A barber who says he's still studying with the Watchtower Society cut my hair last Friday. I'm not usually in the position to argue fine points between the Watchtower folk and Adventism, but I had no choice as he had a pair of scissors in his hands and wouldn't stop talking.
As a young man I used to be terrified of Jehovah Witnesses. They seemed sinister to me, or so I was led to believe by some unfortunate encounters I had had with two or three. To be honest, it wasn't so much sinister, just heavy-handed or intolerant of the views of others that appalled me years ago. Now I feel more warmly towards the Watchtower folk as long as they don't wake me up on Sunday mornings when I'm trying to get some shut-eye.
But here was this inquisitive man with the scissors and I had nowhere to go.
In the end, he had some problems with the Jehovah Witnesses' abhorrence of Thanksgiving and Christmas. He likes spending both with his family and can't accept their negative spin on holidays.
I told him he could be Adventist, see his family for all the major holidays, but not Halloween, which he was glad to hear.
I told him I'm with the Adventists because of their interest in Righteousness by Faith. He had never heard of that term. I told him next time my hair needed cutting, I'd stop by and we'd talk again.
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Future of God
Alternate title: Future of God and Humanity When God said let us create humankind in our own image, did we or did we not inherit emotions or states of mind such as wonder, surprise, excitement, awe, hope, optimism, and other positive human qualities? What I'm getting at is that these good qualities had to come from God; we did not develop them ourselves. Therefore, what is so illogical about a God who also gives himself the luxury of experiencing awe, wonder, surprise and hope? Or is our God a being that has always been devoid of surprise, wonder, and exploration? I realize I'm seeing the man in God and not vice-versa, but are we not created just a little bit lower than the angels?
This may sound shocking to some, but it reassures me, in a way. Why do you suppose God created--had to create so many of us--at such a great cost? Think of the impossible although, of course, when you think of it, nothing is ever really impossible. What if we all are God's insurance of perpetuity in the same way that parents' offspring are insurance should they somehow never live out their full life span?
Why did God give so much in Christ to save us, mere flesh and blood? Might he not have more at stake then just some wayward children who needed rescuing at any cost? If you really believe that humans are children of God, then like human children eventually becoming like their parents at some future time, might we also not have been designed with the potential--perhaps millennia from now--to become as perfect as our creator through the self-actualizing gift he stored in our very DNA? It's not easy to even write these words. Nevertheless, the very idea gives me a strange hope and sense of well-being for the future of humanity on planet Earth, as well as any non-terrestrial colonies humans may yet develop in worlds beyond our own.
Finally, and this takes lots of faith and courage, what if, we are now, or may one day come to be, all that's left of the perfect and self-sacrificing being we commonly refer to as God? We not only owe it to ourselves to take care of each other and of our home planet, but we also owe it to him, our creator, God.
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Either or ...
Either humanity is in control of its future, for better or worse, or God is in control of it, for the good of all concerned.
Either we create our own reality daily or God creates it for us, including having created it in the distant past before any life began.
Either we're "getting better all the time day by day" by focusing on a positive outcome to our lives as Emil Coue believed or we "can do all things through Christ who strengthens" us."
Either we create our own reality daily or God creates it for us, including having created it in the distant past before any life began.
Either we're "getting better all the time day by day" by focusing on a positive outcome to our lives as Emil Coue believed or we "can do all things through Christ who strengthens" us."
Monday, November 12, 2007
Foreknowledge of God
The Open View of God might partially explain the mystery of sin and Satan. God is an optimist by nature, otherwise why create something to begin with if he didn't think it would turn out perfect and stay perfect. A perfect being, by definition, is only capable of optimism.
Can you imagine a being who knows everything that will ever occur? There are no surprises. He knows everything he will ever do and create and what will happen to his creation. God created the universe with the best of optimistic intentions. God had no idea when he created Lucifer that a ghastly creature like Satan would eventually emerge from Lucifer's free will and cause so much anti-perfection for millions (or thousands) of years. Otherwise why be partially responsible for such horror and evil?
If father or mother Hitler had received convincing proof from a time traveler that their little Adolf would murder so many innocent people, would they go ahead and play a role in allowing him to be born? They went ahead because they had no idea, of course. They hoped for the best and waited to see what would become of their little boy.
God, likewise, created Lucifer and his confederates, as well as humanity, with the best of intentions, hoping against hope that we'd all turn out as perfect as he would have liked for us all to have turned out.
