So a lot of people have been getting their panties in a wad about the elections this week, from Congress down to assistant spitoon boy.
Seems like almost everyone's got a reason to be angry, afraid, or deliriously happy.
Especially angry at anyone who would dare NOT FREAKING CARE about the election outcomes.
I've lost track of the number of politic-nicks I've had to endure beratement from, in the process of (sometimes for the tenth time) explaining to them that I USED to be all up in arms to (at first) keep those damn Democrats from winning, or (then later) keep those nazi Republicans from winning.
Fact is, neither side is really that different.
They're all overstuffed, overwealthy, power-hungry bastards constantly trying to grab more money and power for themselves and keep it out of the hands of everyone else, ESPECIALLY EACH OTHER.
The day we see a middle-class, third party candidate show up with more than a halfway decent chance of winning MIGHT be the day I show up at the polls.
But our elitist overseers would never let that happen, unless the dude (or dudette) had alreay been bought, paid for, and stored snuggly in the pockets of those already in power to use as their poster-child.
So, till then, I'll refrain from wasting time and energy taking part in a corrupt, flawed system, and enjoy a Smirnoff Ice and some teryaki beef jerky while watching cartoons at home on "ELECTION DAY".
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Friday, October 29, 2010
Gays in the Military
I keep hearing about how Don't Ask, Don't Tell is somehow unconstitutional.
Like you'd be able to pick the gay guys out of a squad of actual Marines because the gay ones are somehow more feminine....even though they're still frickin MARINES.
Personally, I wouldn't mind having my butt covered by a guy who thinks my butt's pretty cute.
Maybe it'd motivate him to fight for more than just country.
Of course, given my lack of self-discipline, the gay guy in my foxhole would probably be more fit, a better shot, stronger, and a better hand-to-hand combatant than me.
A better wingman there is none.
It seems that many people are underestimating our soldiers' ability to keep their priorities straight, in the barracks or on the battlefield.
Either that, or maybe our soldiers aren't the finely honed battlefield geniuses they're made out to be?
I'd rather be optimistic, and say that the vast majority of our soldiers, no matter their orientation, would actually be (gasp!) PROFESSIONAL regarding their treatment of each other as fellow soldiers.
That may mean regulations to keep ALL on-duty fraternization prohibited or to a minimum, and enforcing that policy.
In the meantime, we should trust the men and women we send to die for us to be professionals when on-duty or deployed, and stay the hell out of their business the rest of the time.
Like you'd be able to pick the gay guys out of a squad of actual Marines because the gay ones are somehow more feminine....even though they're still frickin MARINES.
Personally, I wouldn't mind having my butt covered by a guy who thinks my butt's pretty cute.
Maybe it'd motivate him to fight for more than just country.
Of course, given my lack of self-discipline, the gay guy in my foxhole would probably be more fit, a better shot, stronger, and a better hand-to-hand combatant than me.
A better wingman there is none.
It seems that many people are underestimating our soldiers' ability to keep their priorities straight, in the barracks or on the battlefield.
Either that, or maybe our soldiers aren't the finely honed battlefield geniuses they're made out to be?
I'd rather be optimistic, and say that the vast majority of our soldiers, no matter their orientation, would actually be (gasp!) PROFESSIONAL regarding their treatment of each other as fellow soldiers.
That may mean regulations to keep ALL on-duty fraternization prohibited or to a minimum, and enforcing that policy.
In the meantime, we should trust the men and women we send to die for us to be professionals when on-duty or deployed, and stay the hell out of their business the rest of the time.
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
I think that no sane individual is 100% at either end of the political spectrum.
It tends to be an issue-by-issue arrangement.
The problems start when extremist members of one group start trying to define the opposition's position FOR THEM....as we see in the left- or right-leaning media, who spend more time talking about what they think the other guys want than about what THEY want.
Prime example I've seen many times in many variations online:
"You believe abortion should be okay, so how can you think the death penalty isn't?"
Horrible generality trying to basically tell someone what they "really" think.
Opposing groups (in any realm, not just politics) generally feel the NEED for conflict, because if they didn't they'd have to sit down and LISTEN TO EACH OTHER, and probably find they're more alike than their argumentative selves would ever admit.
Language also comes into play, in our era of catchphrase and soundbite.
Sensationalists know connotations all too well, and use them against one another to sway the general public into a panic based around the possibility of "those guys" ever getting into a position of power.
