some remarks on the book made in henry troyat's biography of dostoevsky, 'firebrand'....
..the Karamazov family live in a little provincial town.
K pere, a cynical and lewd old buffoon, has ruined his life with mysterious debauchery.
from his first wife who beat him unmercifully, he had a son Dmitri,
a savage brute with sudden impulses to honest and metaphysical preoccupations.
from his second wife, a peevish and hysterical woman, he had a son Ivan,
an irritable intellectual with a tormented and destructive mind-
a hero and martyr of negation.
but Aliosha, his youngest son, seems to be untouched by the hereditary curse of the Ks.
his disposition is characterized by male kindness,
the opposite of the asexual kindness of the hero of The Idiot.
he is the positive principle of the book, the luminous axis around which
the other characters whirl like black midges.
in addition to the three brothers, there is the infamous Smerdiakov,
a son of old K by a feebleminded deaf mute whom he had raped one night for sheer bravado.
the epileptic bastard serves as a lackey in his father's house.
he is stolid, pretentious, cunning, admires I who is annoyed by him
because in S he recognizes a caricature of himself.
Old K and his 4 sons quarrel with one another about a woman named Grushenka.
Smer, thinking that he is obeying I's secret wish, murders his father.
K is accused of the crime, sentenced to hard labor and leaves for siberia.
this is the story.
the book is dominated by 2 problems
-the problem of seduction and the problem of God.
it is the conflict between the idea of Gru and the idea of Christ.
the other characters are placed between these two poles.
some, like the old K, are symbols of sensuality;
others, like the starets (spiritual counselor in the russian orthodox church) Zosima,
are symbols of religious faith.
between these extremes the souls of the other characters are arranged skillfully in a hierarchical order.
Smer, D, I, and A are, so to speak, progressive embodiments of the same character
-the individual who shakes himself free of the beast
and is realized in the 'new man'.
these 4 brothers are one and the same being;
each represents a different stage of the single personality development.
'the ladder of vice is the same for all, Aliosha says to Dmitri.
'i am on the first rung, you are a little high-at the thirteenth, for instance.
in my opinion, it's absolutely the same thing'.
Grushenka too is on this 'thirteenth rung'.
this prostitute, the mistress of an old merchant who has rescued her from poverty,
is a courtesan (prostitute), says old K,
but probably a 'greater saint' than all the nuns in the convent.
'this woman is a beast', 'this woman is an angel', retort the other characters.
and D exclaims, 'yes, that's what she is-a tigress.
the queen of immodesty, the completely infernal woman,
the queen of all fiendish women unleashed in the world'.
but what strikes A is 'the naive and kind expression of her face'.
whom are we to believe?
all of them are right, for Gru has earned all of these opinions.
Gru, the young girl, the slut, the beast, the saint, embodies the multiple contradictions of woman.
she is woman on the model of polina suslova (a woman in Dostoevski's earlier life).
woman is folly become flesh,
women are worn out by waiting
and are disconsolate when their desires are gratified,
they yearn to give themselves and reproach men
for having taken them.
they are cruel for the pleasure of being gentle afterward,
then they are gentle for the pleasure of being cruel afterward.
they are perversely modest and voluptuously innocent.
they lie to God, to men, to themselves.
they are not caught in life, they toy with life, they pose before life as before a mirror.
and they make faces and change their expressions to give themselves the sensation of existing.
while permanence is for men the proud of their reality,
woman asserts her existence through change.
man wants to be one, woman wants to be multiple.
man feels his strength only in the full consciousness of his virtues and defects;
woman feels strong only in total unconsciousness of herself.
man is the organize world, woman the formless universe.
everything is possible with her,
nothing is certain with her.
one must flee from her
or else renounce dominion over her.
Gru's beauty has bewitched old K.
this drunken, stingy, lying and vicious old mans seems to be a
a portrait of Dos's own father, painted with pitch.
'he was sentimental, yes, he was sentimental and wicked'...
in the presence of the beautiful Gru, old K is nothing but a stammering and slobbering buffoon.
he gives her the portion of his estate that was to be D's inheritance.
every day he hopes that she will visit him
and wanders from room to room befuddled with lust, waiting endlessly;
but Gru does not yield to him, nor to K when he falls in love with her.
she laughs at father and son,
and as the days go by the two men hate each other more and more intensely.
'they scrutinized each other, with their knives ready in the sheaths'.
Raskolnikov
(i think a Dos character in another of his books..any name that is not specifically defined in what comes out of this biography are either book characters or people identified in other parts of this book..)
is obsessed by an idea to such an extent that he loses all freedom;
D and his father are so obsessed by a human being that they have become slaves of their desire.
'beauty is a terrible and horrible thin', says K.
its power over men equals and sometimes exceeds that of ideas.
the erotic madness of the K's is comparable to the political madness of the protagonists of The Possessed.
in both cases, the desire for an earthly gratification reduces man to the status of beast,
and the claim to the right of defying all morel limits leads him to depravity and murder.
'as for D, says his father, I will crush him like a cockroach'.
and D says of his father: 'i don't know-perhaps i will kill him, perhaps i won't.
i fear that i shall be unable to endure his face at such a moment.
i hate his adam's apple, his nose, his eyes, his impudent smile.
he disgusts me.
that is what frightens me'.
nevertheless, he spies upon his father, lest Gru , lured by promises of money,
should yield to the old man.
one night Grigori, the servant, surprises K in the garden.
K strikes him on the head with a pestle and runs away.
he finds Gru at the inn.
'then an orgy began, a mad party', with wine, songs, dancing.
Gru, completely drunk, admits to D that she is in love with him and wants to marry him.
'although you are a savage, she says to him, i know that you are noble.
from now on we must live honestly...let us be good and honest, let us not be like beasts
....take me far away from here...i don't want to stay here, i want to be far, far away'.
it is as though a looming disaster were intensifying the emotions of these sensual characters.
the foreknowledge of a terrible fate drives them to intensify their transient pleasures.
they are cheerful because they feel that they have no right to be cheerful.
and it is a fact that in Dos's characters all joys that are not strictly spiritual ones
seem strangely fragile.
at the very moment when we witness sudden happiness in an individual, we are perturbed,
because we know that he is doomed.
with the refinement of a sadist, Dos nurses the happiness of his hero before punishing him.
he does not strike a tired, sick body;
he gives the blow on a day when the individual is in his prime,
when his hopes are being fulfilled.
D is arrested at the height of amorous intoxication.
he is charged with parricide, (murder of a close relative)
and his protestations of innocence are of no avail;
all the evidence points to him as the criminal.
Smer, the actual murderer of their father,
plays the role of the diabolical double that is so dear to Dos.
what torture for an honest man to meet the embodiment of everything
dirty, unavowed, forgotten, beastly and cowardly that is buried in himself!
you are serene, you accept yourself
-and then suddenly you are confronted with an individual who is offal, the cesspool of yourself,
who is yourself in what is most vicious in yourself.
in his corrupt mouth, your noblest words sound like obvious stupidities;
in his narrow mind, your noblest ideas are turned against you.
thus I D walks his own alter ego like an ape on a leash.
he hates Smer; Smer is gratified by this hatred and commits murder
because he believes that he is thereby obeying a secret order from his master.
what has been only a vague hope in the heart of I K
is suddenly transformed into a monstrous actuality that horrifies him.
because of Smer who realizes the criminal intention of his master,
Ivan is guilty no longer of a dream but of a deed.
Smer stands for the fusion of the idea and the act,
he symbolizes the negation of spiritual irresponsibility, the punishment of the freethinker.
'you yourself, he says to i, have strongly desired your father's death...
you were incapable of killing him yourself,but you hoped that someone else would do it'.
I questions himself, tries to be reasonable, is troubled.
'yes, i have been waiting for this, and if so, it is true that i wanted to kill him'.
and he asks his conscience, 'did i desire my father's death to this extent?'
I is guilty because of this thought, this intention.
'you have killed him, you are the chief murderer.
i was only your helper, Smer insists.
the lackey proceeds to reveal the origin of his crime to his master.
the truth is that he committed murder because there was nothing to stop him.
thanks to the speeches of i, the intellectual,
Smer understood that 'everything is permissible' in this world.
if there is no God, there is no hell.
'if God does not exist, there is no such thing as being virtuous,
virtue is useless.
that is the way i reasoned'.
having thus negated the rules of common morality, having jumped over the wall,
Smer confuses freedom with license.
he commits murder and his act involves I who declared the
'evedrything is permissible',
and D, who said, 'why does such a man exist?'