Perhaps that's why he sent himself in the form of Christ, because in being partially responsible for allowing us to get into this mess as he was, he got himself into this mess as well, as one of us, to bare the brunt for having created us in the first place and to help us get out of it and return us to that hoped-for perfection he wished we all had chosen for ourselves all along. Think of the pain he's in to see how we all have suffered and continue to suffer. God wants this all to end as much as we do, otherwise he'd already have ended it for all concerned.
That, my friends, sounds like a responsible and sacrificing God and parent.
Can you imagine a being who knows everything that will ever occur? There are no surprises. He knows everything he will ever do and create and what will happen to his creation. God created the universe with the best of optimistic intentions. God had no idea when he created Lucifer that a ghastly creature like Satan would eventually emerge from Lucifer's free will and cause so much anti-perfection for millions (or thousands) of years. Otherwise why be partially responsible for such horror and evil?
If father or mother Hitler had received convincing proof from a time traveler that their little Adolf would murder so many innocent people, would they go ahead and play a role in allowing him to be born? They went ahead because they had no idea, of course. They hoped for the best and waited to see what would become of their little boy.
God, likewise, created Lucifer and his confederates, as well as humanity, with the best of intentions, hoping against hope that we'd all turn out as perfect as he would have liked for us all to have turned out.
Perhaps that's why he sent himself in the form of Christ, because in being partially responsible for allowing us to get into this mess as he was, he got himself into this mess as well, as one of us, to bare the brunt for having created us in the first place and to help us get out of it and return us to that hoped-for perfection he wished we all had chosen for ourselves all along. Think of the pain he's in to see how we all have suffered and continue to suffer. God wants this all to end as much as we do, otherwise he'd already have ended it for all concerned.
That, my friends, sounds like a responsible and sacrificing God and parent.
Wednesday, November 07, 2007
Philosophical Exercises and God
If we concentrate on the evil in the world, invariably we become bitter and unhappy. We blame it all on God instead of pressing on to understand the mystery that is life, and yes the mystery, that is God.
Of course, we shouldn't become unconcerned when we encounter evil, no matter how it manifests itself. That would in itself be compounding the problem of evil.
We should, instead, focus on making good out of evil. It also opens up the possibility that some people out there--clever souls they--may be inventive enough to make evil out of good. It all depends what spin you place on each side of the mirror.
It is sometimes said that good is incomplete without its opposite, evil, and evil is meaningless were it not for the existence of good. A reality that consisted of only one of the two would be an impossibility and would be unstable in very little time.
Therefore, it follows, that in a perfect or complete world or reality, we need both good and evil.
Of course, we shouldn't become unconcerned when we encounter evil, no matter how it manifests itself. That would in itself be compounding the problem of evil.
We should, instead, focus on making good out of evil. It also opens up the possibility that some people out there--clever souls they--may be inventive enough to make evil out of good. It all depends what spin you place on each side of the mirror.
It is sometimes said that good is incomplete without its opposite, evil, and evil is meaningless were it not for the existence of good. A reality that consisted of only one of the two would be an impossibility and would be unstable in very little time.
Therefore, it follows, that in a perfect or complete world or reality, we need both good and evil.
Friday, November 02, 2007
Neo-Charismatic Realities in Adventism
"In the last days I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh." Joel
When doing research for this post I found this article from the Whiteestage.org that is a good enough a springboard for what I've been thinking about lately.
"Our worship services are not to be cold and lifeless. Ellen White says there is such a thing as healthy enthusiasm, but what is a healthy enthusiasm? 'The Holy Spirit of God alone can create a healthy enthusiasm. Let God work, and let the human agent walk softly before Him, watching, waiting, praying, looking unto Jesus every moment, led and controlled by the precious Spirit, which is light and life' (Selected Messages, vol. 2, pp. 16, 17). A healthy enthusiasm is a holy joy that results from beholding the workings of God. This joy is expressed in praise and worship as the human walks softly and reverently in the presence of the great Creator and Redeemer. " Charismatic Experiences in the Seventh-day Adventist Church; Present and Future
by George E. Rice . (Please click on the title of this post to see the quotation in it's original article.)
I am not advocating what most Christians refer to as speaking-in-tongues. I've witnessed it first hand and it is either perplexing, though quite possibly genuine for the believer, or false and is self-orchestrated, which is a travesty to observe. For unsound minds or temperaments it is better not to be in a church where speaking-in-tongues takes place. Some would run from the very place to for fear of contamination by a less than benign force. Others might stay to observe a social-religious phenomenon and learn about how it impacts the lives of the Christians present.
