Opus 2026-351: Intellectual Spectrum

The Bible gives us an outstanding spectrum of intellectual challenges and rewards.

At one end, you have the very solid foundation given to us by the attributes of God.  He is dependable and, in the sense of His attributes, unchanging.  That means that we can investigate the world around us, not to question God’s authority, but to try to understand how He put it together and how it works.  This is the basis of all scientific inquiry.

At the other hand, we have the mysterious realms of the impossible.  Let’s face it.  We cannot even begin to understand the meaning of infinity, let alone the awesome reality of an eternal God.   Recently, I had a discussion with a friend about what the Bible teaches about heaven.  We pretty much started out agreeing that it doesn’t really say much in describing what it will be like.  At the same time we agreed that it was glorious beyond our comprehension.  What little we did have was just a courtesy call by God to give us something to hang onto.  We rejoiced as we speculated.

In between you’ve got the gradual morphing of certainty chemistry.  If you build on that which provides a solid foundation you can make progress.  If you start to speculate based on your own assumptions and theories the edifice gets wobbly and crashes.  This is what we see happening in much of scientific “progress”.  

That is one of the glorious things about the word of God and following Jesus Christ.  You may not know the details of your goal or exactly where the path leads, but you can be sure of the rock beneath your feet.

homo unius libri

Opus 2026-307: Filtering Search Results

One of my recurring themes is truth.  What is truth?  How do you find it?  How do you recognize it when you see it?  These are age old questions which philosophers and Roman governors have been asking since men asked questions.

The first question that must be answered deals with what is truth.  This would have at least two responses.  For me and other Christians the ultimate truth is found in the Bible and in Jesus.  If you are a garden variety pagan the answer is a little more difficult but still something you would search out.

The other response would be found in what we might call the world of science, or what we believe the world of science is supposed to be about.  This would include bodies of knowledge like mathematics.  It is a search for statements that can be matched with real world observations.  Thus we might say that water freezes at 32̊.  You would then check it out to see if it was a true statement and in most cases would find it false.  Why?  Because the statement is not exact enough.  I would suggest “Pure water freezes at 32̊ Fahrenheit at sea level.”  There might even be a few other details I missed but you see the difference.  Scientific truth is when the statement matches the empirical evidence.  I hope that science gets back to that standard during my lifetime.

Truth in our culture is hard to find.  Now I am thinking about the things we hear and read.  It can be a conversation overheard on a park bench or a statement found in a respected reference book.  In our day and age it is almost impossible to correlate what we hear with what is.  The news media is bad enough but the problem extends even to such pillars of truth as dictionaries.  They are being rewritten on a regular basis.  Advances in computer science have made things like Photo-Shop obsolete and it becomes difficult to tell computer generated content from real living actors.

This is where it comes home to me.  How do I know if what I am being exposed to is true?  

There are different types of truth that I reject.

One rejection is for people who know they are lying.

One is for people who pass on false information because it is all they know.

The difficult sources who are accurate most of the time until it touches one of their hot buttons.

A variation of this is the frog warmer who starts off on target but slowly begins to tweak the truth to get you where he wants you.

It may be that I will never be able to cut through the clutter of deception in the news world.  I am not sure that I need to.  Did the apostle Paul need to know what was happening between the Roman Empire and the Parthians?  Did he need to know about the grain harvest in North Africa?  Not really.  It does not mean that I don’t keep looking for truth and recognizing lies but it does mean I leave the final analysis in God’s hands.

homo unius libri

Opus 2026-068: 101 Means 101

In case you have not picked it up, I enjoy debating theology and Bible.  For me a paraphrase of “All roads lead to Rome” would substitute “Bible” for “Rome”.  It is a natural drift in my mind.

There is a basic truth about Christian theology that we tend to overlook and that basic truth is that basic theology is easy to understand.  It might be an exaggeration but with John 3:16 and five minutes I could teach you basic theology.  From there we would open a door to a lifetime of enriching conversations about God, His nature and how He expects us to live.  If we are really bored we could get into prophecy and the end times but since those things generally have no practical application they can be saved for theological desert.

Does basic theology demand that you accept Jesus as God?  Yes.  Does it demand that you agree on whether Mary had other children?  Not really.  Such topics lead to the divisions in the body of Christ and can be taken to the point of undermining the basics but they are not necessary for salvation.  Is there more truth than I could cover in five minutes?  Obviously.  I could not read you the Sermon on the Mount in five minutes but it is loaded with spiritual truth.

Don’t get upset when people disagree with you on topics beyond the five minutes.  Remember that some people tan and some burn but the sun is the same and produces vitamin D in both.

homo unius libri

Opus 2026-067: Don’t Assume

What is truly one of the problems we have today is trying to find where we can get accurate information.  We have the category of Fake News.  We have such nonsense as global warming.  We have supposedly honest scientist talking about the missing links when they describe evolution.  Everywhere you look there is deceit, compromise, and all the words they make up to disguise that they are lying to you.

You would think that the one place you would find a real respect for truth is in the believing Christian community.  You would think the truth would set up a standard in their hearts and minds and be expressed through their tongues.  You would think you could go to a church that claims to be Bible believing and find truth being spoken.

Sadly, that’s not the case.