I is innocent before human justice, but nothing can justify himself in his own eyes.
because he negates God, he is faced with Smer.
instead of superman, he discovers the ape;
instead of the luminous ladder, he perceives the abyss;
instead of defying superior reason, he is faced with madness.
this intelligent, educated, gifted man begins to suffer from hallucinations;
he undergoes a split of personality, he sees the devil and this devil is himself.
'it is myself, but with a different face...
you express my own thought....
only you have chosen my most foolish thoughts;
you are stupid and trivial'.
Ivan K is Dos, whom 'God has tortured all his life'.
I's blasphemous negations are Dos's own negations in his moments of doubt.
'these fools have not even dreamed of the power of negation that i have overcome', he writes.
and when I K says, 'can one accept universal harmony at the price of the tears of one little martyred child?'
it is Dos himself who speaks. (through I in the story)
I was to Dos what Smer is to I
-the embodiment of all that was odious in himself.
I was that part of the author's soul which he wanted to cast away
and the masterful punishment of his author.
shining above these wretched beings are two luminous figures, Aliosha and the starets Zosima.
the youngest of the brothers K is a novice in a peaceful monastery with big white walls,
but he is not a real mystic.
Dos writes of him, 'A was in no way a fanatic nor even, i think, a mystic.
he was simply a philanthropist ahead of his time'.
this boy is perfectly balance, perfectly adjusted to reality
and he has a serene confidence in God.
to be sure, he believes in miracles but he is not troubled by them;
they are the crowning of his faith, not its foundation.
'for a realist faith is not born of miracles; miracles are born of faith'.
thus A is a 'realist', a complete human being.
unlike Myshkin (the main character in the Idiot), he is of this world,
he is capable of understanding the views of his brothers and father;
he is not a stranger in relation to the sinners around him.
therefore his merit in resisting all temptations is the greater.
the starets Z tells him, 'this is what i think of you:
you will go forth from these walls and live like a monk in the world.
you will have many adversaries, but even your enemies will love you.
life will bring you many misfortunes, but you will find happiness in misfortune;
you will bless life, and you will make others bless it
and this is what matters most'.
A was doubtless modeled on shidlovsky, Dos childhood friend,
and Soloviov, the philosopher with the face of Christ.
as for Z, we have seen that this character was inspired by
Tikhon Zadonsky and Father Ambrosius of the optina pustin monastery.
'the starets, writes Dos, is a man who absorbs your soul and your will in his own'.
he is a powerful confessor who rules the monastery by virtue of his extreme clairvoyance and the serene shrewdness of his advice.
'many say that as a result of receiving,for many years,
all those who came to pour out their hearts to him, eager for advice and consolation,
he finally acquired great perspicacity.
he would cast one glance at a stranger and guess why he had come, what he needed,
and even what tormented his conscience'.
like A, Z was a man before becoming a saint.
he lived among his fellow men and served in the army.
when he decided to become a monk he was motivated
not by despair or intellectual conviction, but by love.
Z's doctrine is a doctrine of love and joy.
the strarets repeats the words of his young brother,
'life is a paradise in which we all dwell, but we refuse to recognize this'.
he says also, 'everyone of us is guilty before all men, for all men, for everything'.
all men are united by universal sympathy and the villainy of any one man
has repercussions on the rest.
evil is not confined to single criminal and his direct victim; it spreads like a grease spot.
those who unconsciously desire evil are affected by it even if they do no evil
and those who have realized such desires in themselves without condemning them also suffer.
even those who know nothing of crime are mysteriously accomplices in it.
we are all responsible, defiled, unhappy.
we have stolen with the burglar whose face we do not know,
we have murdered with the parricide about whom we read in the newspapers,
raped with the lewd,
cursed with the blasphemous.
each of us bends under the sin of the world.
and yet all of us will be saved.
A says, 'man cannot commit a sin that can exhaust God's infinite love.
believe that God loves you more that you can conceive,
that he loves you in your sin and with your sin...
if you love, you belong to God.
love redeems everything, saves everything'.
Z does not summon the believer to embrace rigorous monastic rule,
to practice asceticism, to whimper with contrition.
he asks men only to admit their faults and to love.
what matters is not the result achieved, but the effort to achieve it.
when the proud man bows his head, he is closer to God than a lackey who falls on his knees,
because the proud man has had to struggle with himself in order to offer to God this sign of human modesty,
while the lackey prostrates himself by habit.
'do what you can
(note: 'agonize to enter the narrow door, for many will seek to enter and will not be able. luke 13.24)
and it will be taken into account.
that which seems to you wicked in you is purified by the very fact that you have realized it....
at the moment when you realize with horror that despite your efforts you are not only closer to your goal,
but have moved away from it, at that moment you will achieve your goal and you will behold...
the savior who, without you knowing it, has lovingly guided you'.
Z and A are bathed in the same blessed light.
they love and this is sufficient to gain the sympathy of simple people and children,..
the intellectual attacks this serene philosophy.
I K fights the serene faith of his brother with the diabolical arguments of the Grand Inquisitor.
(note: a man judging God!? how queer! how futile..and fatal!
'for what if some did not believe?
shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?
God forbid.
yea let God be true, but every man a liar;
as it is written, that Thou mightest be justified in Thy sayings
and mightest overcome when Thou art judged'. romans 3.3-4)
the legend that i relates to A is the culmination of The brothers K
and probably the testament of Dos' literary career.
it sums up everything, illumines everything and is truly Dos's last word.
in seville, during the inquisition, Christ appears among the crowd.
He is recognized at once.
people throng around Him and beg Him for miracles.
J performs the miracles asked of Him.
then the Grand Inquisitor, a man of 90 with a dried up face and hollow eyes,
orders the arrest of the savior.
at night, the Grand Inquisitor visits Jesus in the dungeon.
'why have You come to disturb us', he says. For you do disturb us'
the old man proceeds to read a terrible indictment against Jesus.
the Grand Inquisitor does not believe in God or man.
he does not believe in God because he refuses to heed the savior's words,
'you have no right to add one word to what you have said
he does not believe in man because he maintains that the christian doctrine
goes beyond the moral strength of mankind.
he rejects the synthesis of the human and divine priciple in freedom.
'I want to make you free, Jesus had said,
but by proclaiming the freedom of choice between good and evil,
Jesus proclaimed man's responsibility, condemned man to the torments of his conscience
and made him the object of a whole machinery of suffering,
in which remorse, temptation and hope are inextricably mixed.
FREEDOM IS INCONCEIVABLE WITHOUT SUFFERING.
freedom can be bought only at the price of suffering.
and christianity is above all a religion of suffering.
thus man is confronted with a dilemma;
on the one hand, independence with moral torture,
on the other, well being through submission.
what will be his choice?
the Grand Inquisitor chooses for him.
Christ, he maintains, has overestimated the strength of His creatures
in imposing the ordeal of freedom on them.
'have you forgotten that man prefers peace, even death, to the freedom of choosing between good and evil?
man's great goal is happiness, and the task of the church is to organize his happiness on earth.
thus the church loves man better than Christ loves him
since Christ has placed an excessively heavy burden on his shoulders.
'because You placed man too high,
You acted pitilessly toward him,
You demanded too much of him'.
the ideal of Jesus in the form that it assumes in the gospels
can be realized only by a few chosen spirits.
christianity is an aristocratic religion and as such impossible.
religion is intended for the masses
and if must propose a way of life that can be followed by the masses.
it must bring comfort to fools, cowards, perverts and the sick.
it must be accessible to the lowest of mankind;
it must be vulgar.
in the place of freedom, uncertainty and spiritual suffering,
the Grand Inquisitor wants to give man a euclidean
(only one line may be drawn through a given point to a given parallel line...
note: here, the point seems,
the church's approach to God is the one line and Jesus' command the other...
the first possible and bringing good (as viewed by the Self)
and the second bringing continual trouble...ala luke 13.24 AGONIZE to enter the narrow door
for many will seek to enter and will not be able)
organization of the world.
at this point the Grand Inquisitor embraces Shigalev's
(think he was a revolutionary, a nihilist?, in st. petersburg)
doctrine.
he takes care of the crowd and defends the hungry and the weak.
he promises them not heavenly bread but earthly bread.
