I’ve given some consideration to the “Right to Life” movement in the United States, and I wonder if – perhaps – the Christian battle against abortion may ultimately be the downfall of organized Christianity in the United States. My sense is that we, the Christian Church, may win the battle – and may have abortion outlawed, perhaps within the next ten to fifteen years. Yet it may be that the very victory may cause a loss of the war. I cannot see such a law holding very long, for there will be a large part of the United States very violently opposed to it. And the revocation of the law will most likely destroy the strength of the Church as an organized political movement, for the very central aspect of its organized strength will be ripped away. And without that central organizing point, the political church will become minimized and weakened. Perhaps there will be a brief attempt to rally around some issue such as gay marriage, but I doubt that will gain any momentum. The “Right to Life” movement may destroy the Church as an organized political organization and may lead to the downfall of this nation.



What does this mean? Does this mean I, or we, should not support the “Right to Life” movement? God forbid that we do so. Yet it needs to be refocused, if we hope to win this battle. If an abortion ban is to hold, then it must spring up from those influenced by the Church, rather than the Church itself. For the Church is not a political movement – it cannot be, by its very nature. For it is a spiritual force, and that is something far more powerful. For the Church, in its organization as a political power has done what the Galations did: “Are you so foolish? Although you began with the Spirit, are you now trying to finish by human effort?” (3:3).



The modern Right to Life movement is build on the strength of human effort – an attempt to change the United States through political means. We cannot legislate morality; rather, we can – but that is not enough. Any attempt to change the United States’ moral compass through legislation will fail and backlash and destroy those who attempted to force their will on others. Rather, the church should again begin with the Spirit – and change the hearts of the people through truth. And that influence should lead to a general renewal and a general change, if not through people who have been saved, but through those people who recognize the truth. For if you attack evil through the flesh, evil will become stronger and conquer the flesh. For the flesh is evil. But if you attack evil through the spirit, it will be conquered; and nations will be changed.



Such a path is a path of faith, a difficult way. And for that reason, the Church will not pursue it. And as a result, the “Church” as it were may be shattered, along with the nation. But I pray to God that I am wrong, that this will not be true. And I pray that the church will take the path of the Spirit. May this be so.

( C: 0 )

28 June 2003

Today is a philosophical day, not a theological one (not that God is ever far from my thoughts). This is a result of my reading another short story of Anthony Burgess. He was a rather excellent writer – having a great knowledge of the stories that he wrote. If I was not called to a different thing, I would enjoy being a writer of his ilk. But the problem with his stories is that, while they are philosophical and thoughtful in nature, there is an underlying emptiness to them – as if they seek answers but never can find them. Therefore, I enjoy them, for they stimulate thought in new directions, but I then realize that the directions they take me can never give me the answers that I seek. This is the problem with pure philosophy – humans can never come to ultimate answers on their own. They can only come to answers which are never deeply satisfying, for they can only see within their own system – never outside of it. That is why the deeply satisfying answers can only be found in God. Which makes it curious that we reject him so.



Actually, we find a certain level of satisfaction in accepting the concept of God and not his reality. So long as we accept that he exists, we can be somewhat satisfying, knowing that there is something deeper out there. We can then trick ourselves into feeling better. The argument is this: God is real. Therefore we possess something real.



There is clearly a jump in logic there. For the mere existence of God does not mean that we possess something deeper. There must be an act of giving, and an act of receiving in order to know the deeper things. The logic must be: God is real. He has given us something real. Therefore we possess something real.



We forget that the gift must both be received and has consequences of receiving (or, rather, we would prefer to not know – finding comfort in this easy jump of logic) – therefore we are somewhat satisfied. But we have nothing real unless we have received it and have accepted the consequence of death of self. Without this, we will have nothing deep.

( C: 0 )

26 June 2003

Take note of Ezekiel 14:





14:4 Therefore speak to them and say to them, ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says: When any one from the house of Israel sets up his idols in his heart and places the stumbling block of his iniquity before his face, and then consults a prophet, I the Lord will answer him myself according to the multitude of his idols, 14:5 in order to capture the hearts of the house of Israel, who are estranged from me on account of all their idols.’



And we wonder sometimes why the Lord seems to give us conflicting thoughts and options and answers to our prayers - why he answers us according to what we want, and why such answers can only lead to disaster. I wonder if there is some direct relationship to the purity of our relationship with God and our ability to truly hear his words. In fact, I am certain that there is a relationship. A very close one.



I can think of several times in my life where the lord answered me according to the multitude of my idols - times when he Lord was in fact not my Lord. And these answers have burdened me for years, for I thought them to be the Word of the Lord. But now, I realize - they are my own word.

( C: 0 )

25 June 2003

Sorry, things have been - as the trend has been, lately - busy. I’ve been car shopping and just generally running around, which means I’ve not had the time to sit down and think in far too long. I’m must rectify that soon.

( C: 0 )

21 June 2003

This song is related to my previous post:



How are you feeling?

What are your reasons?

Do you feel love or a lack there of?