I've rarely experienced congregations of Adventists caught up in the life of the Spirit. Most services are either ordinary, or worse, lack luster and are lacking the minimum required to be genuinely transported into the presence of God.
What Adventism needs is to talk more about the Holy Spirit and to collectively pray for the Holy Spirit. Only then will our churches catch fire. At present they are merely dying embers which is sufficient for most people in attendance. It is not, however, the rich experience that all Adventist churches should be experiencing and which is necessary to both keep current members in the church as well as bring new ones into the church.
When doing research for this post I found this article from the Whiteestage.org that is a good enough a springboard for what I've been thinking about lately.
"Our worship services are not to be cold and lifeless. Ellen White says there is such a thing as healthy enthusiasm, but what is a healthy enthusiasm? 'The Holy Spirit of God alone can create a healthy enthusiasm. Let God work, and let the human agent walk softly before Him, watching, waiting, praying, looking unto Jesus every moment, led and controlled by the precious Spirit, which is light and life' (Selected Messages, vol. 2, pp. 16, 17). A healthy enthusiasm is a holy joy that results from beholding the workings of God. This joy is expressed in praise and worship as the human walks softly and reverently in the presence of the great Creator and Redeemer. " Charismatic Experiences in the Seventh-day Adventist Church; Present and Future
by George E. Rice . (Please click on the title of this post to see the quotation in it's original article.)
I am not advocating what most Christians refer to as speaking-in-tongues. I've witnessed it first hand and it is either perplexing, though quite possibly genuine for the believer, or false and is self-orchestrated, which is a travesty to observe. For unsound minds or temperaments it is better not to be in a church where speaking-in-tongues takes place. Some would run from the very place to for fear of contamination by a less than benign force. Others might stay to observe a social-religious phenomenon and learn about how it impacts the lives of the Christians present.
I've rarely experienced congregations of Adventists caught up in the life of the Spirit. Most services are either ordinary, or worse, lack luster and are lacking the minimum required to be genuinely transported into the presence of God.
What Adventism needs is to talk more about the Holy Spirit and to collectively pray for the Holy Spirit. Only then will our churches catch fire. At present they are merely dying embers which is sufficient for most people in attendance. It is not, however, the rich experience that all Adventist churches should be experiencing and which is necessary to both keep current members in the church as well as bring new ones into the church.
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
Adventism Reversed
I have benefited immensely from the blog ministry of Julius Nam. Recently he has had to cut back, as well as revamp the nature and specificity of his blog. I'm especially sorry to see all of the links to Adventist blogs removed.
I am especially grateful for the article in question which I've linked to the title of this post. In the article in question, "'Questions on Doctrine' and M. L. Andreasen: The Behind-the-Scenes Interaction" he recounts the effects of objections voiced and written by one, . L. Andreasen, a deceased Adventist theologian, on Adventism.
While one cannot effectively turn back the wheels of time, I can't help but wonder what Adventism would be like today had brother Andreasen simply sat back and enjoyed his retirement. Perhaps others would have stepped in and taken up the challenge. Or perhaps those involved in Questions on Doctrine would have revised and republished that book as the direction of the Adventist church would have grown increasingly self-critiquing and transparent.
I must tell you that as I read about the machinations, although I fear that word is too strong, of M. L. Andreasen, I felt both postive and negative emotions. Negative because so much discord and wasted opportunities were the result of his objections. Positive because of his refusal to simply go with the flow and to fight for what he felt were his just rewards for his efforts or objections.
As I reflected further on the results--five decades--of changes in Adventism because of M. L. Andreasen's efforts, I wondered if it was providential that he entered Adventist history in the way that he did, as a corrective, if you will. Or were his letters and published materials merely free human will injecting itself in the stream of time? Much depends on which view one takes. If it was the former, then it is a good thing, of course. If it was the latter, it may happen yet again with untold consequences within the Adventist movement.
At this point in time I think it accurate to speak of Adventist movements. I strongly feel that conservative, mainstream and progressive Adventist approaches to the nature of the church, and its future, consitute distinct movements with soon-to-be-felt repercussions, and not just divergent currents within one homogeneous body of water.
Please click on this link, Progressive Adventism, in order to read the entire article and benefit from Julius Nam's research.
I am especially grateful for the article in question which I've linked to the title of this post. In the article in question, "'Questions on Doctrine' and M. L. Andreasen: The Behind-the-Scenes Interaction" he recounts the effects of objections voiced and written by one, . L. Andreasen, a deceased Adventist theologian, on Adventism.