'You (Jesus) have promised them heavenly bread,
but can it compare with earthly bread, in the eyes of this weak human race,
eternally wicked and eternally ungrateful?...
to us, it is the weak who are precious'.
this religion of earthly bread is identical with the atheist socialism of The Possessed.
the Grand Inquisitor proclaims the ideal of mediocre happiness,
as against great spiritual aspirations:
'we shall give them the quiet happiness of weak creatures, such as they are by nature...
yes, we shall set them to work,
but in their leisure hours we shall organize their life like a child's game,
with childish songs, choruses and innocent dances.
oh, we shall allow them even sin, because they are weak and helpless'.
(note: and liquidate them if their 'sin' hinders our grand vision for mankind?)
it was in the name of man's freedom that Christ in the desert refused to succumb to the first temptation,
that of earthly bread.
according to the Grand Inquisitor, this was his first error.
His second error was His wish to be loved freely.
men cannot believe when guided by their hearts alone.
they need a certainty.
the divine promise is unintelligible to them,
it is enveloped in too much mystery, too much silence, too many allusions.
'You have chosen the strangest, most enigmatic, most indeterminate things
-everything that exceeds man's strength'.
man wants to be terrorized, enslaved,
he wants to be convinced of the inexorable NECESSITY of worshiping.
Christ allowed Himself to be crucified like a thief,
He bled on the cross and His death was witnessed by women in tears.
because He desired that man's love should not be won by miracles,
He moved away from man and lost him.
'You wanted a freely accorded love, not the servile passion of a terrified slave.
here again You overestimated man'.
thus the second temptation, that of authority,
is complemented by the third temptation, that of the miracle.
the Grand Inquisitor accepts these three temptations that Christ rejected.
he corrects the work of Christ by basing it on earthly bread, on authority and on miracles.
'and men rejoiced at being led again in a herd
and delivered from the fatal gift that caused them such torment'.
thus, christianity is no longer the religion of the elite but the religion of all.
the church betrays God out of love for man.
it uses Christ to symbolize not a spiritual but a social order.
it sets up 'christian communism'.
it formulates rigid duties, bourgeois
(concern with property values, respectability...strictly middle class)
theories and gives promises of absolution, pardon and eternal life
to reassure its lamentable flock.
rites, festivals and professions of faith are the official pageantry of the Divine Presence.
supernatural mystery is transformed into fairy tales for young persons
who partake of the sacrament for the first time.
it multiplies bells, incense, pictures and sculptures.
it mobilizes all the arts, all the senses, to dazzle the masses.
it diminishes God, offering him for sale like a commodity.
(note: witness the only instance of GREAT ANGER by Jesus in driving 'sales' our from His Father's house.)
and its triple lie, its triple blasphemy, is so cleverly contrived that no one dreams of denouncing it.
the church disavows Christ while extolling His (note: rabbit foot?) work.
it is the last refuge of atheism.
and men will burn Christ rather than renounce the facile dogmas
that the Grand Inquisitor has forged for them.
'they will cling to us with terror, like a young brood under their mother's wing...'
'if anyone deserves the stake more than all others, it is You', says the Inquisitor to Christ.
'tomorrow i shall order You to be burned'.
Christ approaches the Inquisitor and kisses his bloodless lips.
the old man shivers, opens the door and says,
'go away and don't come back'.
it is noteworthy that I, the atheist, exemplifies the divorce between religion and the church.
he attacks not Christ but the church, he defends not atheism, but unwittingly the true faith.
he, more than anyone else, stresses the supreme moral beauty of Christ,
his wish to be loved for His own sake.
according to Dos, the catholic theocracy alone is guilty of
having stolen the word of Christ for imperialistic purposes.
yet the byzantine orthodoxy can be accused of the same crime;
in fact any ecclesiastical system incurs the reproach of caesarism.
throughout its history the church has fought against the temptation
of denying spiritual freedom.
and yet the true mystery of Christ is the mystery of freedom.
the meaning of calvary is the assertion of man's perfect freedom of choice.
victorious divine truth would have compelled the allegiance of human souls apart from love.
crucified divine truth, truth humiliated, lacerated, covered with spittle and pus,
does not impose itself on man.
man believes not because but notwithstanding.
the act of faith in the presence of this corpse that is like any other corpse is perfectly free.
and Dos invites us to this free faith that is incomprehensible and logically inadmissible.
faced with the problem of God, I K rejects the theological explanation of the world.
he evokes the memory of all human suffering.
in his eyes the expiation of wrongdoers in eternity does not redeem the horrors
for which they were responsible during their earthly existence ;
'what is the use of all the hellish sufferings of the doomed, if a child has been tortured to death?'
moreover, he asks, 'where is harmony, if there is still a hell?
i want to forgive and to reconcile myself.
i do not desire that there should be more suffering'.
the explanation supplied by the church is oversimplified.
something more that the give and take principle is needed. but what?
'how can i conceive anything about a God who is too high for me? he says.
thus this atheist does not deny God;
he rejects the possibility of conceiving Him.
to want God is not to be an atheist any longer.
to insult God, is to believe in God.
I's passionate negation is directed against the God of the church,
against the administrative, factitious, familiar God of the Grand Inquisitor.
I refuses to admit a God comprehensible to the human mind,
justified by human syllogisms and brought down to earth by humans.
'God is not of this world'.
he can only be a riddle, a hope.
the church spoils this hope by making it specific.
having thus reached the threshold of true faith, I withdraws.
he is filled with admiration because the idea of God could germinate in man's obtuse (not quick
or alert in perception) mind.
did God create man or did man create God?
I does not want to know the answer to this question.
before this world that is a failure,
before this God who does not even illumine His work,
I 'returns his entrance ticket', saying: 'i do not accept it, i refuse to accept it'.
and he renounces God out of love for mankind, as did the Grand Inquisitor in the legend.
having refused God, I becomes satanic.
I K is the devil.
he sees the devil in a delirium and this devil is himself.
the devil knows God, yet rejects Him.
'i was there, he says to I , when the Word expiring on the cross
ascended to heaven taking with Him the soul of the good thief who was crucified...
at that moment i should have liked to join all the choirs and cry hosannah with them....
but in view of my duties...i was compelled to repress a beautiful gesture and remain in my ignominy'.
thanks to the devil, i at last discovers the reasons for his own atheism.;
because of his desire to measure himself against God,
to do without God,
to replace God,
he refuses the faith that PURSUES Him.
here we find the theme of the superman, the concept so dear to Dos:
'the human mind will grow great,
it will rise as high as satanic pride and
this will be the era of deified mankind'.
but I is not at ease in his atheism.
he hurls a cup of tea at the devil, 'like a woman'.
he drives out the devil, he drives himself out.
for it is difficult to deny a presence that one perceives inwardly to be necessary.
he is one of those who voluntarily take the path to hell.
he is sick with God.
will he die of this sickness?
Aliosha looks upon his brother with horror and pity
and in the end gently disses his mouth, just as Christ kissed the Grand Inquisitor.
such an answer is the only possible answer of a christian to an atheist.
for he can oppose only love to logic.
faith cannot be explained, cannot be imposed at order.
myshkin, the idiot, says to hippolyte, the unbeliever,
'go your way and forgive us our happiness.'.
'God will be victorious, thinks A.
'either Ivan will be resurrected in the light of truth or he will succumb in hatred'.
and he prays for his brother, because there is no other way of saving him.
Friday, January 17, 2014
Thursday, January 16, 2014
1.16.2013 LUKE 13.23-4
yesterday a.m. battling again against all kinds of inner turmoil and turn, in matthew henry's commentary, to look at what he has to say about 'agonizing' in verse 24...and am drawn into his comments on verses 23-30
..parts of which are shared below.
'we have here,
I. a question put to our Lord Jesus.
who it was that put it we are not told, whether a friend or a foe;
for He both gave a great liberty of questioning Him and returned answers
to the thoughts and intents of the heart.
the question was, ' ARE THERE FEW THAT ARE SAVED? v23
'if the saved be few? master, i have heard Thou shouldest say so; is it true?'
1. perhaps it was a captious (faultfinding) question.
he put it to Him, tempting Him, with a design to ensnare Him and lessen His reputation.
if He should say that many would be saved,
they would reproach Him as too loose and making salvation cheap'
if few, they would reproach Him as precise and strait laced.
the jewish doctors said that all israel should have a place in the world to come
and would He dare to contradict that?
those that have sucked in a corrupt notion
are ready to make it the standard by which to measure all men's judgments;
and in nothing do men more betray their ignorance, presumption and partiality,
than in judging of the salvation of others.