Most of us are aware that many of the mega churches have drifted away from scripture.  We know about the Progressive church.  We know about the new age.  We are aware of the deception is going on.  What we don’t like to admit is that twisting and compromise is setting up a castle in the hearts of minds of people we think of as true believers.

Sometimes the deception is based on the fact that they’ve been taught wrong.  They’ve been indoctrinated with a certain slant from a certain theological perspective, and they adapted.  They repeated without thinking or searching the scripture for themselves.  I think that’s almost universal across the church . And what is amazing is when you share with them something that is clearly stated and they say, “Well, it doesn’t mean that.”

Recently, I was watching a video that caught my eye because it said something to the effect of did Jesus really say, “Go and sin no more.”  My first reaction is, what a stupid question.  I’ve read it over and over again.  I don’t know that I’ve ever researched the Greek, but I know what it says.  How could there be any question?  But evidently there is.  The man putting on this podcast went down along windy road, never getting close to the conclusion before I finally turned him off, but I could tell he was going to compromise on something.  It is a basic statement of Jesus.  Why the question?  Because he’s been indoctrinated in the Calvinistic interpretation of Pauline theology and is incapable of getting beyond it.  I’ve seen the same arguments when someone says with the Bible does not say you’re saved by faith alone.  Then it’s pointed out that the only place that that phrase appears is in James where he is saying it’s not by faith alone.  And again in some convoluted twisted way, they managed to turn that on its head.

No, I’m not talking about those people.  They are not trying to deceive.  They are not aware of their deception.

So whom am I speaking about?

Here’s where I come to my reading and discussion with King James Only (KJO) and Mid-Aact Dispensation (MAD) people . I first entered into my reading and discussing in good faith.  I assumed that the commandment that we interpret as not lying would be followed by them, even though it is under the law.  Unfortunately, that doesn’t seem to be the way it works.  I think I’ve expressed this before, but I want to say it again here.  The two groups mentioned tend to take the scripture and put it in a special category and, while they will admit it if you confront them, they continually hide it behind their vocabulary.

An example from frequent instances.  There’s a word that Christians around the world assume means a certain thing.  That word is “Bible”.  You can be speaking in any language and they may have a different word for it but you know what they mean.  It is a book that contains the words of God from Genesis to Revelation.  These two groups have decided to redefine the word.  When they say the word “Bible” what they mean is the 1611 translation of King James.  They don’t say that, but that’s what they mean.  There are subtle indicators, like for instance they no longer talk about the KJV but instead the KJB.  The difference to them is significant, but it’s no concern for us because we assume that the KJV is a Bible, we may not preferred it as our translation but we referred to it as a Bible.  That courtesy is not extended the other way.  If you don’t use the KJB, you are not reading the Bible.  Anything you quote from another translation has very likely been distorted by Satan.

Do you think I joke?  I wish I joked.  Stay alert.  It’s a jungle out there.

homo unius libri

Opus 2026-056: Sad Situation

One of the problems we have today is trying to find where we can get accurate information.  We have the category of fake news.  We have such nonsense as global warming.  We have supposedly honest scientists talking about the missing links when they describe evolution.  Everywhere you look there is deceit, compromise, spin, advertizing and whatever other words you want to throw in.

You would think that the one place you would find a real respect for truth is in the believing Christian community.  You would think the truth would set up a standard in their hearts and minds and be expressed through their tongues.  You would think you could go to a church that claims to be Bible believing and find truth being presented.

Sadly, that’s not the case.

Most of us are aware that many of the mega churches have drifted away from scripture.  We know about the Progressive.  We know about the new agers.  We are aware of the deception that is going on.  What we don’t like to admit is that same twisting and compromise is setting up a castle in the hearts of minds of people we think of as true believers.

Sometimes the deception is based on the fact that they’ve been taught wrong.  They’ve been indoctrinated with a certain slant from a certain theological perspective, and they adapted.  They repeated without thinking or searching the scripture for themselves.  I think that’s almost universal across the church.  And what is amazing is when you share with them something that is clearly stated and they say, “Well, it doesn’t mean that.”

Recently, I was watching a video that caught my eye because it said something to the effect of did Jesus really say, “Go and sin no more”?  My first reaction is, “What a stupid question.”  I’ve read it over and over again. I  don’t know that I’ve ever researched the Greek, but I know what it says.  How could there be any question?  But evidently there is.  The man putting on this podcast went down a long windy road, never getting close to a conclusion before I finally turned him off, but I could tell he was going to compromise on something.  It is a basic statement of Jesus.  Why define it into oblivion?  Because he’s indoctrinated in the Calvinistic interpretation of Pauline theology and is incapable of getting beyond it.  I’ve seen the same arguments when someone says  the Bible does not say you’re saved by faith alone when it’s pointed out that the only place that phrases appears is in James where he is saying it’s not by faith alone.  And again in some convoluted twisted way, they managed to turn that on its head.

No, I’m not talking about those people.  They are not trying to deceive.  They are not aware of their deception.

So whom am I speaking about?

Here’s where I come to my reading and discussions with King James Only (KJO) and Mid-Acts Dispensation (MAD) people.  I first entered into my reading and discussing in good faith.  I assumed that the commandment that we says not to bear false witness would be followed by them, even though it is under the law.  Unfortunately, that doesn’t seem to be the way it works.  I think I’ve expressed this before, but I want to say it again here.  The two groups mentioned tend to take most scripture and put it in a special, inferior, it-doesnt-apply-to-us category and while they will admit it if you confront them, they continually hide it behind their vocabulary.

