tomcat Web management, SAN management (Hitachi 9585, USPV and IBM Shark F20, 800),



0 0 - 1 1999

HP Openview IT/Operations for System Administrators I | San Jose, CA


0 0 - 1 1999

HP Openview IT Operations Fundamentals |


0 0 - 10 1998

HP-UX Sys/NW Admin for Exp Unix Sys Admins | San Jose, CA

HP-UX System Admin for Experienced Unix System Admins.


HP-UX Troubleshooting

4 2000

HPUX Upgrade to 11.i

3 2003

Administration for nPartitions

3 2002

HP OpenView IT/Operations II

6 2000

System and Network Administration II

9 1999

Category: | 2 Comments

Grace is not defined in the Bible. The activity and life of grace wasn't created by those who added their input to the pages we now consider The Bible. I would first like to look at the English word and then at the Greek word in another post.

The reason I want to talk about this word is that I am referencing what it means when it is written in the Bible. Currently, when people read the word grace, they:

  • Can't figure out what that word means in the sentence because it doesn't fit according to the Christian definition of the word.
  • Think grace means, "God's unmerited favor."
  • Think grace means salvation.
  • Think grace is the word to use to speak of a feeling of peace, or when good things happen.
  • Think grace is the prayer that is spoken before or after a meal.
  • To be lenient, "It was out of grace that God does not punish us."

When the King James Bible was translated in 1611, they chose to use the word "grace" as a translation for the Greek word, "charis" and for variations of that Greek word.

The word, grace, originated from French in the late 12th century and was eventually used by the English. The first written record of the word in English was in 1579.

The current English variations of the word are:

  • Grace as a verb. This is used like, "grace us with your presence." The meaning of that statement is a request for someone to show us their favor by being present at a certain time. This is a modern day use of the word, grace, to mean favor.
  • To suggest being well balanced, or well able to perform some physical feat. This would be, "She was a graceful dancer."
  • To say a prayer of thanks to God for providing the food.
  • To be lenient, "It was out of grace that he did not punish the child."
  • To be a person who shows kindness to visitors, "They were gracious hosts."
  • A Greek goddess.

Some of our English variations come from the English translation of Latin origin. In Latin, the word is "gratis". The English is really a transliteration, but we have English definitions for them because we use them when we speak.

  • Gratify - To show favor to someone or to please them.
  • Gratitude - To show thanks to someone who gratified you.
  • Gratuity - A gift or reward given without obligation in response to someone providing gratification.

We use the Greek form in one respect as it applies to Christian church  ritual. The Communion or the Lord's Supper, is also referred to as the Eucharist. Eucharist is a transliteration of eukharistos. A transliteration is not a translation. To transliterate is to convert letter for letter from one language to another. It doesn't provide an equivalent meaning in the known language.

  • Grace is one translation of the word, charis.
  • Charisma is a transliteration of charisma (Greek). But, we happen to have a English meaning for charisma because it is used by English speaking people. It is the characteristic of a person who has personal  influence on a person or group of people. It translates as a gift of grace.
  • Eucharist is a transliteration of the word, eukharistos because it doesn't tell us the meaning of the word. It only represents the letters and the sound of the word for us to use. eukharistos is translated, "grateful".

 The following words or terms refer to grace because of their origin and help define grace itself as it is used in modern English.

  • Grace.
  • Gratuity.
  • Thanks.
  • Thanksgiving.
  • Favor.
  • Favorite.
  • Charisma.
  • Charismatic.
  • Kindness.
  • Gift given without obligation.
  • To satisfy someone.
  • Having received a other-worldly gift.

Favor is an important part of this study on grace, particularly as it applies to God having favor towards humans. That is the essence of the Christian use of the word, "grace". It is not a wrong usage, but to use it exclusively this way is to narrow our understanding of what grace really means to all of us.

There is an old practice or custom that has changed in our times that would help us understand a part of what grace is about. This is the use of the word, "obligate", or "oblige".