2. perhaps it was a curious question, a nice speculation,
which he had lately been disputing upon with his companions
and they all agreed to refer it to Christ.
note, many are more inquisitive respecting who shall be saved and who not,
than respecting what they shall do to be saved.
it is commonly asked, 'may such and such be saved?'
but it is well that we may be saved without knowing this.
3. perhaps it was an admiring question.
he had taken notice how strict the law of Christ was and how bad the world was,
and comparing these together, cries out, 'how few are there that will be saved!'
note, we have reason to wonder that of the many to whom the word of salvation is sent
there are so few to whom it is indeed a saving word.
4. perhaps it was an enquiring question, 'if there be few that be saved, what then?
what influence should this have upon me?'
note, it concerns us all seriously to improve the great truth
of the fewness of those that are saved.
II. Christ's answer to this question, which directs us what use to make of this truth.
our saviour did not give a direct answer to this enquiry,
for He came to guide men's consciences, not to gratify their curiosity.
ASK NOT, 'HOW MANY SHALL BE SAVED?
BUT, be they more or fewer, 'SHALL I BE ONE OF THEM?'
NOT,'WHAT SHALL BECOME OF SUCH AND SUCH
BUT, 'WHAT SHALL THIS MAN DO?'
but, 'WHAT SHALL I DO AND WHAT WILL BECOME OF ME?'
now in Christ's answer observe,
1. a quickening exhortation and direction
STRIVE TO ENTER IN AT THE STRAIT GATE.
this is directed not to him only that asked the question,
but to all, to us, it is in the plural number: strive ye. note
A. all that will be saved must enter in at the strait gate,
must undergo a change of the whole man, such as amounts to no less than being born again,
and must submit to a strict discipline.
B. those that would enter in at the strait gate must strive to enter.
it is a hard matter to get to heaven
and a point that will not be gained without a great deal of
care and
pains,
of difficulty
and diligence.
WE MUST STRIVE IN EVERY DUTY OF RELIGION
STRIVE WITH OUR OWN HEARTS (agonidzesthe - be in an agony)
STRIVE AS THOSE THAT RUN FOR A PRIZE
(note: I corinthinans 9.25 - 'and everyone WHO COMPETES IN THE (olympic) GAMES
(in nearby athens) (same verb agonidzO)
exercises self control i all things.
they then do it to receive a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable'.)
EXCITE AND EXERT OURSELVES TO THE UTMOST.
2. divers awakening considerations, to enforce this exhortation.
o that we may be all awakened and quickened by them!
they are such considerations as will serve to answer the question,
'are there few that shall be saved?'
A. think how many take some pains for salvation and yet perish because they do not take enough
and you will say that there are few that will be saved
and that it highly concerns us to strive.
'many will seek to enter in, and shall not be able'
they seek, but they do not strive.
note, the reason why many come short of grace and glory is because
they rest in a lazy seeking of that which will not be attained without a laborious striving.
they have a good mind to happiness
and a good opinion of holiness
and take good steps towards both.
but their convictions are weak;
they do
..parts of which are shared below.
'we have here,
I. a question put to our Lord Jesus.
who it was that put it we are not told, whether a friend or a foe;
for He both gave a great liberty of questioning Him and returned answers
to the thoughts and intents of the heart.
the question was, ' ARE THERE FEW THAT ARE SAVED? v23
'if the saved be few? master, i have heard Thou shouldest say so; is it true?'
1. perhaps it was a captious (faultfinding) question.
he put it to Him, tempting Him, with a design to ensnare Him and lessen His reputation.
if He should say that many would be saved,
they would reproach Him as too loose and making salvation cheap'
if few, they would reproach Him as precise and strait laced.
the jewish doctors said that all israel should have a place in the world to come
and would He dare to contradict that?
those that have sucked in a corrupt notion
are ready to make it the standard by which to measure all men's judgments;
and in nothing do men more betray their ignorance, presumption and partiality,
than in judging of the salvation of others.
2. perhaps it was a curious question, a nice speculation,
which he had lately been disputing upon with his companions
and they all agreed to refer it to Christ.
note, many are more inquisitive respecting who shall be saved and who not,
than respecting what they shall do to be saved.
it is commonly asked, 'may such and such be saved?'
but it is well that we may be saved without knowing this.
3. perhaps it was an admiring question.
he had taken notice how strict the law of Christ was and how bad the world was,
and comparing these together, cries out, 'how few are there that will be saved!'
note, we have reason to wonder that of the many to whom the word of salvation is sent
there are so few to whom it is indeed a saving word.
4. perhaps it was an enquiring question, 'if there be few that be saved, what then?
what influence should this have upon me?'
note, it concerns us all seriously to improve the great truth
of the fewness of those that are saved.
II. Christ's answer to this question, which directs us what use to make of this truth.
our saviour did not give a direct answer to this enquiry,
for He came to guide men's consciences, not to gratify their curiosity.
ASK NOT, 'HOW MANY SHALL BE SAVED?
BUT, be they more or fewer, 'SHALL I BE ONE OF THEM?'
NOT,'WHAT SHALL BECOME OF SUCH AND SUCH
BUT, 'WHAT SHALL THIS MAN DO?'
but, 'WHAT SHALL I DO AND WHAT WILL BECOME OF ME?'
now in Christ's answer observe,
1. a quickening exhortation and direction
STRIVE TO ENTER IN AT THE STRAIT GATE.
this is directed not to him only that asked the question,
but to all, to us, it is in the plural number: strive ye. note
A. all that will be saved must enter in at the strait gate,
must undergo a change of the whole man, such as amounts to no less than being born again,
and must submit to a strict discipline.
B. those that would enter in at the strait gate must strive to enter.
it is a hard matter to get to heaven
and a point that will not be gained without a great deal of
care and
pains,
of difficulty
and diligence.
WE MUST STRIVE IN EVERY DUTY OF RELIGION
STRIVE WITH OUR OWN HEARTS (agonidzesthe - be in an agony)
STRIVE AS THOSE THAT RUN FOR A PRIZE
(note: I corinthinans 9.25 - 'and everyone WHO COMPETES IN THE (olympic) GAMES
(in nearby athens) (same verb agonidzO)
exercises self control i all things.
they then do it to receive a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable'.)
EXCITE AND EXERT OURSELVES TO THE UTMOST.
2. divers awakening considerations, to enforce this exhortation.
o that we may be all awakened and quickened by them!
they are such considerations as will serve to answer the question,
'are there few that shall be saved?'
A. think how many take some pains for salvation and yet perish because they do not take enough
and you will say that there are few that will be saved
and that it highly concerns us to strive.
'many will seek to enter in, and shall not be able'
they seek, but they do not strive.
note, the reason why many come short of grace and glory is because
they rest in a lazy seeking of that which will not be attained without a laborious striving.
they have a good mind to happiness
and a good opinion of holiness
and take good steps towards both.
but their convictions are weak;
they do
Wednesday, January 15, 2014
1.15.2014 CHRISTIANITY TODAY (CT)
because of TMI i keep to only two magazines, christianity today and world magazine.
until several months ago, world was my favorite and ct was almost at the point of being dropped.
not that i loved worldmag so much but more that ct was so poor.
in the last several months worldmag has fallen lower and lower,
while ct has absolutely soared. (i'm not given to this but i hope to tell ct...and may world, how i feel.)
i have become an growingly enthusiastic fan of ct.
every month is seems more important to read.
it draws, it seems in a very fruitfully intelligent way, from a wide variety of writers.
the pieces seem to answer, or at least deal with, more and more of the 'right' questions,
frequently bringing welcome light in an unsought for or unknown (to me) direction.
currently reading a book of impressions on martyn lloyd-jones,
i have been 'spoken to' on a deeper level about the need to not just read, but to think.
to him, books were only occasions to think 'christianly' about everything in the world.
his fingerprints, in that regard, are all over ct...may God grant it last...and (too much to ask?!) increase.
world, which deals with current events, sadly slanted in a political as opposed to ideological direction,
has limited firepower in the area of writing power.