Metaphors are also used ad nauseum, and generally even when they FAIL are held onto dogmatically.
...all this I learned in the process of transforming from an argument addict into a listener.
For myself, these are some issues I take one "side" or the other regarding, but each is too complex to boil down to just "conservative" or "liberal," in my opinion:
"Conservative" - I believe the federal government has become bloated in power and responsibility, and that the American citizenry has become conditioned to look to the federal government to solve our problems and find us jobs and help us all retire, with a disgusting sense of entitlement.
"Conservative" - I believe arming the citizenry can aid in crime reduction, as long as the constabulary remains at a higher level of armament in order to retain the visible position of holding higher authority to enforce laws than the average citizen.
"Conservative" - I believe municipal governments are not given nearly enough credit for the massive amount of person-to-person work they hold responsibility for, and that local government holds by its nature less aptitude for corruption than state and federal governments.
"Conservative" - I believe America has become so dependent on other nations, that our national pride is misplaced. We basically act like we don't need anyone, yet most of the products we use are manufactured overseas. Ironically, our unwillingness to pay a little more for domestic products is the result of our own capitalistic obsession with "getting our money's worth", no matter how dependent on China, Japan, etc. we become.
"Liberal" - I believe it immoral and illegal to deploy military personnel without the explicit permission of Congress in a formal declaration of war, and that without said declaration, any initiated or extended deployment is a crime amounting to high treason, for which the chief executive and the joint chiefs should be held responsible.
"Liberal" - I believe the U.S. has become a fat cat holding a big gun among the nations of the world, especially in our deployment of military bases throughout the world. If any other nation wished to build a base on our soil, we would call it an act of war, yet we expect our allies to tolerate our armed presence on THEIR soil without complaint. I believe these bases have and are draining the federal budget, require far too many of our troops which could be either discharged or assigned post at home, and contribute to international hatred of the U.S.
"Liberal" - I believe we, as a nation, due to the above sense of entitlement and fat-caterry, have completely disregarded our natural resources and their conservation, keeping our National Parks open strictly to be tourist attractions to gain revenue. As such, we continue to lay waste to our last untouched wilderness, and to turn our cities into giant trash heaps.
"Liberal" - I believe our nation was a bought and paid for decades ago by big business and the wealthy, and that any and all "political" decisions we of the un-wealthy can make are merely illusions to make us THINK we have a say in the matter of what happens to our country, especially in the matters of poverty, class and racial stratification, and class mobility.
A brief smattering, to be sure.
It tends to be an issue-by-issue arrangement.
The problems start when extremist members of one group start trying to define the opposition's position FOR THEM....as we see in the left- or right-leaning media, who spend more time talking about what they think the other guys want than about what THEY want.
Prime example I've seen many times in many variations online:
"You believe abortion should be okay, so how can you think the death penalty isn't?"
Horrible generality trying to basically tell someone what they "really" think.
Opposing groups (in any realm, not just politics) generally feel the NEED for conflict, because if they didn't they'd have to sit down and LISTEN TO EACH OTHER, and probably find they're more alike than their argumentative selves would ever admit.
Language also comes into play, in our era of catchphrase and soundbite.
Sensationalists know connotations all too well, and use them against one another to sway the general public into a panic based around the possibility of "those guys" ever getting into a position of power.
Metaphors are also used ad nauseum, and generally even when they FAIL are held onto dogmatically.
...all this I learned in the process of transforming from an argument addict into a listener.
For myself, these are some issues I take one "side" or the other regarding, but each is too complex to boil down to just "conservative" or "liberal," in my opinion:
"Conservative" - I believe the federal government has become bloated in power and responsibility, and that the American citizenry has become conditioned to look to the federal government to solve our problems and find us jobs and help us all retire, with a disgusting sense of entitlement.
"Conservative" - I believe arming the citizenry can aid in crime reduction, as long as the constabulary remains at a higher level of armament in order to retain the visible position of holding higher authority to enforce laws than the average citizen.
"Conservative" - I believe municipal governments are not given nearly enough credit for the massive amount of person-to-person work they hold responsibility for, and that local government holds by its nature less aptitude for corruption than state and federal governments.
"Conservative" - I believe America has become so dependent on other nations, that our national pride is misplaced. We basically act like we don't need anyone, yet most of the products we use are manufactured overseas. Ironically, our unwillingness to pay a little more for domestic products is the result of our own capitalistic obsession with "getting our money's worth", no matter how dependent on China, Japan, etc. we become.