Let me give an example from frequent instances.  There’s a word that Christians around the world assume means a certain thing.  That word is “Bible”.  You can be speaking in any language and they may have a different word for it but you know what they mean.  It is a book that contains the words of God from Genesis to Revelation.  These two groups have decided to redefine the word.  When they say the word “Bible” what they mean is the 1611 translation of King James.  They don’t reveal that, but that’s what they mean.  There are subtle indicators like for instance they no longer talk about the KJV but instead the KJB.  The difference to them is significant, but it’s no concern for us because we assume that the KJV is a Bible.  We may not prefer it as our translation but we refer to it as a Bible.  That courtesy is not extended the other way.  If you don’t use the KJB, you are not reading the Bible.  Anything you quote from another translation has very likely been distorted by Satan.

Do you think I joke?  I wish I joked.

Stay alert.  Many people want to confuse you.

homo unius libri

Opus 2026-050: Coffee, Grace

The traditions of the elders are like old coffee grounds where the flavor and the freshness has been leached out.

Up above, I said “leached out” and the AI added a “B” to make it “bleached”.  That is also a good illustration, but it’s a totally different one.

When you make coffee, you don’t reheat the old grinds and run water through them.  Well, I guess you could, but you get decreasing flavor with each reheat.  I think I tried it somewhere in my past.  No, you get new beans, grind them up and get your truth out of them.

So many of the traditions that we accept as biblical truth have gotten stale in the reheating over the years.  It may very well be that in the ritual excesses of the Roman Catholic Church, Calvin and Luther were right in rejecting what they had to say and instead emphasizing grace and faith.  Grace and faith are certainly biblical concepts.  The Bible does say we are saved by grace.  It says we are saved through faith and believing is a constant in the salvation process.  However, in spite of everything that your traditional elders have told you, the Bible does not say that you are saved by faith alone.

You don’t believe me?  I don’t really expect you to because you’ve heard it otherwise so often.  I even started out on a bit of Clickbait that asked the question, “How many times does the Bible say ‘faith alone’?”  I didn’t get very far before I realized that he wasn’t really asking what the Bible said.  He was asking what the tradition said.  Do your own research.  Look for the phrase “faith alone”.  You won’t find it in the KJV.  You only find it once in the New American Standard.  When you find it go to that passage and read what it says, and then ask yourself who am I gonna believe, the traditions of the elders, my own lying eyes, or what the Bible clearly states.

There are many battles for truth to be fought.  God is loving.  God is kind.  Jesus did not go to the cross in order to see how many people He could throw into hell.  We can probably make a lot of mistakes in our theology and still make it to heaven.  I for one want to be as close to the center of the target as I can be.

homo unius libri

Opus 2026-046: The Need to Know

If you were ever involved in the military, you went through a class that talked about security and security clearances.  It always seems strange to me that being cleared to a certain level of security did not necessarily mean that you had access to information at that level.  There was another element besides being cleared as an honest patriotic citizen.  You also had a “need to know”.

It was assumed that the general population in the military and the civilian world did not need to know all of the details of how to drive an Abram’s tank.  It is assumed that a private in the army did not need to know who the spies were giving us information before the invasion.  Although it didn’t always work out the way it was supposed to, the idea was that you would be told what you needed to know to complete your mission.

Having been in education, I would say that this principle has been quite perverted.  One of the reasons I got in trouble was because I would continually ask, “Why?”  I didn’t ask why like a six-year-old sitting in the backseat when his parents tells him to do something.  I asked why, because knowing the reason for an action often gives me better insight into how to complete that action.

There’s a difference between what we need to know in order to be effective and what we want to know in order to feel informed.

This is why the Bible is to be the foundation of all actions in human life.  I’ve written before about wondering what kind of conversations God and Abraham had that we don’t know about. It would really be interesting to hear Moses arguing with Yahweh over issues that we aren’t even aware of.  Wouldn’t you like to hear the shepherds on the way back to the field exclaiming about the exciting moment they had seen the baby Jesus?  Do you wonder just where the wisemen came from and how many there were?

You may be cleared at that level of information but, God has decided you don’t have a need to know.  Everything you need is in the book.  Every principal.  Every standard.  Every procedure.  It’s there.

Is this an excuse for book burning?  Of course not.  It doesn’t mean that we don’t keep asking questions.  It doesn’t mean that we don’t keep investigating.  I have shelves of books that consist of three categories.  The ones I keep for emotional support, but never intend to read again; the ones I have not read yet, but want to get to and those that I’ve already read, but plan to read again.  If all those books disappeared, it would not put my life in danger or change how I do things.  If my Bible disappeared, I would be in a world of hurt.

So keep reading.  Keep investigating.  Keep questioning.  Be an ethical skeptic seeking truth, but rotating it to see all aspects so you know if it is true or not.

And don’t forget to consult the owner’s manual.

homo unius libri

Opus 2026-034: Starting Blocks

Where do we start?

I’m reading a book that is so full of things I disagree with that I wonder why I keep reading.  Possibly because it’s been given to me by a friend who endorses the ideas.  That troubles me.