(the main reason may be directly related to their good vision of developing and promoting
a christian presence in the newsprint and other related areas.)
but most discouraging is the sense of a type of 'one slant', single type of mentality on/view of events.
one gets the sense that there is a kind of 'party line' that one must not dare depart too far from...
a seeming departure from the roots of liberal arts...questioning, questing toward truth with no qualifications.
i now find a growing number of things i'd like to share...so time permitting here is a sampling of this month's
christianity today: (i have 10 dogeared sections)
*in 'reply all'
while the mindfulness and gratitude practiced by lamppost farm
is light years ahead of today's standard agricultural practices,
the underlying assumption of the article is that animals were made for human consumption.
yet more and more christians are realizing that eating animals
was not part of God's original design for creation,
nor will it be a part of a kingdom in which
'they will not hurt or destroy on all my holy mountain'.
i hope CT will highlight some of the reasons that christians are turning back to plant based diets.
sarah withrow king
deputy director, the sider center on ministry and public policy
king of prussia, penna.
whenever somebody claims, 'this (activity) is more spiritual than that one',
i need to give due diligence to determine whether i should adjust
my own spiritual life to encompass the claimed benefit
or if the claim is really, 'i like my secular tradition more than your secular tradition'.
i think you chicken farm article falls into the later category.
christians derive substantial spiritual (as well as financial) benefit from factory farms and processed food,
because those scorned links in the food chain have
freed up millions of people from the drudge of growing and preparing their own food,
so that they can do other things to create wealth
and therefore help others.
i buy TVdinners or canned soup for about $1 each,
and heat them for five minutes in a microwave.
as a computer programmer who works on bible translation software,
i can earn 500 (?!) times the cost of that meal in the time it would
take me to prepare it from local fresh produce.
that doesn't seem like a good investment of the talent God entrusted to me.
tom pittman, bolivar, missouri
in response to the interview with candy gunther brown about her book 'the healing gods,
having grown up in the new age movement,
i'm pretty aware of pantheistic religious influences in many alternative therapies
and absolutely reject them.
however, as someone formerly in the medical field,
i also recognized that there is some scientific basis for many of these practices.
how much each practitioner of alternative treatments adheres to eastern religious influences
and calls upon spiritual forces varies widely and should be identified prior to treatment.
denise plicht, ct online comment
* a chart detailing same sex marriage laws for 12 states (of the 16 where same sex marriage is legal)
shows the variety of these laws in a helpful way.
delaware exempts clergy from officiating a same sex wedding
maryland and rhode island add to the above
-exempts religious nonprofits from providing wedding services
-protects objectors from private suits and government penalties
-exempts religious marriage counseling, courses or retreats
-exempts insurance coverage by fraternal organizations
-allows adoption/foster agencies to maintain existing placement policies.
along with commentary including,
'if you can't beat them, amend them.
(note: we are not in a theocracy. we fail to see the ongoing
stream of conscious/unconscious sins that would damn us to eternal hell apart from the mercy/grace
of God in Christ Jesus upon those who come to Him as sinners.)
...'law professor thomas b says,
'too many fols see this as an all or nothing matter.
if religious liberty is tied to defeating (SSM) altogether, religious liberty is going to lose'.
*how churches attract millennials (aged 18-34)
'the latest Faith communities today report found that only 16% of 11,000 religious congregations have
'significant' young adult participation (20% + of congregation)
beyond electric guitars and projectors, three of the strongest correlating factors are
1. men..are twice as likely to become involved if women make up 25% or less
2.instability..rapid growth/decline (10% in 10 years) more than 2 times as likely to draw millenials.
3. multiple pastors..twice as likely (as opposed to single pastor)
*interview on p65 on evangelicals foreign policy mission...
the real damage comes when evangelicals speak out without adequate competence and knowledge...
realists tend to emphasize the importance of strong nation states.
without strong nation states, it's very hard to secure human rights.
sophisticated realists would say,
'we need strong states that are also morally good'. (note: yes!)
*(i am more often than not, deeply blessed and challenged by the 'testimony' section on the last 2 pages)
this one by nabeel qureshi.
(brought up in a devout family where his father and grandfather were muslim evangelists (never knew
there were such!)
...as a freshman at old dominion university in virginia, i was befriended by a sophomore, david wood.
soon after he extended a helping hand, i found him reading a bible.
incredulous that someone as clearly intelligent as he would actually read christians' sacred text,
i launched a barrage of apologetic attacks,
form questioning the reliability of chripture to denying jesus' crucifixion to, of course
challenging the trinity and the deity of Christ.
david didn't react like other christians i had challenged.
he did not waver in his witness, nor did he waver in his friendship with me.
far from it-he became even more engaged, answering the questions he could respond to,
investigating the questions he couldn't respond to and spending time with me through it all.
even though he was a christian, his zeal for God was something i understood and respected.
we quickly became best friends, signing up for events together,
going to classes together and studying for exams together.
all the while we argued about the historical foundations of christianity.
some classes we signed up for just to argue some more.
after three years of investigating the origins of christianity,
i concluded that the case for christianity was strong
-that the bible could be trusted and that Jesus died on the cross, rose from the dead, and claimed to be God.
then david challenged me to study islam as critically as i had studied christianity.
...when i finally read the sources, i found that muhammad was not the man i had thought.
violence and sensuality dripped from the pages of his earliest biographies,
the life stories of the man i revered as the holiest in history.
shocked by what i learned, i began to lean on the quran as my defense.
but when i turned an eye there, that foundation crumbled just as quickly.
...overwhelmed and confused by the weakness of the islamic case, i began seeking allah for help.
or was He Jesus?
...the way that muslims expect to hear from God is through dreams and visions.
..in the summer after graduating from old dominion,
i began imploring God daily.
'tell me who you are!
if you are Allah, show me how to believe in you.
if you are Jesus, tell me!
whoever you are, i will follow you, no matter the cost.
by the end of my first year in medical school, God had given me a vision and three dreams,
the second of which was the most powerful.
in it i was standing at the threshold of a strikingly narrow door,
watching people take their seats at a wedding feast.
i desperately wanted to get in, but i was not able to enter,
because i had yet to accept my friend david's invitation to the wedding.
when i awoke, i knew what God was telling me,
but i sought further verification.
it was then that i found the parable of the narrow door, in luke 13.22-30.
God was showing me where i stood.
but i still couldn't walk through the door.
how could i betray my family after all they had done for me?
by becoming a christian, not only would i lose all connection with the muslim community around me,
my family would lose their honor as well.
my decision would not only destroy me,
it would also destroy my family, the ones who loved me most and sacrificed so much for me.
i began mourning the impact of the decision i knew i had to make.
on the first day of my second year of medical school,
it became too much to bear.
yearning for comfort, i decided to skip school;/
returning to my apartment, i place the quran and the bible in front of me.
i turned to the quran, but there was no comfort there.
for the first time, the book seemed utterly irrelevant to my suffering.
irrelevant to my life.
if felt like a dead book.
with nowhere left top go, i opened up the new testament and started reading.
very quickly, i came to the passage that said,
'blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted'.
electric, the words leapt off the page and jump started my heart.
i could not put the bible down.
i began reading fervently, reaching matthew 10.37.
which taught me that i must love God more than my mother and father.
'but Jesus, i said, accepting You would be like dying.
i will have to give up everything'.
the next verse spoke to me, saying, 'he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me
Jesus was being very blunt: for muslims, following the gospel is more than a call to prayer.
it is a call to die.
i knelt at the foot of my bed and gave up my life.
a few days later, the two people i loved most in this world were shattered by my betrayal.
to this day my family is broken by the decision i made
and it is excruciating every time i see the cost i had to pay.
but Jesus is the God of reversal and redemption.
he redeemed sinners to life by His death
and He redeemed a symbol of execution by repurposing it for salvation.
He redeemed my suffering by making me rely upon Him for my every moment,
bending
it was there in my pain that i knew him intimately.
He reached me through investigations, dreams and visions
and called me to prayer in my suffering.
it was there that i found Jesus.
to follow Him is worth giving up everything.
(note: oh Lord You Are Beautiful...i am blessed and challenged and encouraged by this brother...)
*there was also an excellent 'best books of the year in 10 categories' section from which i had to write down a number of titles that seemed very helpful...
*in the book review section, a selection from dallas willard's 'living in Christ's presence
...'blessing is the projection of good into the life of another:
it isn't just words.
it's the actual putting forth of your will for the good of another person.
it always involves God,
because when you will the good of another person,
you realize only God is capable of bringing that.
so we naturally say, 'God bless you'.