  • obliging - Happy and ready to do favors for others.
  • obligate - To cause to be grateful by doing favors.
  • obliged - To have received a favor and is now looking to return the favor.
 It may seem funny to look at the English ideology of grace as it applies in our recently modern language. To oblige someone is not that old of a use. These days, it has a slight variation. If you have obligated someone, you have constrained them by contract or a business deal to fulfill some action. That is an example of how these words have changed recently even though we continue to use the same words from the 17th century.

To obligate someone  used to mean that you had done them a favor and now they feel that they should do you a favor in return.
Now, to obligate someone, means that you are forcing some action from someone by contract or other legal means.

Category: | 1 Comment

Glory is the high esteem accorded to a person or thing by a group of people. It is also the quality of the person or thing that results in people holding it in high esteem. In order for there to be glory, there must be something that is not glorious. Otherwise, the glorious thing would appear normal.

We are presented with the glory of God's grace. What do we compare it to? How can we ascertain that God's grace is indeed worthy of glory?

I am not afraid of looking at this worthiness. I don't believe that my determination of worthiness will be the final say on the matter. And I think that any time there is a statement that God is worthy or that he has glory, it is backed up by a certain judgment. This judgment was made by the person declaring God's worthiness or his glory.

To say that we should determine God's glory or worth based on the single fact that "he is God, therefore he is worthy", leaves something to be desired. To hold someone's attributes in high esteem, simply because of a position of authority or preeminence is to say that we don't really know what it is about that attribute that makes him worthy or that is glorious. If we approached everything like that, then we might find ourselves praising the truthfulness of a liar simply because he holds the office of judge or mayor. We could sing his praises and glorify his name simply because he is the judge, therefore he is honest and should be honored even though we know of nothing that he has been truthful about.

So, if we want to truly honor or glorify God, we need to know what it is about him that is glorious. What is it about God's grace that is glorious? Is it because he gives us things we don't deserve? Is that not like the children singing the praises of the father, "Dad is great! He gives us chocolate cake?"

I think that some may think that the comparison is how God does not punish us if we are under grace and he does when we are under law. But that isn't really it either. That's the same as reporting that my friend knows how to give good gifts because he didn't hit me with anything instead of hitting me on the side of the head with a bat.

In order to really answer this, we need to look at what grace is. What was Paul talking about when he said, "In love he predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will -- to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves?"

Category: | 1 Comment

That is to ask, "Does God do extra, non-spiritual things for people?" Does he send rain to help the crops grow? Does he help people recover from illnesses? Is he really concerned with those things on the earth that are, perhaps, not really as important as the things that are in heaven?

I know that there are verses I can quote about these questions. Those versions could probably lead both ways in the discussion. But, my idea about how we live as Christians brings me to one conclusion that is known, but may not be generally considered. It is probably more of something that people would say that it is true, but that they hadn't really thought about it. My theory is:

  • If our opinion is expressed by quoting the Bible verbatim, it isn't really our opinion. It is an expression of what we understand is the opinion of someone else.
  • When we express our opinions, we have either built them based on what we have learned that the Bible teaches or from folk lore, or superstition, or just plain common sense. We actually mix all those things together when we express our opinions.
For instance, if you were asked how you thought people were saved by God, would you quote verses, or would you gather all your understanding of life and what the Bible says together into one cohesive statement of what your opinion is? If you chose the later, you would be expressing the conglomeration of your life mixed with your understanding of the Bible. I believe that a lot of times, choosing the former method is the route taken by someone who doesn't know what they think or is possibly afraid of saying the wrong thing.

But, an opinion is an opinion. If an opinion is expressed and it can be deemed "wrong", then that provides opportunity for learning. If the answer is given in rote and it is correct, but the person is not able to express his opinion apart from rote memory, then there is no opportunity for learning. In order to learn, one must realize a deficiency and have a goal to aim to improve it. If the deficiency is masked by quoting words that are not our own, we avoid the first step to learning.