As I read, I noticed that everything in the book goes back to a twisted interpretation of one verse.

(2Ti 2:15 KJV)  Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

For over nineteen hundred years Christianity as a whole has interpreted this verse to mean that we carefully interpret what the scripture says; that we handle the scripture as it was meant to be handled.  Then somewhere around 1830 a man named Darby came out with his idea of dispensationalism.  One of his key scriptures was this.  I haven’t read Darby or followed a lot of standard dispensationalism, but I assume that they would interpret this verse to mean that you take a pair of scissors and cut the history in the Bible into segments and that there are different rules for each segment.

Most of us can see some of the logic in this.  One of the common quotes of Christians is, “We’re not under law; we’re under grace.”  That in a sense is a basic form of dispensationalism.  But this book takes it to rabid extremes.  Where they have taken this is to the point where anything not written by the apostle Paul himself is subject to suspicion and rejection.  Of course, this only applies to the verses they don’t like.

So what is my starting point?  What verses do I always come back to?  My first point of foundation would be a scripture, also from II Timothy,

(2Ti 3:16 KJV)  All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

The second point is a little more widely spread out and it is the existence of Yahweh.  It is a belief that there is a God and that He is a personal God who created and is involved.  Everything I believe has to be founded on those two truths.

From there I might go to John 3:16.  There might be other basic scriptures that I would start branching out on, but ultimately it comes back to the two things that I cannot prove, but I have to accept totally on faith:  The Bible is the word of God and God exist as described in that Bible.  I can’t think of any rational way to explain and prove those two things.  Many people come up with all kinds of clever schemes, and I salute them, but I can’t put much confidence in their proofs.

If you looked at the Catholic Church, I think their core scripture would be where Jesus told Peter that He would build His church on this rock.  If you looked at Calvin, they would probably take the verse that says we’re saved by grace and some verses about foreknowledge and predestination.  Pentecostals would tend to go with verses about the gifts of the Spirit.

I think it’s a good question.  Where do you start?

homo unius libri

Opus 2025-604: Divergent and Convergent Truth

I’m thinking here of trying to address why we explain some things more readily than others.  Some truth is easy to explain.  It’s ready.  It’s right out there in front.  I would call that convergent truth.  An example of that would be the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.  It is very clearly stated there is no wiggle room.

Our divergent truth might be something like the divinity of Christ and the Trinity.  These are spelled out in different places, and you have to go and get those places then bring them together.  They become issues because the different places in scripture don’t seem to jive with each other.  Take for instance when it says God is one.  Another place that talks about the Father.  Another place who talks about Jesus as God.  And so forth

The dual nature of Jesus would be another example.  How do you explain these things because there is no place where it says or Paul says, “I’m now going to explain to you the incarnation.”  It doesn’t happen.  So when you see things like this that don’t add up, you need to go look for answers and solutions.  Another area of divergent truth, which is hard to deal with is the fact that the Bible seems to say that God does not change and other places it talks about him changing.  You have to dig to find answers to these questions.

Keep digging.

homo unius libri

Opus 2025-570: No Know

Much of my thinking deals with the sifting of what I know and what I just think I know.  In listening to recent presentations at church I was impressed with the assurance that the speaker had that he spoke truth.  Verses were quoted, authorities recited, strong announcements made.  My problem is that I have read enough in my Bible to know if there were significant scriptures being left out, other interpretations that were not only possible, but were more likely, in conflict with his conclusions.

Most of us at sometime in our life want to know if something is true or not.  I will accept the fact that often when we just drift along in the comfort zone and as long as we are feeling no pain, then life is good.  There are other times when is really important to know the truth.  When it comes to what the Bible teaches, I think it’s important to know the truth rather than just live in tradition and habit.  It is very hard to separate Biblical truth from theological traditions.  I considered it a constant challenge in my life.

Knowledge comes in different categories.  I don’t think we stopped to think about it but we should.

One category of knowledge is that which we will never be able to understand or never know, at least not in this life.  When you run into someone who thinks they can tell you what it means, you need to be careful.  Some of that knowledge is of an infinite nature and and finite minds cannot grasp it.  I think of the nature of the Trinity here.  It exists.  We see all the scriptures that make it a logical conclusion.  Understanding it is another matter.  Another area would be something like the book of Revelation with all of it’s figurative language.  Everybody has a theory.  Everyone has a system.  They’re all quite elaborate and often times very entertaining.  But the truth is the person giving you their system doesn’t know any more than you do, in reality they just won’t admit it.  So we have some knowledge that it’s just beyond us.

Then we have knowledge that just isn’t so.  I would put the theological conclusions of people I disagree within this category.  When I meet with a friend and he tells me that Jesus only came to minister to the Jews, I’m afraid I put on my skeptic hat.  When I listen in church and your conclusions about Abraham totally overlook clear statements in other books, I find myself realizing that these people know what isn’t so.  When people use the phrase “faith alone” and the only place you’ll find the phrase “faith alone” is in James where it says that we’re not saved by faith alone.