* also 'why we're losing the war on poverty', an interview with gary haugen involved with the international
justice mission concerning his book, 'the locust effect' , p56
-what is the locust effect and how does it affect poor people?
picture a poor farmer trying to scrapew his way out of poverty.
just whenh the crops have started to show promise, the locusts descent and devour all of that hard work.
that's the locust effect-the way violence impacts the poor in the devfeloping world.
the traditional things we do to assist the poor to get out of poverty don't stop the violence.
the (book) tells the story of the hidden plague of violence.
-your book stresses the rule of law and law enforcement.
we know churches don't have police powers or the power to prosecute,
so what can religious leaders (PEOPLE!) do?
i hope christians will recover their role in building
COMMUNITIES WHERE THE POOR ARE PROTECTED from violence.
christians played a wonderful role in sounding the alarm on the HIV/AIDS epidemic.
they became world leaders, confronting it and engaging it...
christians provide moral authority for ensuring that justice systems don't just serve a political faction
or moneyed interests
or are used for extortion or corrupt purposes.
you can find again and again where christian leaders loed that fight 100-150 years ago.
-you say violence against the poor has been invisible. how?
when people think of poverty, they tell you what they see:
the shacks, the dirty water, the hungry families.
those are all the visuals that immediately come to mind.
what they don't see are the
assaults,
the slap across the face,
the rape,
the torture by police and
the extortion.
it's intentionally hidden by the perpetrator.
the victimes are scared and ashamed and its difficult for them to speak.
people don't talk about the things they don't have solutions for.
people working in the development field and in poverty fighting or public health
don't often come from law enforcement.
-what can the average christian do about violence agaist the poor thousands of miles away?
it begins by asking, 'what about the violence in this (note: ie. MY) COMMUNITY?
(note:THEN the next and the next....)
it's the same thing as the AIDS epidemic.
there's tremendous shame around it.
people do not want to talk about it.
the world health organization ways that GENDER VIOLENCE
(accounts) for MORE DEATH AND DISABILITY for women and girls between 14 and 44
THAN CAR ACCIDENTS, MALARIA AND WAR COMBINED.
ask about the violence against women and girls.
OBSERVE WHETHER PEOPLE EXPERIENCE THE POLICE
AS PEOPLE YOU RUN TO OR RUN FROM when you are in trouble.
peoplle who work intimately with the poor frequently are quite familiar with violence,
but they don't know what to do, so they don't readily talk about it.
there is a solution for violence:
the basic service the rest of us rely on every day,
law enforcement.
-some christians fear that church bsed justice advocacy will eventually displace formation and discipleship
as the church's core mission.
almost none of those christians would ever live THAT WAY
ktoward the people dearest to them, their own family.
what if the only thing you did was (tell) your children about the christian faith
and (you) never showed them love?
that's just not the way christian parents act.
in fact, they know that if they preach to their kids but don't actually love them,
that none of that preaching is going to convey the truth.
these tired, false dichotomies are from another era when the gospel was divided between word and deed.
historically, the people of God, when they (are) obeying Christ, are used (by) God to bring ujustice to people.
i'm on the side of hope.
ive seen it with my own eyes and i've seen it profoundly in history.
who are the american church's ideal partners for fighting violence?
the ideal partner is the body of Christ around the world.
westerners are not going to parachute in and save the day.
this is a fundamental struggle for justice that's going to have to be owned by the local community.
another partner will be governmental authorities within that community, within that country.
this recovers christian interaction with government.
romans 13 says the authorities are actually ministers of God in order to do justice in the community.
christians in other eras shaped the way the government went about seeking justice and peace in the community.
(note: how did they 'shape'?
LEARNING (themselves) TO DO GOOD
SEEKING JUSTICE
REPROVING THE RUTHLESS
DEFENDING (vindicate..ie. clear of accusation, innuendo etc.) THE ORPHAN..and any other who cannot
defend themselves)
PLEADING FOR THE WIDOW ISAIAH 1.17
as well as
LOVING THEIR ENEMIES
DOING GOOD TO THOSE WHO HATED THEM
BLESSING THOSE WHO CURSE THEM
PRAYING FOR THOSE WHO SPITEFULLY ABUSE THEM
NOT JUDGING (ie. that's-you are-bad)
NOT CONDEMNING (ie. i will never help you or seek your good for you are too wicked!)
PARDONING (so the prayer 'forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors' can be prayed
with the joyful assurance of immediate and complete forgiveness of our own-many we cannot see-sins.
GIVING (GOOD MEASURE, PRESSED DOWN, SHAKEN TOGETHER, RUNNING OVER
to their worst enemy on down...Luke 6.27-8;36-8
until several months ago, world was my favorite and ct was almost at the point of being dropped.
not that i loved worldmag so much but more that ct was so poor.
in the last several months worldmag has fallen lower and lower,
while ct has absolutely soared. (i'm not given to this but i hope to tell ct...and may world, how i feel.)
i have become an growingly enthusiastic fan of ct.
every month is seems more important to read.
it draws, it seems in a very fruitfully intelligent way, from a wide variety of writers.
the pieces seem to answer, or at least deal with, more and more of the 'right' questions,
frequently bringing welcome light in an unsought for or unknown (to me) direction.
currently reading a book of impressions on martyn lloyd-jones,
i have been 'spoken to' on a deeper level about the need to not just read, but to think.
to him, books were only occasions to think 'christianly' about everything in the world.
his fingerprints, in that regard, are all over ct...may God grant it last...and (too much to ask?!) increase.
world, which deals with current events, sadly slanted in a political as opposed to ideological direction,
has limited firepower in the area of writing power.
(the main reason may be directly related to their good vision of developing and promoting
a christian presence in the newsprint and other related areas.)
but most discouraging is the sense of a type of 'one slant', single type of mentality on/view of events.
one gets the sense that there is a kind of 'party line' that one must not dare depart too far from...
a seeming departure from the roots of liberal arts...questioning, questing toward truth with no qualifications.
i now find a growing number of things i'd like to share...so time permitting here is a sampling of this month's
christianity today: (i have 10 dogeared sections)
*in 'reply all'
while the mindfulness and gratitude practiced by lamppost farm
is light years ahead of today's standard agricultural practices,
the underlying assumption of the article is that animals were made for human consumption.
yet more and more christians are realizing that eating animals
was not part of God's original design for creation,
nor will it be a part of a kingdom in which
'they will not hurt or destroy on all my holy mountain'.
i hope CT will highlight some of the reasons that christians are turning back to plant based diets.
sarah withrow king
deputy director, the sider center on ministry and public policy
king of prussia, penna.
whenever somebody claims, 'this (activity) is more spiritual than that one',
i need to give due diligence to determine whether i should adjust
my own spiritual life to encompass the claimed benefit
or if the claim is really, 'i like my secular tradition more than your secular tradition'.
i think you chicken farm article falls into the later category.
christians derive substantial spiritual (as well as financial) benefit from factory farms and processed food,
because those scorned links in the food chain have
freed up millions of people from the drudge of growing and preparing their own food,
so that they can do other things to create wealth
and therefore help others.
i buy TVdinners or canned soup for about $1 each,
and heat them for five minutes in a microwave.
as a computer programmer who works on bible translation software,
i can earn 500 (?!) times the cost of that meal in the time it would
take me to prepare it from local fresh produce.
that doesn't seem like a good investment of the talent God entrusted to me.
tom pittman, bolivar, missouri
in response to the interview with candy gunther brown about her book 'the healing gods,
having grown up in the new age movement,
i'm pretty aware of pantheistic religious influences in many alternative therapies
and absolutely reject them.
however, as someone formerly in the medical field,
i also recognized that there is some scientific basis for many of these practices.
how much each practitioner of alternative treatments adheres to eastern religious influences
and calls upon spiritual forces varies widely and should be identified prior to treatment.
denise plicht, ct online comment
* a chart detailing same sex marriage laws for 12 states (of the 16 where same sex marriage is legal)
shows the variety of these laws in a helpful way.
delaware exempts clergy from officiating a same sex wedding
maryland and rhode island add to the above
-exempts religious nonprofits from providing wedding services
-protects objectors from private suits and government penalties
-exempts religious marriage counseling, courses or retreats
-exempts insurance coverage by fraternal organizations
-allows adoption/foster agencies to maintain existing placement policies.
along with commentary including,
'if you can't beat them, amend them.
(note: we are not in a theocracy. we fail to see the ongoing
stream of conscious/unconscious sins that would damn us to eternal hell apart from the mercy/grace
of God in Christ Jesus upon those who come to Him as sinners.)