Back to the point of this blog.

Does God do good physical things for people? I believe that he does. I know that we don't always get what we want God to give us. But, there are times when we do. LaFonda is fond of saying, "God doesn't do nice things for us because we are good. He does nice things for us because he is good." I think that expresses it. He does nice things for bad people and he does nice things for those of us who don't consider ourselves to be bad (even though we may actually be bad).

Jesus told us to do nice things to and for people who are doing mean things to us. His reasoning is so that we could be like God, because God is good to the good people and the bad people when he sends rain to both types (The rain is for the crops.). That is my evidence that Jesus thinks God does good non-spiritual things for people.

I also think that a lot of times, we have a tendency to separate the physical from the spiritual. We essentially see the physical as being unimportant at best and evil at worst, while spiritual is good or better than the physical. My opinion about that is that God made us physical and spiritual. It wasn't his intent that we live our lives unimportant or evil simply because he has encompassed our souls inside this body. Even Jesus didn't shirk putting on the physical in order to do God's work. If the physical is evil, how would he have justified that? If it is unimportant, why would he have made all that effort?

His effort didn't only entail coming to earth and suffering the sacrifice and being resurrected. He was actually born of a woman. He came out of a woman, was potty trained, learned how to read and speak and so on. Why go through all that trouble if he was just coming here to cause damage to the body he was given? Then, he spent three years teaching, healing and casting out demons. It seems that if the physical is unimportant, he would have simply skipped all that. Why go through the trouble? Just get the job done and get out of here!

I don't say this to suggest that every whim that we have is important. Nor do I mean to insinuate that the temporary things of this world are more important than or as important as the eternal things of the spirit. I am saying that the things of this earth are not unimportant. We live our lives here. The eternal hope we have in Christ is our encouragement to continue in this life on the earth.

Now for a list good things that God did or does for people as they were done by Jesus.
  • He gives rain to the just and the unjust.
  • He healed people's physical deformities.
  • He healed diseases.
  • He exorcised demons.
  • He raised people from the dead.
  • He paid taxes from a coin in a fishes mouth.
  • He multiplied food to feed hungry people.
  • He turned water into wine for a wedding.
  • He helped fishermen find fish.
There's another thing that I keep thinking of that illustrates the power of God to affect the things of the physical world. It wasn't a thing he did for anyone. It was something he did and the Bible said it was because he was hungry and the tree didn't have fruit on it since it wasn't the season for fruit. What happened then? He cursed the tree and the tree withered to its roots.

So, whether we look at Jesus as God's son who had a special connection with God, or we look at him as God incarnate (also giving him special abilities), we have to confess that he as the representation of God or God himself, did these things and they weren't just the natural course of this world. They were supernatural activity affecting the physical world.

Now - what about the rest of the New Testament? What kinds of things were prayed for and what did God do for or with people?
  • Directed the choice of a replacement apostle by the drawing of lots.
  • Raised a girl from the dead.
  • Healed people as Peter's shadow fell across them.
  • Two people died because they lied.
  • One man died for being proud.
  • Demons were cast out of people.
  • Signs and wonders were done among the people at the hands of the apostles.
  • Paul didn't die when bitten by a snake.
  • Peter was released from prison.
  • Paul was released from prison.
What sort of prayers for physical things are recorded in the New Testament? Some were answered and some were not.
  • Thanksgiving for food. (Why thank God for food if he isn't the provider of the food?)
  • Release of Peter from prison.
  • Prayer prior to raising people from the dead.
  • Prayer for people to be able to travel to certain places to visit with people.
  • Prayer for the sick.
Now for personal experience. These are some of the things that I am personally aware of:
  • Daughter healed.
  • LaFonda given black shoes.
  • Eyes healed.
  • Drunk led to Bible study from a bar.
  • A person sick for days better in a couple of hours after praying.
  • A continuously reinfected broken ankle healing in a day or two after praying.