"Liberal" - I believe it immoral and illegal to deploy military personnel without the explicit permission of Congress in a formal declaration of war, and that without said declaration, any initiated or extended deployment is a crime amounting to high treason, for which the chief executive and the joint chiefs should be held responsible.
"Liberal" - I believe the U.S. has become a fat cat holding a big gun among the nations of the world, especially in our deployment of military bases throughout the world. If any other nation wished to build a base on our soil, we would call it an act of war, yet we expect our allies to tolerate our armed presence on THEIR soil without complaint. I believe these bases have and are draining the federal budget, require far too many of our troops which could be either discharged or assigned post at home, and contribute to international hatred of the U.S.
"Liberal" - I believe we, as a nation, due to the above sense of entitlement and fat-caterry, have completely disregarded our natural resources and their conservation, keeping our National Parks open strictly to be tourist attractions to gain revenue. As such, we continue to lay waste to our last untouched wilderness, and to turn our cities into giant trash heaps.
"Liberal" - I believe our nation was a bought and paid for decades ago by big business and the wealthy, and that any and all "political" decisions we of the un-wealthy can make are merely illusions to make us THINK we have a say in the matter of what happens to our country, especially in the matters of poverty, class and racial stratification, and class mobility.
A brief smattering, to be sure.
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
October 6, 2006
Crazy how time can fly.
Four years ago today, I drove 80 miles to meet a stranger from the Internet.
We'd exchanged pictures, chatted on Instant Messenger (dunno if anyone uses those anymore outside of Facebook), and gradually gotten to know each other, at least in the context of frozen faces on screens.
We'd heard each other's voices via microphones, and even latched onto each other's penchant for music by singing little songs to each other via our computers.
It kinda faded in and out for awhile.
But after my relationship crumbled, I looked again to the long-haired cop daughter, and felt a swelling of attraction.
I asked if I could come see her.
I think she was shocked, pointing out that 80 miles lay between us.
"Honey, I'm from Texas. I grew up 80 miles from the nearest Braum's."
So I ventured into the unknown, not sure what I would find, and she not sure if this man coming her way was really whom he had claimed to be in the much-decieved world of the Internet.
A first kiss (in a piano practice room), a first date (to see 300), and many happy moments later, we were joined at the hip.
Three years, fighting through her mother's final heavyweight bout with cancer, and a million joyous moments later, we were joined at the hip and at the left-hand ring finger.
If someone were to ask me if God exists, I could point to my marriage as prime evidence to the affirmative.
Had I not indicated X-city as my location, had she not been looking at that EXACT time, we would never have found each other.
Plus...up until we met I was an arrogant, selfish bastard pretty much all the time.
Starting arguments, procrastinating (especially in school), mooching off family, etc.
But once we were together, making sacrifices came second-nature to me, especially as the ordeal with her mother's health began and continued.
She's asked me many times what kept me around during those years, especially given that I was the boyfriend...not bound by familial obligation to stay or help or do anything.
The short answer?
I felt like it would have just been the height of douchbaggery to ditch when the going got tough.
The real answer is deeper.
The divine presence of God and the amazing presence of my wife are the only things which could transform me from selfish and arrogant to selfless within the course of just a few months.
For that, and for all she has given me in the intervening moments, I will always treasure her.
Four years ago today, I drove 80 miles to meet a stranger from the Internet.
We'd exchanged pictures, chatted on Instant Messenger (dunno if anyone uses those anymore outside of Facebook), and gradually gotten to know each other, at least in the context of frozen faces on screens.
We'd heard each other's voices via microphones, and even latched onto each other's penchant for music by singing little songs to each other via our computers.
It kinda faded in and out for awhile.
But after my relationship crumbled, I looked again to the long-haired cop daughter, and felt a swelling of attraction.
I asked if I could come see her.
I think she was shocked, pointing out that 80 miles lay between us.
"Honey, I'm from Texas. I grew up 80 miles from the nearest Braum's."
So I ventured into the unknown, not sure what I would find, and she not sure if this man coming her way was really whom he had claimed to be in the much-decieved world of the Internet.
A first kiss (in a piano practice room), a first date (to see 300), and many happy moments later, we were joined at the hip.
Three years, fighting through her mother's final heavyweight bout with cancer, and a million joyous moments later, we were joined at the hip and at the left-hand ring finger.