While one cannot effectively turn back the wheels of time, I can't help but wonder what Adventism would be like today had brother Andreasen simply sat back and enjoyed his retirement. Perhaps others would have stepped in and taken up the challenge. Or perhaps those involved in Questions on Doctrine would have revised and republished that book as the direction of the Adventist church would have grown increasingly self-critiquing and transparent.
I must tell you that as I read about the machinations, although I fear that word is too strong, of M. L. Andreasen, I felt both postive and negative emotions. Negative because so much discord and wasted opportunities were the result of his objections. Positive because of his refusal to simply go with the flow and to fight for what he felt were his just rewards for his efforts or objections.
As I reflected further on the results--five decades--of changes in Adventism because of M. L. Andreasen's efforts, I wondered if it was providential that he entered Adventist history in the way that he did, as a corrective, if you will. Or were his letters and published materials merely free human will injecting itself in the stream of time? Much depends on which view one takes. If it was the former, then it is a good thing, of course. If it was the latter, it may happen yet again with untold consequences within the Adventist movement.
At this point in time I think it accurate to speak of Adventist movements. I strongly feel that conservative, mainstream and progressive Adventist approaches to the nature of the church, and its future, consitute distinct movements with soon-to-be-felt repercussions, and not just divergent currents within one homogeneous body of water.
Please click on this link, Progressive Adventism, in order to read the entire article and benefit from Julius Nam's research.
Saturday, October 06, 2007
Evolution of Sin
In human experience there was a time when sin did not exist. People were sinless and strangers to sin. Can you imagine what such a life could have been like? Everyone put their brother (sister) first. No one asserted themselves. Everything owned was the property of everyone else. No one had adulterous desires because there really was nobody else to have adultery with. Everyone loved everyone else perfectly.
It almost sounds too good to be true. So good, in fact, that it couldn't possibly last for very long. It sounds like the most perfect of ideals. Moral people today hold out that pristine moral purity as the future goal.
Understandably, such a state is to be desired, and no criticism is intended of its perfect qualities. What is difficult to understand is how such perfection could have existed.
Children have to learn not to throw tantrums and to not think that they're the center of the universe. It is their natural state. Can you imagine what a sinless infant would be like? I must admit that it is difficult for me to do so.
What if we were all born with a natural inclination towards evil and an inclination to good moral behaviour was a learned and conditioned response?
Thursday, October 04, 2007
Death, Salvation, Foreknowledge
I never felt uneasy about the concept of soul sleep until I lost a good friend to AIDS 20 years ago. My father tried comforting me by restating the Adventist position. I found it more comforting emotionally to think that somehow my friend, Clive, was still conscious in some other sphere. And then there's the other side of the soul sleep issue. If he didn't accept Christ, then he won't be among the "dead in Christ rising first."
Recently, a kind church mother of two young boys died of cancer. I had been praying for her for months. Now that she's gone I still pray for her wherever she is. I miss her so much that today I prayed that God would watch over her body if that is all that's left of her until he calls her to live again. I also prayed that if like most Christians believe, she is "with the Lord" now, that she would enjoy her new life free of pain.
My pastor insisted that Adventists equate soul sleep with only the life force. When I quoted "God is Spirit", he just kept silent. I guess, in that interpretation, it's the same as saying "God is life, itself."
What if both the majority of Christians and Adventists are wrong regarding soul sleep and all the rest. What if, as a recent New York Times Science-Philosophy article suggested, we are simulations in some larger-than-life cosmic computer with a Super Intelligence "watching over it all in loving grace?"
That would explain a lot of things, but would open up another can of worms. If that should be the true reality, then none of this really matters, does it? Or perhaps it matters in a very different way. In the end, it's how we treat each other that matters, whether we're really here as flesh and blood beings or whether we're shadows flickering in some ancient Platonic cave.
An even better and more economical idea might be, if foreknowledge knows that an individual will eventually be burned up so as to dispose of unresolvable wickedness, why bother allowing that individual to live in the first place?
I like this idea for it infers that those that are living were created economically and will eventually be saved. This is possible because, in theory, all the people who are alive today or who have ever lived or who will eventually be born could very well experience a deathbed conversion, or its equivalent. This may be confused with universalism, but it's not really, as all of these formerly wicked people could--and could is a big word--accept Jesus or his ethical equivalent right before they die.
Didn't Paul say that all were destined to be saved? Well, if you accept this view of only creating those who are going to be saved--all that have lived and are presently living or will live one day--then this is the best of all possible worlds.