This is the area that is the most difficult to live with.  People around us are convinced they know the truth.  Since they know the truth, they don’t need to think anymore.  They don’t need to be aware of their own inconsistencies because it fits well together in their plan.  When you read another passage, it makes their conclusions impossible, they don’t want to hear about it.  They tend to get very hostile and hot.  It may be necessary often just to keep what you see clearly to yourself because they’re not going to listen anyway.  In this category, I would think of people who claim that we cannot be righteous because of Romans 3:10.  The big problem with that is that there are hundreds, if not thousands, of references in the Bible to people living righteous lives, being upright, even being perfect.

My goal is to go with the third type of knowledge.  I seriously believe that if we read carefully and think things through on our own, we can come to truth.  This does not mean we don’t discuss it with others.  It doesn’t mean we don’t listen to others.  Others might have insight that we haven’t thought about.  The thing is we can recognize truth when we see it because it is consistent with what we’ve been reading.  When we come across things that seem to conflict, I think it’s possible that we will be able to work out the conflicting aspects by digging a little bit deeper and asking ourselves what it really means.  For instance, one of the things I come across all the time are statements that talk about forever and ever.  Most people assume, logically, that this literally means forever.  The problem with that is that often you will find it used in a place where you know it can’t mean forever.  It becomes clear that the phrase is used figuratively rather than literally. J ust knowing that, recognizing it, admitting it, can take away a lot of conflicts.

So seek truth.  Sift.  Compare.  Meditate.  Listen.  And as the old Bible verse says, “Seek, and you shall find.”

homo unius libri

Opus 2025-549: BIG TRUTH, little truth

I’m sitting here thinking about how serious, honest people of good faith can differ on their understandings of things.  My reference of course is theological, but I see this in politics in economics and just about every area.  How do we know what is true as opposed to what we want to be true?  I know I’m quite capable of seeing how other people do not grasp the big picture.  What comes back to haunt me is the question of whether I actually see the big picture.

Is truth simple or complex?  That’s another one of those questions which you answer, “Yes”.  It’s almost pointless to try and break down the question itself without specific examples.  So let me give you an example.

If I would walk out beside the road and pick up an object from the ground and show it to you and ask you, “Is this a rock” you would be able to answer me in most cases yes or no.  If what I picked up was a leaf you would say obviously that’s a leaf not a rock.  It was a piece of well worn concrete you might not be sure.  But ultimately, it would be easy to determine if this was a rock or not.

Is that truth?  Is that simple?  Is there more to it?

And then I might ask you OK, what kind of rock is this?  If you’re not into geology, you might have no idea.  I know that there’s limestone and granite.  I know that there are geodes that have beautiful colors inside when you break them open.  I know there is volcanic rock.  I know just enough to be dangerous.  I know just enough to know that there are deeper truths to the question of what is a rock?

One of these will be TRUTH, and the other will be truth.  Life is like that.  There always seem to be deeper levels.  When we have disagreements, we have to decide how deep a level we’re going to go to.  In the discussion of rocks, we have to come to a basic understanding of what the generic term rock means.  After that, we can start breaking it down and look for deeper meanings.  We can get down to the chemical composition, what elements are in that rock.  We can ask ourselves does it contain gold?  But we have to agree on what the basics are before we can go deeper.

It always amazes me how I can talk to people who will look at Donald Trump, agree with everything he’s done, think that he has been a positive force on America, recognize that the world has responded positively towards what he’s done, and refused to vote for him no matter what because “Orange Man bad”.  And yes, these people exist.  You have massive numbers of young people who are excited about socialism and communism.  The evidence of what these systems produce is clearly demonstrated by history.  They don’t care.  They are literally saying, don’t confuse me with the facts.

I guess we just have to keep stating the truth loudly and strongly.  We need to keep checking our facts to make sure that they aren’t talking us into delusions.  We have to build relationships with people by being patient and kind and courteous.  We have to hope that somehow the latent intelligence that’s buried deep under the layers of indoctrination can breakthrough.

Keep talking. Keep listening. Keep praying.

homo unius libri

Opus 2025-494: The Attributes of Truth

This morning, as I was following another trail a side path opened up which pointed out to me something which I knew, but I had not focused on.  One of the attributes of God is “truth”.

One simple statement about this is where Jesus said “I am the way, the truth, and the life.”

Truth comes in different forms.  That may seem strange, but there are many times where it’s very difficult to cut through all the layers of frosting and bloviation and get to the substance, but it still is true.

Some truth is absolute but must be expressed correctly.  Take the statement that water freezes at 32 degrees Fahrenheit.  We were taught this as children, or at least we think we were.  The correct statement would be that pure water freezes at 32 degrees Fahrenheit at sea level.  There might be further details I am missing but the actual truth does not vary.  Also keep in mind that truth does not require your approval or agreement.

Some truth is variable in the sense that it’s best presented in principles rather than simple yes/no statements.  Often there are situations which modify the basic statement.  Take, “Honesty is the best policy.”  Not when you are hiding Jews from the Nazis.

Some truth needs to be broken down in smaller truth so that it can be worked with and applied

Some truth is not meant to be understood by we humans in our mortal bodies with mortal minds.  It would be easy to illustrate this by the fact that children are not ready to understand everything that adults understand.  A child will pick a shiny nickle over a corroded dime.  That doesn’t mean that the facts are any less true, just beyond you.  Some of this may be temporary.  Some of it may be permanent.  I’m not sure we will ever understand the Trinity.