If someone were to ask me if God exists, I could point to my marriage as prime evidence to the affirmative.
Had I not indicated X-city as my location, had she not been looking at that EXACT time, we would never have found each other.
Plus...up until we met I was an arrogant, selfish bastard pretty much all the time.
Starting arguments, procrastinating (especially in school), mooching off family, etc.
But once we were together, making sacrifices came second-nature to me, especially as the ordeal with her mother's health began and continued.
She's asked me many times what kept me around during those years, especially given that I was the boyfriend...not bound by familial obligation to stay or help or do anything.
The short answer?
I felt like it would have just been the height of douchbaggery to ditch when the going got tough.
The real answer is deeper.
The divine presence of God and the amazing presence of my wife are the only things which could transform me from selfish and arrogant to selfless within the course of just a few months.
For that, and for all she has given me in the intervening moments, I will always treasure her.
Sunday, September 12, 2010
More Rants...yay...
Facebook statuses provide an amazing medium in which to rant.
Moreso than on message boards, because Facebook does not allow anonymity (as much as we might pray for it).
The families of victims and survivors of 9/11 are SPLIT DOWN THE MIDDLE on the issue of the mosque, so it's not as black and white as some would have us believe.
As much as we might idealize "separation of church and state," politicians can still sway the masses by using emotionally charged religious language, just as religious authorities can sway their congregations by using emotionally charged political language.
But when all you have is emotion, you're basically running this way and that screaming about the thing-to-be-angry-about of the day like a chicken with its head cut off, and REASON never has a chance to enter the equation.
Thus the reason I don't follow politics anymore.
It's impossible to be HAPPY when your happiness hinges on flawed human beings whom you have never met, whose decisions are beyond your control, and whom your fellow politico-addicts are telling you to hate one day and love another.
As for the mosque itself, let the people of New York City vote on the issue.
The mosque won't be in anyone else's back yard, so let the local government decide, and then let the rest of us ACCEPT THEIR DECISION.
Some claim that letting the mosque be built is somehow an insult to our military.
But this claim ignores the fact that just about everything the American military has been forced to do since 9/11 has been either idiotic or illegal.
Idiotic in "declaring war" against an ideology..we've seen how well that's worked in the "war on drugs."
Illegal (by our own standards) in that we've invaded two countries without a single declaration of war.
Congress is supposed to have sole authority in deploying our military against other nations, but because it's been labeled a "war on terror," the presidents have basically skipped over that little check on the Executive branch in order to throw American lives wherever.
We haven't played by our own rules (i.e, the CONSTITUTION), yet we expect other countries to play by our rules? Stupidity at its most basic level.
I'm just waiting for the inevitable backlash against our "Team America: World Police" nonsensical foreign policy. With our current delusional mindset of indestructibility, and the pattern we've set, eventually we'll go up against a country willing and fully able to blast us back to the stone age (Russia, China,...the list is building as we wallow in our ignorance).
There IS NO MORALITY in this situation. The presence of a mosque is not causing American Muslims to take up arms against anyone, and if it causes American "Christians" to do so, it is on the heads of those "Christians," not those who built or worship at the mosque.
The situation is amoral.
Personal bias for or against does not equate morality.
So, give NYC the power to decide, and then LET THE ISSUE GO, regardless of their decision.
Moreso than on message boards, because Facebook does not allow anonymity (as much as we might pray for it).
The families of victims and survivors of 9/11 are SPLIT DOWN THE MIDDLE on the issue of the mosque, so it's not as black and white as some would have us believe.
As much as we might idealize "separation of church and state," politicians can still sway the masses by using emotionally charged religious language, just as religious authorities can sway their congregations by using emotionally charged political language.
But when all you have is emotion, you're basically running this way and that screaming about the thing-to-be-angry-about of the day like a chicken with its head cut off, and REASON never has a chance to enter the equation.
Thus the reason I don't follow politics anymore.
It's impossible to be HAPPY when your happiness hinges on flawed human beings whom you have never met, whose decisions are beyond your control, and whom your fellow politico-addicts are telling you to hate one day and love another.
As for the mosque itself, let the people of New York City vote on the issue.
The mosque won't be in anyone else's back yard, so let the local government decide, and then let the rest of us ACCEPT THEIR DECISION.
Some claim that letting the mosque be built is somehow an insult to our military.