Category: | 2 Comments

This part is the most difficult because it is not meant to be an attack on any person or group of people as if I have all the answers and they don't. But it can sound like it if this is read expecting it to be an attack.

I believe the church is the body of him who fills every thing in every way. I also believe that the church as a whole thing is as invisible as he is since it is too large to be viewed from any vantage point besides God's. So, the church is essentially invisible as a whole entity.

But, there are several places where people gather together at least once a week (either as a services to God or to view a service to God) in the name of Christ. Those gatherings are visible. The individual persons who make up the body of Christ is each visible to those who are close enough to see them. But, to observe a service or to observe those who go to the services is not necessarily seeing the church. The church is mingled in with those who gather together, but not all who gather are the church. The church is those who have been united to Christ through his death and resurrection.

My observation is that the church is not that gathering for service. But, the church does gather for service. This is true because to observe the ritual actions of these gatherings does not reveal the church. Those actions do not represent the church. The church is alive as Christ is alive. If we are united with him in his death, we are also made alive with him.

This takes the ritual out of the church. Our present day idea of the church includes the ritual. But the ritual is only a replacement for the active life of those who are united with Christ. This ritual has replaced the King in the minds of those who see the church as:

  • A place where people gather to worship Jesus.
  • An organization that provides leadership and guidance to its members.
  • The leaders of the organization who make decisions that affect the members.
  • The pastor or priest who is the go-between in relation to the members and God.
The new testament is the part of the Bible that tells us about Jesus and the fledgling church as it emerged into the world. It also has letters from various individuals to various people at various times and in various locations and situations. These letters primarily give us instruction about what the church looks like and how the church lives. None of these documents that are primarily concerned with the church and Jesus give us any indication that God wanted the church to become an organization or for pastors to replace the direct relationship between God and the church (who is in Christ).

It wasn't until after the twelve and their disciples died that the facade the church has become started to be put into place. The existing "church", with its rules of membership, pastors, priests, hierarchical model of leadership, rituals, superstitions and special rules for holiness (to list a few things) was not in the mind of Jesus when he said that the true worshipers will worship in spirit and in truth instead of a certain place. Now days, worship means that some people tell other people what to say, do and think. This doesn't seem to me like worshiping in spirit and in truth.

I know the Bible gives us direction on how we behave as we live together in this body. I know that it tells us the truth on how to behave with each other in love as we gather together. So, we are to gather. But it doesn't tell us anything about how the pastor or priest is to lead us to God. It doesn't tell us that the church has final authority on earth when it comes to heavenly things. But, this is the general way the organizations are represented as the church. It is thought of by those in charge of the organizations and by those who are members of those organizations as if God wants some religion.

These are just a few ways that the rule of Christ has been superseded by the organizational church. I am not saying that those who are a part of that are not in Christ. I am saying that the real people are a part of the church; the organization, the building and the governmental structure are not. Those things actually place those who would be obeying the King into the position that what they are really doing is obeying the church. For example, even if a person wants to do something for Jesus, it must pass the scrutiny of the expert, paid and trained clergy before it is legitimate. If someone begins to do some thing that they think God wants them to do and they are not working within the constraints of the clergy, then they are labeled parachurch. This gives us the sense that at best, the church puts up with it, but it cannot completely be condoned by the church because of its lack of commitment to the beliefs, or practices of the clerical church.

As I said earlier, the current conditions that are forced upon the real church by the self-proclaimed representative of God on earth, have been gradually put into place a little at a time here and there throughout the last 1900 years or so. So, what we currently think of as the church is so ingrained in us that we only think of it in the form that has replaced the reality.

I have not said that there should not be leadership in the church. I have not said that the church should not meet. I am referring to the state of mind that tells us that there is a certain class of person who is holier than the rest of the body of Christ. The idea is that the church follows the leader. These leaders have placed themselves between the people and the King. This was not a requirement of the King. It was a man's invention. It cannot be found in the Bible and it wasn't practiced by the early disciples of Jesus or by their disciples.