Love is a bond without reason

A cry for connection

A light in your eyes

Love is a reason for living, a reason for trying, a reason for life

Forget the feeling

Get all your of reasons

Life is love or the lack there of

Love is a bond without reason

A cry for connection

A light in your eyes

Love is a reason for living, a reason for trying, a reason to cry

Love is a bond without reason

A cry for connection

A light in your eye

Love is a reason for living, a reason for dieing,

Love is everything

Love is everything

Love is everything

How are you feeling?

Love is everything

What are your reasons?

Love is everything

How are you feeling?

Love is everything

Love is everything

Love is everything

Love is everything

Ohh love, you move me

Ohh love, you move me

Love, move in me, move me

Love means everything

( C: 0 )

I’ll be honest, I wonder - at times - what hope there is for me, when all of the things I long for are utterly out of my reach. Am I ever to strive and to seek for an unattainable goal, only to be repeatedly denied the fulfillment of a desire that God has placed within me? Why is my life the story of ‘almost’, a tale of possibilities never fulfilled?



When I die, will it be said, “Imagine what could have been?”



Why can I never attain the things I seek? What does it mean to love? I mean, truly love - to utterly give your heart and soul to someone else? Why can I never gain even a part of this knowledge in my relationships with my family? My friends? What terrifies me so much of this that I desire it and run from it so much?



Am I destined, in that sense, to ever be alone? Because I am always alone, no matter how large the croud. I am always alone. Part of that is praticed (for far too many these days do not understand the importance of being alone without being lonely, a trait I have carefully cultivated). But part of that is this fear. For I am afraid...



Afraid of the consequences of love, of deep abiding relationships and friendships - for love (in a Biblical sense) is something mind-shattering, something which would utterly change me if I more fully realized it. Love carries consequence. I’m writing in almost every sense of the word love: in terms of family love, friendship love, and relationship love. I fear love - and what it might do to me, for I’ve seen what the loss of love will do. And I fear that love may somehow cause me to lose perspective (whatever “perspective” a cynical, analytical view might hold). But would it be so bad to gain the perspective of love, of intimacy?



But I’m afraid. Afraid that this hope may be yet another hope leading to failure. And that it would be said, upon my death, “There goes a man who had a greater possibility for love than anyone - Imagine what could have been”.

( C: 0 )

16 June 2003

I was once a man as you are

There were times I fought the good fight

But there were times where the darkness fooled me

there were times, I became the things I hate



And I said, Did you come from heaven

And I said, No, you fell from hell

But she said, No long ago you lost me

No, it was you, who fell



What about the things we long for?

What about the things we hate?

I once was young as you are

But now, all I know is pain.



And I said, Did you come from heaven

And I said, No, you fell from hell

But she said, No, long ago you lost me

No, it was you, who fell



I once was a man as you are

I once was a man who was young

I once was a man who dreamed and lived

I once was a man who loved.

( C: 0 )

15 June 2003

This week’s been busy. I’m disappointed, since I haven’t had the time to write as much as I’d like. Next week doesn’t look so bad, though!

( C: 0 )

12 June 2003

Apocalyptic statements in the New Testament amaze me, both for their accuracy and their almost cruel honesty. It almost does seem cruel to me, the way the NT pulls no punches concerning apostasy. It does not excuse actions; it merely comments on their evil – with no excuses for anyone, for anything, as if it assumes that people make their choices and then live with them. As if people are not victims but capable of choosing right and wrong. And when the NT discusses wrong, it condemns evil in the most harsh of terms. That says a great deal about how I should be concerned with evil and apostasy.



For example, take a look at 2 Timothy 3.

3:1 But understand this, that in the last days difficult times will come. 3:2 For people will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, arrogant, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, ungrateful, unholy, 3:3 unloving, irreconcilable, slanderers, without self-control, savage, opposed to what is good, 3:4 treacherous, reckless, conceited, loving pleasure rather than loving God. 3:5 They will maintain the outward appearance of religion but will have repudiated its power. So avoid people like these.



What a statement! What a judgment, both on such a people, and on the church today for not reacting in a similar manner to that which is evil! Why do we brush it off as “No big deal”? Why do we ignore those in the church who are deliberately spreading heresy? To say, “Avoid people like that?” – who are we to not react in the same way? We are a people who are more concerned with a flaky love and non-confrontationalism than concerned with the truth.

( C: 0 )

11 June 2003

See the subject line.



Life’s been busy the last couple of weeks, so I haven’t had the time for reflection and thinking that I’d normally like. Rest assured, I will soon have more posting action occuring.

( C: 0 )

08 June 2003

Well, I just arrive back from my preaching experience. I’ll spend some time (I’m sure) over the next couple of days assessing the situation and rewriting the sermon so that it can be posted on this site.



In the meantime here is the Word Document of the thoughts and notes I preached from, until I finish putting it into written form.



Now, time for bed - and back to the grind of ‘real’ work.

( C: 0 )

04 June 2003

So my sermon title will be “Christ and Church”. It’ll be an interesting commentary on the state of the Church, in relation to the centrality of Christ, out of Hebrews 3. I really have a lot to say. I hope that it is just not too much.



When I get back I will post the entirety of the sermon on this site, since I basically have it written in paper-form. I hope to read some comments on it, too!

( C: 1 )