But this claim ignores the fact that just about everything the American military has been forced to do since 9/11 has been either idiotic or illegal.
Idiotic in "declaring war" against an ideology..we've seen how well that's worked in the "war on drugs."
Illegal (by our own standards) in that we've invaded two countries without a single declaration of war.
Congress is supposed to have sole authority in deploying our military against other nations, but because it's been labeled a "war on terror," the presidents have basically skipped over that little check on the Executive branch in order to throw American lives wherever.
We haven't played by our own rules (i.e, the CONSTITUTION), yet we expect other countries to play by our rules? Stupidity at its most basic level.
I'm just waiting for the inevitable backlash against our "Team America: World Police" nonsensical foreign policy. With our current delusional mindset of indestructibility, and the pattern we've set, eventually we'll go up against a country willing and fully able to blast us back to the stone age (Russia, China,...the list is building as we wallow in our ignorance).
There IS NO MORALITY in this situation. The presence of a mosque is not causing American Muslims to take up arms against anyone, and if it causes American "Christians" to do so, it is on the heads of those "Christians," not those who built or worship at the mosque.
The situation is amoral.
Personal bias for or against does not equate morality.
So, give NYC the power to decide, and then LET THE ISSUE GO, regardless of their decision.
Saturday, August 28, 2010
"Turning Back to God"
Yay for Glenn Beck giving me a great reason to rant.
Basically, the whole country's ranting/complaining/praising whatever version of God they believe in that Beck is holding a rally on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial...supposedly to ring in America's return to "christian" morals and values in the political realm.
...when in reality (something Beck refuses to believe in) Christian morals and values (however you define that) don't EXIST in the political realm.
We should probably stop the contradictory notion that we are a "christian nation" AND YET are so sinful that Sodom and Gomorrah demand a note of apology.
...in addition to completely throwing out the idea of a "Christian nation" anyway. Read... the Treaty of Tripoli for a lesson in what our government (and, in reality, the constitution) thinks we should be.
Nations aren't Christian. Individuals are Christians. We can't throw spiritual bombs and assume everyone caught in the blast radius is going to instantly toss their old selves and start believing in/following Christ.
Our responsibility as individual Christians is to those in our circle, whom we influence and interact with on a daily basis, NOT any of the groups we try to box others into in order to feel superior to them.
Glenn Beck and his ilk, in addition to being power-hungry warmongers, maintain a good-old-days delusion, that at some point American WASN'T dealing with the spiritual issues which it faces today.
The only difference now is that we are more free as a nation to BRING THOSE ISSUES TO LIGHT, not sweep them under the rug by order of the Church's traditions.
Those who maintain that delusion don't want to have to remain intellectually present in the spiritual and political realms. They are addicted to a black-and-white world of "absolutes" (read: catchphraes/soundbites) which has NEVER existed except in name, and NOW is fading away even in name.
If anything, it is time for America to step up as a nation and throw off the shackles of black-and-white blanket thinking, and admit that the spiritual and political issues with which we each struggle daily do NOT have easy solutions or clear-cut answers, and finding some sort of resolution to them requires contributions from EACH OF US, each bringing his or her own experiences and reasoning ability to the table.
Basically, the whole country's ranting/complaining/praising whatever version of God they believe in that Beck is holding a rally on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial...supposedly to ring in America's return to "christian" morals and values in the political realm.
...when in reality (something Beck refuses to believe in) Christian morals and values (however you define that) don't EXIST in the political realm.
We should probably stop the contradictory notion that we are a "christian nation" AND YET are so sinful that Sodom and Gomorrah demand a note of apology.
...in addition to completely throwing out the idea of a "Christian nation" anyway. Read... the Treaty of Tripoli for a lesson in what our government (and, in reality, the constitution) thinks we should be.
Nations aren't Christian. Individuals are Christians. We can't throw spiritual bombs and assume everyone caught in the blast radius is going to instantly toss their old selves and start believing in/following Christ.
Our responsibility as individual Christians is to those in our circle, whom we influence and interact with on a daily basis, NOT any of the groups we try to box others into in order to feel superior to them.
Glenn Beck and his ilk, in addition to being power-hungry warmongers, maintain a good-old-days delusion, that at some point American WASN'T dealing with the spiritual issues which it faces today.
The only difference now is that we are more free as a nation to BRING THOSE ISSUES TO LIGHT, not sweep them under the rug by order of the Church's traditions.