Some truth might even be inaccurate.  I’m sitting on the porch looking toward the eastern horizon.  The black has turned into gray, which is morphing into orange and pink and as you go higher up, it’s blue.  I would say the sun is rising.  In one sense that is true.  In another sense it is a false statement because we know the sun is not rising, but the Earth is turning under the sun.  Does that make the statement any less true?

Some truths are only true in our own eyes.  That doesn’t make them any less true to us, but others might question it.  For instance, my grandchildren are the most wonderful and awesome grandchildren in the world.  That is true for me.  You might disagree.  On other matters disagreement is just confusion on one person’s part.  If I say there is one God and you disagree that doesn’t mean it’s just a matter of opinion.  It means that one of us is woefully wrong.

homo unius libri

Opus 2025-491: Literacy Is Overrated

Down through history the percentage of the people who were literate was very small.  For most people it had little or no value and the amount of time and effort it took to learn put it beyond their reach.  Even heads of state and commanders of armies often could not read.  They had scribes and priest to do that for them.  Of course that put them at the mercy of the scribes and priest and that worked out in history also.

The value of literacy depends upon access to truth.  It doesn’t do you much good to have a literate population if nothing they read is true or accurate.  Of course, part of the dumbing down process is to separate the general population from the ability to discern what is true and accurate.  I have been conditioned to believe that liver is a disgusting thing to eat.  I continually come across people who rave about the liver and onions that they’ve had and tell me that the only reason I don’t like it is because it was not prepared properly.  They make sense, but I’m not willing to listen.  I am even less willing to try it.  It is similar to the people who say that real communism has never been tried.

The implementation of the intersection of literacy and truth depends on open and free dialogue.  I think of how the American colonies responded to the Federalist Papers as each chapter was published in local newspapers.  The picture you get is that when the local citizens would gather at the pub to have a pint and discuss the publications, the discussion was free and far ranging.  In those days, people gathered at the pub to discuss philosophy, politics and economics.  Today they gather at the pub to get drunk and watch football.

Literacy is only valuable if you are willing to think about what you read.  For everyday tasks the written word is often optional.  Have you ever bought a piece of furniture from IKEA?  You have to assemble it yourself and the instructions have no words.  It would be interesting to find out if being literate made it easier for you to understand picture writing.

homo unius libri

Opus 2025-482: The Eyes Don’t Have It Any More

I have seen numerous pictures which are reported to be Hamas executing their political rivals.  The written portion talks about them hunting down rival gangs, and anyone who has tried to stand up to them.  I’m told that now that they are coming out of the tunnels they’re putting their uniforms back on . One reason all of this is very simple to believe is because it fits in with the pattern that these terrorist have demonstrated over the years.  There is nothing in it that is surprising.

The big question that we always have to ask ourselves though, would be, “Is it true?”

Just because I want something to be true, or should I say just because something fits my preconceived notions, does that excuse me for taking it at face value?  Keep in mind the things that we know that are readily available to even amateur provocateurs.  You have the tools of AI. Does anybody remember Photoshop?  With Internet search engines we have access to vast quantities of old photographs.  Has Hollywood ever produce something like this?  Since reporters can’t find out much of anything else how would they know what Hamas is doing against its rivals behind the barricade of censorship?

I don’t know if you’ve noticed but so far I have seen one photograph.  This type of sensationalism I have seen in regard to earthquakes, fires and all kinds of disasters.  You have one spot and you take multiple photographs from different positions, different angles, different times of day, different lighting, different filters, and you presented as something much bigger than it actually is.

Somewhere under all the manipulation is the truth.  When it comes to things like this, I don’t know if we’ll find the truth.  When I think of how this relates to me in my daily life, I as usual, come back to my studies of the Bible and thoughts about the things of God.  The commentaries that I read, the study notes in my reference Bible, the teachers on the Internet, all of them give me their opinion.  Even allowing for them speaking in good faith, it still adds up to a bunch of AI, Photoshop, personal opinions.  Fortunately, when it comes to eternal truth, I am able to cut through all of the nonsense and go right to the original source.  I have a Bible.  I was taught to read as a child.  I have learned to reason as I moved into adulthood.

I may continue to live in the dark when it comes to current events and the news.  I don’t have to settle for that when it comes to eternal truth.

homo unius libri

Opus 2025-481: Changeless Variety

Does truth change?  No.  Does our understanding of truth change?  Yes.

So often we get these two things confused in all walks of life.  It seems to be part of the life of faith to think that we have arrived at an understanding of truth.  That may be an important and even vital element in our walk with Christ.  We need to believe.  We need to be able to overcome doubts.  But in the midst of that we also need to be open to greater insight into the truth that God has given us.

I am reflecting on the sovereignty of God and what we would call the doctrine of a mutability.  I keep coming across people advocating an understanding of this which conflicts with my contact with a living God.  God says He does not change. 

(Mal 3:6 KJV)  For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.

I believe the Bible also says He’s the same yesterday, today and forever.  That is the truth, but it is a truth that we only understand partially to our own deficiency.

We need to walk carefully here and not keep throwing the baby out with the bath water.  We need to not reject our brothers and sisters in the faith because their level of insight is higher or lower than ours.  We are united by our faith in Christ, not by our insight and eschatology.  We are one in the body because of the blood of Jesus, not because we agree on our theories of the atonement.  God does not change in character, power, holiness, and the list goes on.   However, in His unchangeability, He is constantly interacting with we humans who are nothing but change.  That requires Him to be expressing Himself differently one time from another.  From our perspective that has changed.  From His not so much.