Of course, if you subscribe to the Open View of God--is Richard Rice out there?--then God has no idea who will be saved. He will be either pained or pleased, as the case may be, when the end of all things reveals which of his children he can enjoy forever.
Dick Larsen: After death the soul, spirit , or whatever it is of a person is not constrained any longer by time. In that, it can experience at once with every other soul/spirit the second coming of Christ simultaneously.
Yes, it sounds very attractive. It also sounds like what psychics refer to as global and gestalt consciousness. Even Isaac Asimov wove that attractive trait into the future of human evolution in his last installments of the classic Foundation and Empire series.
When I read about this gestalt consciousness you describe--well, that Mr. Campolo describes--I was surprised by the nature of what he suggests. I also thought, "why stop there with being in tune simultaneously with only every other redeemed soul/spirit"? In addition to this perfect consciousness, I'd also like for us all in this mass consciousness to be jacked in--to borrow a Matrix-like term--into the beauty and consciousness of Perfection Itself, namely the Spirit who created us all and gives us life. If this is heaven, it truly is beyond anything we could ever envision.
Thank you, brother Larsen, for sharing your vision of a perfect future reality.
Recently, a kind church mother of two young boys died of cancer. I had been praying for her for months. Now that she's gone I still pray for her wherever she is. I miss her so much that today I prayed that God would watch over her body if that is all that's left of her until he calls her to live again. I also prayed that if like most Christians believe, she is "with the Lord" now, that she would enjoy her new life free of pain.
My pastor insisted that Adventists equate soul sleep with only the life force. When I quoted "God is Spirit", he just kept silent. I guess, in that interpretation, it's the same as saying "God is life, itself."
What if both the majority of Christians and Adventists are wrong regarding soul sleep and all the rest. What if, as a recent New York Times Science-Philosophy article suggested, we are simulations in some larger-than-life cosmic computer with a Super Intelligence "watching over it all in loving grace?"
That would explain a lot of things, but would open up another can of worms. If that should be the true reality, then none of this really matters, does it? Or perhaps it matters in a very different way. In the end, it's how we treat each other that matters, whether we're really here as flesh and blood beings or whether we're shadows flickering in some ancient Platonic cave.
An even better and more economical idea might be, if foreknowledge knows that an individual will eventually be burned up so as to dispose of unresolvable wickedness, why bother allowing that individual to live in the first place?
I like this idea for it infers that those that are living were created economically and will eventually be saved. This is possible because, in theory, all the people who are alive today or who have ever lived or who will eventually be born could very well experience a deathbed conversion, or its equivalent. This may be confused with universalism, but it's not really, as all of these formerly wicked people could--and could is a big word--accept Jesus or his ethical equivalent right before they die.
Didn't Paul say that all were destined to be saved? Well, if you accept this view of only creating those who are going to be saved--all that have lived and are presently living or will live one day--then this is the best of all possible worlds.
Of course, if you subscribe to the Open View of God--is Richard Rice out there?--then God has no idea who will be saved. He will be either pained or pleased, as the case may be, when the end of all things reveals which of his children he can enjoy forever.
The following was originally part of a Spectrum Blog exchange circa 8-15-07:
What follows was part of the comments in that now misplaced post:Dick Larsen: After death the soul, spirit , or whatever it is of a person is not constrained any longer by time. In that, it can experience at once with every other soul/spirit the second coming of Christ simultaneously.
Yes, it sounds very attractive. It also sounds like what psychics refer to as global and gestalt consciousness. Even Isaac Asimov wove that attractive trait into the future of human evolution in his last installments of the classic Foundation and Empire series.
When I read about this gestalt consciousness you describe--well, that Mr. Campolo describes--I was surprised by the nature of what he suggests. I also thought, "why stop there with being in tune simultaneously with only every other redeemed soul/spirit"? In addition to this perfect consciousness, I'd also like for us all in this mass consciousness to be jacked in--to borrow a Matrix-like term--into the beauty and consciousness of Perfection Itself, namely the Spirit who created us all and gives us life. If this is heaven, it truly is beyond anything we could ever envision.
Thank you, brother Larsen, for sharing your vision of a perfect future reality.
Christian Progress and the Beautiful Christ
"Every day, in every way, I'm getting better and better." -- Emile Coue
About his little son: "Every day in every way it's getting better and better. Beautiful, beautiful, beautiful, beautiful boy." -- John Lennon in Beautiful Boy (Darling Boy)
Christian synthesis: Every day, in every way, Christ is making me better and better. Thank you, beautiful Christ.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)