Category: | 3 Comments

Once there was a man with two sons. This was a long time ago, so there won't be very many familiar things in it like cars and cell phones. In any case, the youngest son decided he wasn't getting the things out of life that he wanted, so he asked his father for his inheritance (see how long ago it was?).

His father gave him his inheritance and little Johnnie thanked him gleefully and headed out into the world to see what he could see. After some time, he found that gambling and partying was very expensive and that it had severely damaged his inheritance. In fact, he had run so low on money; he couldn't even afford to buy a McDonald's cheese burger (if there had been any around that is).

Since he was getting hungry and really didn't have a place to sleep either, he hired himself on to take care of farmer Don's pigs. But, as you can imagine, pig feeding doesn't pay much and he still found that he wasn't able to purchase enough food to keep his stomach from aching because it was so empty.

One day, he threw the slop out to the pigs and noticed something that most people don't notice when they are feeding pigs. He noticed that the slop he was giving the pigs looked like a pretty good meal. Of course, pig slop can be made up of food that would have otherwise been thrown out into the garden or the burn pile. But, it still looked good to him.

When that happened, he remembered how well his father's servants ate when he was at home. Wow! What a revelation. The servants eat better than the pigs and the pigs eat better than he does. So, little Johnnie set off for home to negotiate a deal with Dad. He decided he could be a servant in his father's house. He had completely forgotten how much he disliked living there when he was a son. But, the servant idea was better than eating pig slop. As he reasoned these things, he approached his home.

What do you suppose happened then? While he was a long ways away (not driving or in a bus), his father looked out and saw the form of his son who had left so long ago. He dropped all that he was doing and ran out to meet his son and welcome him back home. Johnnie said, "Dad, I can be a servant in your house. I know how well they eat." But, his father would not hear of it. Instead, he insisted that a robe be thrown over him and the family ring put on his finger and a great big party be thrown for his son. He said, "My son who was dead has come back to life again."

Well, there's more of the story to tell. His brother, Jake was none too pleased with this situation. He had not wasted his father's money. He had stayed at home and done all the things he thought would set him in place in his father's mind and house. But, now, that troublemaker is back and he gets a party. But, that's another story.

It is amazing that God just looks for the slightest excuse to accept us and take us back to him. The father didn't put Johnnie on trial to determine if all the requirements for returning home had been met. He didn't ask him what happened to the money. He didn't ask him if he was sorry. He just saw Johnnie heading in the direction of home and ran to bring him the rest of the way.

Wow! What does it take to get acceptance from God? Just take a turn. He's watching to see which way you are heading so he can run and help you come back.

This variation of an old familiar story was stolen from "The Musings of Matthew Smith".

Category: | 4 Comments

The Good News

  1. Jesus’ message of good news was that the kingdom of God was near them.
    1. He even declared it to be in those who followed him.
  2. Jesus’ good news was not freedom from the kingdoms of the world.
    1. His good news was that the king that we rejected all those times is coming to establish his kingdom among us once more.
    2. He hasn’t given up on us.
    3. He hasn’t decided to just destroy us as his enemies.
    4. He provided a means for us to submit ourselves to him as we should have always done.

    Peter’s conclusion of his speech on the day of Pentecost was:
      “Brothers, I may say to you with confidence about the patriarch David that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. Being therefore a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that he would set one of his descendants on his throne, he foresaw and spoke about the resurrection of the Christ, that he was not abandoned to Hades, nor did his flesh see corruption. This Jesus God raised up, and of that we all are witnesses. Being therefore exalted at the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this that you yourselves are seeing and hearing. For David did not ascend into the heavens, but he himself says, “‘The Lord said to my Lord, Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.’ Let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.”
    There is then a short summary of some of what was happening while these people gave themselves up to the king of kings.
      Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?” And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.” And with many other words he bore witness and continued to exhort them, saying, “Save yourselves from this crooked generation.” So those who received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls. And they devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers. And awe came upon every soul, and many wonders and signs were being done through the apostles. And all who believed were together and had all things in common. And they were selling their possessions and belongings and distributing the proceeds to all, as any had need. And day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they received their food with glad and generous hearts, praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to their number day by day those who were being saved.
    From that day, the church began to grow to be more than those 120 people who were in the upper room to thousands. These thousands of people who were added to their numbers were subjecting themselves to the king and messiah. This was Jesus that they submitted to.