I can trust Him because He doesn’t fluctuate.  I can trust Him because He relates to me as a free agent and desires genuine love, not slave obedience.  There is an understanding of truth that will never change in one sense, and yet we always become deeper and more meaningful as time goes by.  If the church could historically struggle with the concept of the Trinity, of God being one in three persons, then I think they could also struggle with a concept of an unchanging God responding differently based on the input from His world.

(Jon 3:10 KJV)  And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.

And that’s the truth.

homo unius libri

Opus 2025-478: The Prejudice of Tradition

While contemplating the Sunday sermon, one of the things I kept running into was the way in which the pastor would use his traditional understanding in a way which did not go well with the verse he was looking at.  It came up several times.  He was going down the road of eschatology, which is rather risky when you have people around you who have read their Bible.  He was talking about the rapture and looking at Paul’s writings.

1 Thessalonians 4:13 (KJV) But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.

He was explaining that the word sleep here means dead.  No problem with that but somewhere on the talking points he got off on something called “soul sleep”.  I’ve heard of this before and I recognize it is one of the two theories on what happens between death and resurrection.  Some placees in scripture seem to imply that you go directly to be in the presence of Jesus.  Other places, and this is one of them, seem to imply that we are asleep until the resurrection.  Both are legitimate ways to understand it, but he started off on talking about how this was totally wrong.  My memory might be faulty, but I think he even used the word heresy.

So this morning, I was reflecting on how our traditions often get in the way of reading the Bible.  We have the ability to read something that makes a very clear statement and then speak tradition instead of scripture.  I like to think I’m above it, but I’m not convinced of that.  I’m at least aware of the problem and seek overcome.

So this morning, as I was thinking about this, the Lord brought this to mind,

Psalm 119:105 (KJV) NUN. Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.

And as I contemplated that, I got to thinking about how the scripture is there to give us direction, to show us where to put our feet, to give us an insight and do which path to follow.  That’s all good standard stuff.

Then I realized that although the lamp will tell us where to put our feet, it might not tell us what the landscape around us looks like  . We’re so used to powerful flashlights that put out thousands of lumens.  Put yourself back in the day of flickering oil lamps.  You didn’t even have the glass chimneys to keep the flame steady.  If you heard a rustling in a dark corner of the room at home, you might have to get up and walk over to see what it was even if you had a lamp.

It occurred to me as we go through life that God will show us what our next step will be.  He will show us which is the right direction, the path. that does not mean that He’s going to light up the distant hills on our left and our right.  It doesn’t mean He’s going to make us able to penetrate the forest that is grown up next to the road.  What He does is guarantee to help us know truth or falsehood as we head straight and narrow.

Our problem usually is not that we don’t have light, but that we don’t use the light we have.

homo unius libri

Opus 2025-475: Truth Is an Introvert; Tradition an Extrovert

When it comes to any area of study, one of the big challenges is separating the traditions from the truth.  Traditions are represented by theories that have come to be accepted as rock solid truth.  In reality, many of these theories might have a bit of truth, but are also heavily influenced by folklore, antidotes, legends, deliberate editing and any other type of story that’s been passed down and possibly embellished over the years.  One of the challenges of history scholars is to cut through the cultural mandates and get to what actually happened in the past.  On the other hand, you have truth.  Truth is something which is based on facts and in reality.  If you say, the nail was rusty, then it requires certain evidence.  First you need a nail.  Then you need samples of rust and proof that the rust came from the nail.  It seems easy, but it’s also easy to fake.  Truth is a hard one and must be continually examined to see if the reason for believing it was fraudulent or not.

Which is worse, traditional truth or truthful tradition?  Which is more dangerous?  If you’re talking science and you’re doing experiments based on traditional understandings, it’s possible that you could kill yourself and everyone around you based on what you thought was a safe process.  This is the problem with much of science today.  Research is being manufactured.  It’s being falsified.  And no one seems to care.  If the issue is whether the paint on your car will last five years or seven years then you’re not causing a lot of harm and you’re making money.  If the issue is, does your vaccine cause people to die in a few years, that gets to be a whole different issue.

Remember when education went with the whole language approach to teaching reading?  What was the whole language approach?  I was a teacher for years and I’m not sure I know.  The key thing that came down was that it abandoned the teaching of phonics.  It was based on theories made it by people with an agenda.  The result was decrease in reading abilities and students level of education.  As a social skeptic, I would say that was a successful application of their theory because it produced the results that they seem to really want.  It’s much easier to bring in a dictatorship and control the population when people are ignorant and can’t read.  It is almost as effective if you destroy their desire to read by introducing inferior woke literature.  You can call me a cynic if you want.  In this case I would say I’m just an observant realist.

And of course, I run the same issue in theology and biblical studies.  One of the reasons we have so many denominations is that people want to go with traditions.  They’re comfortable with what they have always been told rather than facts that they don’t like.  Many times, the comfort is based on being accepted by the cool kids.  This is why many so-called Christian churches are rejecting the concept of the physical resurrection of Christ.  They can be respected by their pagan friends because they have rejected this “fairytale”.  The problem is when you look objectively at the evidence, the most logical conclusion to come to is that Jesus did rise physically from the dead.  The cool kids will laugh.  They will laugh very hard until they stand before the judgment seat.  Jesus will not be amused.