...'law professor thomas b says,
'too many fols see this as an all or nothing matter.
if religious liberty is tied to defeating (SSM) altogether, religious liberty is going to lose'.
*how churches attract millennials (aged 18-34)
'the latest Faith communities today report found that only 16% of 11,000 religious congregations have
'significant' young adult participation (20% + of congregation)
beyond electric guitars and projectors, three of the strongest correlating factors are
1. men..are twice as likely to become involved if women make up 25% or less
2.instability..rapid growth/decline (10% in 10 years) more than 2 times as likely to draw millenials.
3. multiple pastors..twice as likely (as opposed to single pastor)
*interview on p65 on evangelicals foreign policy mission...
the real damage comes when evangelicals speak out without adequate competence and knowledge...
realists tend to emphasize the importance of strong nation states.
without strong nation states, it's very hard to secure human rights.
sophisticated realists would say,
'we need strong states that are also morally good'. (note: yes!)
*(i am more often than not, deeply blessed and challenged by the 'testimony' section on the last 2 pages)
this one by nabeel qureshi.
(brought up in a devout family where his father and grandfather were muslim evangelists (never knew
there were such!)
...as a freshman at old dominion university in virginia, i was befriended by a sophomore, david wood.
soon after he extended a helping hand, i found him reading a bible.
incredulous that someone as clearly intelligent as he would actually read christians' sacred text,
i launched a barrage of apologetic attacks,
form questioning the reliability of chripture to denying jesus' crucifixion to, of course
challenging the trinity and the deity of Christ.
david didn't react like other christians i had challenged.
he did not waver in his witness, nor did he waver in his friendship with me.
far from it-he became even more engaged, answering the questions he could respond to,
investigating the questions he couldn't respond to and spending time with me through it all.
even though he was a christian, his zeal for God was something i understood and respected.
we quickly became best friends, signing up for events together,
going to classes together and studying for exams together.
all the while we argued about the historical foundations of christianity.
some classes we signed up for just to argue some more.
after three years of investigating the origins of christianity,
i concluded that the case for christianity was strong
-that the bible could be trusted and that Jesus died on the cross, rose from the dead, and claimed to be God.
then david challenged me to study islam as critically as i had studied christianity.
...when i finally read the sources, i found that muhammad was not the man i had thought.
violence and sensuality dripped from the pages of his earliest biographies,
the life stories of the man i revered as the holiest in history.
shocked by what i learned, i began to lean on the quran as my defense.
but when i turned an eye there, that foundation crumbled just as quickly.
...overwhelmed and confused by the weakness of the islamic case, i began seeking allah for help.
or was He Jesus?
...the way that muslims expect to hear from God is through dreams and visions.
..in the summer after graduating from old dominion,
i began imploring God daily.
'tell me who you are!
if you are Allah, show me how to believe in you.
if you are Jesus, tell me!
whoever you are, i will follow you, no matter the cost.
by the end of my first year in medical school, God had given me a vision and three dreams,
the second of which was the most powerful.
in it i was standing at the threshold of a strikingly narrow door,
watching people take their seats at a wedding feast.
i desperately wanted to get in, but i was not able to enter,
because i had yet to accept my friend david's invitation to the wedding.
when i awoke, i knew what God was telling me,
but i sought further verification.
it was then that i found the parable of the narrow door, in luke 13.22-30.
God was showing me where i stood.
but i still couldn't walk through the door.
how could i betray my family after all they had done for me?
by becoming a christian, not only would i lose all connection with the muslim community around me,
my family would lose their honor as well.
my decision would not only destroy me,
it would also destroy my family, the ones who loved me most and sacrificed so much for me.
i began mourning the impact of the decision i knew i had to make.
on the first day of my second year of medical school,
it became too much to bear.
yearning for comfort, i decided to skip school;/
returning to my apartment, i place the quran and the bible in front of me.
i turned to the quran, but there was no comfort there.
for the first time, the book seemed utterly irrelevant to my suffering.
irrelevant to my life.
if felt like a dead book.
with nowhere left top go, i opened up the new testament and started reading.
very quickly, i came to the passage that said,
'blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted'.
electric, the words leapt off the page and jump started my heart.
i could not put the bible down.
i began reading fervently, reaching matthew 10.37.
which taught me that i must love God more than my mother and father.
'but Jesus, i said, accepting You would be like dying.
i will have to give up everything'.
the next verse spoke to me, saying, 'he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me
Jesus was being very blunt: for muslims, following the gospel is more than a call to prayer.
it is a call to die.
i knelt at the foot of my bed and gave up my life.
a few days later, the two people i loved most in this world were shattered by my betrayal.
to this day my family is broken by the decision i made
and it is excruciating every time i see the cost i had to pay.
but Jesus is the God of reversal and redemption.
he redeemed sinners to life by His death
and He redeemed a symbol of execution by repurposing it for salvation.
He redeemed my suffering by making me rely upon Him for my every moment,
bending
it was there in my pain that i knew him intimately.
He reached me through investigations, dreams and visions
and called me to prayer in my suffering.
it was there that i found Jesus.
to follow Him is worth giving up everything.
(note: oh Lord You Are Beautiful...i am blessed and challenged and encouraged by this brother...)
*there was also an excellent 'best books of the year in 10 categories' section from which i had to write down a number of titles that seemed very helpful...
*in the book review section, a selection from dallas willard's 'living in Christ's presence
...'blessing is the projection of good into the life of another:
it isn't just words.
it's the actual putting forth of your will for the good of another person.
it always involves God,
because when you will the good of another person,
you realize only God is capable of bringing that.
so we naturally say, 'God bless you'.
* also 'why we're losing the war on poverty', an interview with gary haugen involved with the international
justice mission concerning his book, 'the locust effect' , p56
-what is the locust effect and how does it affect poor people?
picture a poor farmer trying to scrapew his way out of poverty.
just whenh the crops have started to show promise, the locusts descent and devour all of that hard work.
that's the locust effect-the way violence impacts the poor in the devfeloping world.
the traditional things we do to assist the poor to get out of poverty don't stop the violence.
the (book) tells the story of the hidden plague of violence.
-your book stresses the rule of law and law enforcement.
we know churches don't have police powers or the power to prosecute,
so what can religious leaders (PEOPLE!) do?
i hope christians will recover their role in building
COMMUNITIES WHERE THE POOR ARE PROTECTED from violence.
christians played a wonderful role in sounding the alarm on the HIV/AIDS epidemic.
they became world leaders, confronting it and engaging it...
christians provide moral authority for ensuring that justice systems don't just serve a political faction
or moneyed interests
or are used for extortion or corrupt purposes.
you can find again and again where christian leaders loed that fight 100-150 years ago.
-you say violence against the poor has been invisible. how?
when people think of poverty, they tell you what they see:
the shacks, the dirty water, the hungry families.
those are all the visuals that immediately come to mind.
what they don't see are the
assaults,
the slap across the face,
the rape,
the torture by police and
the extortion.
it's intentionally hidden by the perpetrator.
the victimes are scared and ashamed and its difficult for them to speak.
people don't talk about the things they don't have solutions for.
people working in the development field and in poverty fighting or public health
don't often come from law enforcement.
-what can the average christian do about violence agaist the poor thousands of miles away?
it begins by asking, 'what about the violence in this (note: ie. MY) COMMUNITY?
(note:THEN the next and the next....)
it's the same thing as the AIDS epidemic.
there's tremendous shame around it.
people do not want to talk about it.
the world health organization ways that GENDER VIOLENCE
(accounts) for MORE DEATH AND DISABILITY for women and girls between 14 and 44
THAN CAR ACCIDENTS, MALARIA AND WAR COMBINED.
ask about the violence against women and girls.
OBSERVE WHETHER PEOPLE EXPERIENCE THE POLICE
AS PEOPLE YOU RUN TO OR RUN FROM when you are in trouble.
peoplle who work intimately with the poor frequently are quite familiar with violence,
but they don't know what to do, so they don't readily talk about it.
there is a solution for violence:
the basic service the rest of us rely on every day,
law enforcement.