Those who maintain that delusion don't want to have to remain intellectually present in the spiritual and political realms. They are addicted to a black-and-white world of "absolutes" (read: catchphraes/soundbites) which has NEVER existed except in name, and NOW is fading away even in name.
If anything, it is time for America to step up as a nation and throw off the shackles of black-and-white blanket thinking, and admit that the spiritual and political issues with which we each struggle daily do NOT have easy solutions or clear-cut answers, and finding some sort of resolution to them requires contributions from EACH OF US, each bringing his or her own experiences and reasoning ability to the table.
Thursday, August 12, 2010
Random God thoughts...
TRADITION.
Simply "we've always done it this way, so this is the way it should be."
'Tis the source of many Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox doctrines and practices which may or may not have any scriptural basis.
Does that make them essentially satanic? By no means.
However, we should all recognize that many of the things we profess to believe do not come from a single source, and thus we should not use a single source for discernment regarding which we should continue professing.
Tradition -> we stand on the shoulders of spiritual giants and learned men who oftentimes have already delved into the areas we seek to understand. We should seek to add to the accumulated wisdom, even as we acknowledge and rely on our forbears' contributions.
Reason -> God-given ability to think. Drawing lines of logical progression between church practices, doctrines, even terminology, OR seeing that no such logical progression exists.
Experience -> Our testimony. What God has already done in our lives. Does it match what we claim to believe about God, the church, or ourselves?
Scripture -> Multiple translations, multiple interpretations, multiple collections. Many times a bundle of paradoxes, but still a tool for ours and God's use. Does our personal interpretation of the Bible match our circumstances, our beliefs, our relationships?
These four are our primary sources for discernment, and each must be used carefully, even as we find connections among them.
An individual's belief should be the current conclusion of the combined filtering through tradition, reason, experience, and scripture.
I say current, because it is an ongoing process.
God is not dead, and always has more to show us.
God has not changed in the two millennia since the end of events described in the Bible.
Our understanding and perception of Him, however, which influenced the creation of Levitican and Mosaic law and how humanity reacted to the person of Christ, has changed DRASTICALLY, to the point that we must be constantly vigilant in discerning what Biblical principles came from God, and which came from man.
For anyone to say "I HAVE FOUND THE ONLY WAY" until that MOMENT, demonstrates extreme arrogance, the likes of which have not been seen Satan offered Christ the whole world if He would only bow down.
Our discernment will not end until we see God's face and the complete truth, unknowable to us in this life, will be revealed.
Simply "we've always done it this way, so this is the way it should be."
'Tis the source of many Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox doctrines and practices which may or may not have any scriptural basis.
Does that make them essentially satanic? By no means.
However, we should all recognize that many of the things we profess to believe do not come from a single source, and thus we should not use a single source for discernment regarding which we should continue professing.
Tradition -> we stand on the shoulders of spiritual giants and learned men who oftentimes have already delved into the areas we seek to understand. We should seek to add to the accumulated wisdom, even as we acknowledge and rely on our forbears' contributions.
Reason -> God-given ability to think. Drawing lines of logical progression between church practices, doctrines, even terminology, OR seeing that no such logical progression exists.
Experience -> Our testimony. What God has already done in our lives. Does it match what we claim to believe about God, the church, or ourselves?
Scripture -> Multiple translations, multiple interpretations, multiple collections. Many times a bundle of paradoxes, but still a tool for ours and God's use. Does our personal interpretation of the Bible match our circumstances, our beliefs, our relationships?
These four are our primary sources for discernment, and each must be used carefully, even as we find connections among them.
An individual's belief should be the current conclusion of the combined filtering through tradition, reason, experience, and scripture.
I say current, because it is an ongoing process.
God is not dead, and always has more to show us.
God has not changed in the two millennia since the end of events described in the Bible.
Our understanding and perception of Him, however, which influenced the creation of Levitican and Mosaic law and how humanity reacted to the person of Christ, has changed DRASTICALLY, to the point that we must be constantly vigilant in discerning what Biblical principles came from God, and which came from man.
For anyone to say "I HAVE FOUND THE ONLY WAY" until that MOMENT, demonstrates extreme arrogance, the likes of which have not been seen Satan offered Christ the whole world if He would only bow down.
Our discernment will not end until we see God's face and the complete truth, unknowable to us in this life, will be revealed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