So whatever your field of study, mine is the Bible, make sure that your research is coming up with actual facts rather than the wishful thinking of other people.  I don’t know how easy or hard that is in science, education, economics, history, or other fields.  I do know that it can be done when it comes to Bible study.

Don’t throw all the babies out with all the bath water.  Sometimes tradition is just a simple way of understanding a deeper truth.  Other times it is like the cowbird that lays its eggs in another birds nest, and when it hatches, it’s chicks push out the eggs and chicks that belong there.

Seek truth.  Embrace truth.  Make truth a part of your family.  Pat tradition on the head and let it sit at the table for dinner as long as it behaves itself.

homo unius libri

Opus 2025-423: Article of Faith

I don’t know if you remember your junior high school English well enough to know the difference, but there is a major difference between the definite article and the indefinite article.  A definite article is the word “the”.  When you say “the” house you are specifically indicating one location.  When you say “a” house, you are talking about a genre of construction.

What brings this up was a sound bite.  I was walking through a room that had a bunch of Talking Heads discussing the speech by Erika Kirk.  Someone mentioned the obvious influence of a higher power in her demeanor and in the things she said.  I didn’t stay to follow it.  I don’t really like Talking Heads .  I listened to her speak because I wanted to hear what she said.  I don’t listen to the Talking Heads because I wanted to hear what she said, not how they interpreted it.  It is much better for my blood pressure.

And this phrase that I heard “a higher power” is a good example of the kind of nonsense that we hear from Talking Heads, who are awash in their mediocrity, political correctness, and editors.  It was not “a” higher power that was recognized and moving.  It was “the” higher power.  We’re not talking about the many spirits that the pagan world looked at as causing trees and animals to do what they do.  What Erika was talking about and responding to was the one and only God of the universe.  He is all powerful, all knowing, all loving, and you can just keep on down the list of attributes.  That is whom she was referring to, not some vague force that moves above the clouds.

She would use the definite article not the indefinite one.  Know the difference.

homo unius libri

Opus 2025-407: Data Processing

I find myself listening to more and more podcasts and watching more videos.  This kind of surprised me when I realized it was happening.  I’ve always avoided them because it takes so long to listen to something that has commercials, long introductions, and people who think they are funny not being so funny.

I think one of the things that is driving me to this desperation is the lack of integrity in the news media and the Clickbait.  I find it somewhat amusing reading the headlines of the different YouTube videos.  I automatically eliminate anything that has extreme adjectives such as “the funniest”, “the ultimate”,  “This will make you laugh out loud” or “Charlie Kirk destroys….”

What I find myself looking for are actual interviews between two people who can put two thoughts together and listen to another person who has a third thought.  Even then you need to be careful because often times it’s someone else parsing what was said, and trying to convince you of their point of view.

The same principal applies in my reading.  I find that I’m less and less willing to take someone’s word that they are quoting accurately.  Many of the great truths that are being quoted are readily available if we want to take the time to read the primary sources.  This is obviously demanding and time-consuming.  I think it’s necessary.  Where am I going to find the time?  I have no idea.  Can I stay awake long enough to finish a boring passage that actually bears some truth?  I have failed many times.

But I continue on the quest for accurate information and hopefully some foundations that will get me to truth.  The only source that I have no doubts about at this point is the Bible and even there I often will question the translation and compare what different versions have said in order to get it the truth.  Commentaries are just some guys opinions.  Sermons are the theoretically inspired interpretations of theoretically born again individuals.

In all things ask questions.

homo unius libri

Opus 2025-397: Speaking Truth to Denial

Have you noticed how people have a genuine fear of the truth?  This came up in a recent discussion where the person I was talking to did not want to call evil, evil.  He kept coming up with synonyms or excuses.  I finally pointed out to him that it is very common at least in the book of Proverbs, to call evil, evil, to admit that evil is evil.

Why don’t we want to call evil by its name?  Because there’s always going be someone around us who says you shouldn’t say that, it’s not kind, you’re going to drive people away.  As a result, we don’t drive them away.  They leave in boredom because we don’t have anything to attract them.  We need to speak truth.  Not truth to power, but truth to denial.

Think of all the areas where we don’t want to come right out and say that things are evil.  We don’t want to mention homosexuality as evil.  Everybody always brings up a family member or a friend who is the nicest person in the world and is homosexual.  How can it be evil?  You could ask the same question about the sociopath who has learned how to function in society.  He is still a sociopath.  He is still not to be trusted.  Good manners and smooth talk do not overcome the evil.

You can make a list: transgender, Islam, corruption in government, censorship for you own good.  Add whatever you want.

So we can at least start by not being afraid to use the word evil.  We are surrounded by it.  When we see professional medical people who are supposed to be committed to do a no evil, butchering the bodies of adolescent children because they have had some perverted adult convince them they are the wrong sex, we need to call it evil.  Why?  Because it is.

Of course, we need to be careful that what we are calling evil is evil by an absolute standard not just by our personal preference for the moment.  That again, as I’ve said many times, is something that we have to base on the witness of scripture and of the God we serve.

homo unius libri