    From that point, the followers of Jesus as king grew in Jerusalem until persecution and famine drove them from that place to others places. Wherever they went, they spread the news of the king of creation and all men who had died and rose from the grave as predicted by the prophet and king, David.

    Now, as we read the few letters and documents that have been passed down to us from those men who knew and spoke to Jesus, we see no evidence that there was any intention in any of their minds that the church replace their king in heaven with one from the earth. But those who claim the name of Christ have done so.

    Reaction to “heresy” – the making of a “king” like Israel did.
    It started with some group of men in 300 AD who were the supposed leaders of the church. These men decided which of the writings of the apostles they would keep and which they would destroy. Based upon that decision, they made it clear that those who subscribed to the non-canonized scriptures would be considered to not be followers of Christ. In fact, at some point the “church” found itself with the authority and the insolence to judge these people worthy of death at the hands of the “church” for disagreeing over which written articles were actually authentic and should be deemed to be God's word.

    The next section is going to go over what the church has done in the past 2000 years in relationship to the King of kings. It will be general and I am not going to spend a lot of time digging up dates and particulars and names to back up what I am going to say. It is, after all, history and anyone can find documents to read it. I am not as interested in the particulars because I am only aiming at the general relationship of the church towards her king. It has been 2000 years after all.

    I am not against any particular people group, or religious sect. My only concern is, "How has the church related to her king and how shall she relate in the future?"

    I think that examples like that of the canonization of certain scripture and the resulting slaughter of people as a result of it is only important in that it gives us a comparison between following the King who said, "A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another: just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another," and following those who justified killing one another over the words on a piece of paper. The rub is that those documents all had the same thing written in them. It was written that the King of heaven and earth had commanded us:
      "A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another: just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another."

    Category: | 2 Comments

    I know that was the caterpillar's question, but it is a good one none the less.

    Once there was a farmer. Let's call him, Gideon. He enjoyed farming and producing food products for his family and community until a small glitch in his life-style was forced upon him. There was an enemy in the land. This enemy proceeded to kill live stock and steal produce from Gideon and his friends. But, what could he do? He was a farmer after all.

    Once day, while threshing his wheat in a wine press, he was visited by an angel. This angel addressed him as if he were some kind of war hero and gave him some instructions for his next place in life. All of a sudden, Gideon was a soldier and a commander. He wasn't a farmer any longer.

    From here, he proceeded to build his army to fight the enemy. There are too many details in the story for my tastes and much more than needed for the point of this blog. But, let's suffice it to say that he got his army, got his instructions from the king (God) and fought the enemy. They won the war.

    After the war, the people wanted to make him the ruler of the land. But he refused. You see, he was now a farmer. His assignment from the king was ended when the war ended.

    The lesson we see in this is that we can be satisfied and fulfilled in being who God has made or called us to be. It doesn't matter if it is extraordinary or mundane.

    As a wise friend of our said, our peace lies not trying to be who we are not. While Gideon was fighting the war, he wasn't responsible for the crops. While he was tending the crops, he wasn't responsible for the war.

    Sometimes, our lives are mundane. Sometimes they are extraordinary. When we are not satisfied with whatever place are we are in, we have conflict within ourselves. Our job is to do the thing that God has placed in front of us to do now. In that lies our peace with our selves and with God.

    This is my lesson of course. It is the lesson that God is trying to teach me. He just told this to me. Now I have to find a way to make it a part of my life. Sometimes I am there and sometimes I am not.

    Category: | 2 Comments