-some christians fear that church bsed justice advocacy will eventually displace formation and discipleship
as the church's core mission.
almost none of those christians would ever live THAT WAY
ktoward the people dearest to them, their own family.
what if the only thing you did was (tell) your children about the christian faith
and (you) never showed them love?
that's just not the way christian parents act.
in fact, they know that if they preach to their kids but don't actually love them,
that none of that preaching is going to convey the truth.
these tired, false dichotomies are from another era when the gospel was divided between word and deed.
historically, the people of God, when they (are) obeying Christ, are used (by) God to bring ujustice to people.
i'm on the side of hope.
ive seen it with my own eyes and i've seen it profoundly in history.
who are the american church's ideal partners for fighting violence?
the ideal partner is the body of Christ around the world.
westerners are not going to parachute in and save the day.
this is a fundamental struggle for justice that's going to have to be owned by the local community.
another partner will be governmental authorities within that community, within that country.
this recovers christian interaction with government.
romans 13 says the authorities are actually ministers of God in order to do justice in the community.
christians in other eras shaped the way the government went about seeking justice and peace in the community.
(note: how did they 'shape'?
LEARNING (themselves) TO DO GOOD
SEEKING JUSTICE
REPROVING THE RUTHLESS
DEFENDING (vindicate..ie. clear of accusation, innuendo etc.) THE ORPHAN..and any other who cannot
defend themselves)
PLEADING FOR THE WIDOW ISAIAH 1.17
as well as
LOVING THEIR ENEMIES
DOING GOOD TO THOSE WHO HATED THEM
BLESSING THOSE WHO CURSE THEM
PRAYING FOR THOSE WHO SPITEFULLY ABUSE THEM
NOT JUDGING (ie. that's-you are-bad)
NOT CONDEMNING (ie. i will never help you or seek your good for you are too wicked!)
PARDONING (so the prayer 'forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors' can be prayed
with the joyful assurance of immediate and complete forgiveness of our own-many we cannot see-sins.
GIVING (GOOD MEASURE, PRESSED DOWN, SHAKEN TOGETHER, RUNNING OVER
to their worst enemy on down...Luke 6.27-8;36-8
1.15.2014 THAT'S TOO SCAREY FOR MY KIDS TO HEAR OR SEE!! (only if you are allowing the corrupt culture to 'babysit' so you can DO YOUR OWN THING..)
recently purchased a set of 11 videos from voice of the martyrs which feature the lives of saints and
martyrs down through the centuries. the first on general booth, founder of the salvation army, was
excellent. but the household i showed these at has a fear of 'violence' which is, in my mind, akin to
a fear of real life. so now the children have to wait until the are the specified age on the back.
this whole mentality which i run across more and more is challenged by the article in christianity today,
2.1014,p30 by n.d.wilson entitled 'why kids' stories need a dose of darkness (there's no resurrection
without death).
in the chrisitian world, stories laced with dark content-especially for children
-will always spook whole flocks of eyebrows into concerned flight.
the 'content' of a book or film is parsed out,
every bit of shadow flagged and sniffed at by mothers
like they've discovered a malicious growth hormone in a suspicious chicken nugget.
as an author who writes novels for children, i am often questioned about my choice of ingredients.
a boy discovers and opens dozens of tiny magical doors
should be a lark, right?
why does it need to be dangerous?
why include loneliness, father hunger and a terrifying enemy?
tow functional orphans living in a roadside motel are taken to ashtown,
a place where many of the world's wildest secrets have been kept for centuries.
sounds like a great little slumber party.
so why include pain?
why must the chi8ldren face hardships?
why must the villains be so, well, villainous?
wouldn't it be better for everyone if the evil was jokey?
lighthearted?
more like a school rivalry than a matter of salvation or damnation?
YIPES. NO. WRONG. F.
think on this: God's artistic choices should govern our own.
more than any other type of artist, christian artists should be truth lovers and truth tellers.
more than any other consumer, christian readers-and parents of young readers-
should be truth seekers.
i would understand if hard bitten secularists were the ones feeding narrative meringue to their children '
with false enthusiasm.
they believe their kids will eventually grow up and realize
how terrible, grinding and meaningless reality really is.
oh, well-might as well swaddle children in Santa Clausian delusions
while they're still dumb enough to believe them.
but a christian parent should always be looking to serve up truth.
the question is one of dosage.
shelter your children. yes. absolutely.
but use a picnic shelter,
not a lightless bomb bunker
and not a virtual reality goggles looping bubblegum clouds.
feast with them on fiction in safety,
laugh with them through terrible adventures seething with real weather.
they should feel the wind and fear the lightning
and witness the fools and heroes-and yet stay protected.
faithful artists should provide sabbaths, not escapes.
we should be crafting periods of rest and inspiration
that will feed, fuel and empower readers to engage more deeply in reality as men and women.
to step out of the shelter when the time comes.
in your picnic shelter, pack stories that bless the meek and shatter the proud.
stories that use hardship to burn away the dross in characters.
stories that honor the honorable and damn the damnable, (note: yes!)
childhood is the time for truth and adulthood is the time for a deeper understanding of the same.
to seed courage, we must show fear.
to reveal triumph, we must build enemies.
to tell the truth about what it means to be heroic, we must spin a fiction full of danger.
wisdom from g.k. chesterton:
'if the characters are not wicked, the book is'.
we must tell stories the way God does,
stories in which a sister must float her little brother on a river with nothing but a basket between him
and the crocodiles.
stories in which a king is a coward
and a shepherd boy steps forward to face the giant.
stories with fiery serpents and leviathans and sermons in whirlwinds.
stories in which murderers are blinded on donkeys and become heroes.
stories with dens of lions and fiery furnaces
and lone prophets laughing at kings and priests and demons.
stories with heads on platters.
stories with courage and crosses and redemption.
stories with resurrections.
and resurrections require deaths.
we do no one any favors when we pretend away darkness in the world.
we've only neutered the need for grace.
and we've neutered the glorious triumph on the other side of darkness.
yes, darkness should be mediated and even muted in art for children (and adults).
at some point, the knowledge of evil can damage a reader or viewer.
but the relationship between good and evil in our stories should mirror
the relationship between good and evil in God's stories.
that relationship should present one consistent worldview in art
meant for 8 year olds and in art meant for 80 year olds.
our goal is to produce and consume truth,
to feed,
to be strengthened,
and to rise up from our narrative sabbaths ready to live harder lives, ready to love and laugh more deeply.
we emerge from such stories ready to step into the roar of glory
that leads us all to our own graves
and out the other side.
our stories should feed us, young and old, for that journey.
martyrs down through the centuries. the first on general booth, founder of the salvation army, was
excellent. but the household i showed these at has a fear of 'violence' which is, in my mind, akin to
a fear of real life. so now the children have to wait until the are the specified age on the back.
this whole mentality which i run across more and more is challenged by the article in christianity today,
2.1014,p30 by n.d.wilson entitled 'why kids' stories need a dose of darkness (there's no resurrection
without death).
in the chrisitian world, stories laced with dark content-especially for children
-will always spook whole flocks of eyebrows into concerned flight.
the 'content' of a book or film is parsed out,
every bit of shadow flagged and sniffed at by mothers
like they've discovered a malicious growth hormone in a suspicious chicken nugget.
as an author who writes novels for children, i am often questioned about my choice of ingredients.
a boy discovers and opens dozens of tiny magical doors
should be a lark, right?
why does it need to be dangerous?
why include loneliness, father hunger and a terrifying enemy?
tow functional orphans living in a roadside motel are taken to ashtown,
a place where many of the world's wildest secrets have been kept for centuries.
sounds like a great little slumber party.
so why include pain?
why must the chi8ldren face hardships?
why must the villains be so, well, villainous?
wouldn't it be better for everyone if the evil was jokey?
lighthearted?
more like a school rivalry than a matter of salvation or damnation?
YIPES. NO. WRONG. F.
think on this: God's artistic choices should govern our own.
more than any other type of artist, christian artists should be truth lovers and truth tellers.
more than any other consumer, christian readers-and parents of young readers-
should be truth seekers.
i would understand if hard bitten secularists were the ones feeding narrative meringue to their children '
with false enthusiasm.
they believe their kids will eventually grow up and realize
how terrible, grinding and meaningless reality really is.
oh, well-might as well swaddle children in Santa Clausian delusions
while they're still dumb enough to believe them.
but a christian parent should always be looking to serve up truth.
the question is one of dosage.
shelter your children. yes. absolutely.
but use a picnic shelter,
not a lightless bomb bunker
and not a virtual reality goggles looping bubblegum clouds.
feast with them on fiction in safety,
laugh with them through terrible adventures seething with real weather.
they should feel the wind and fear the lightning
and witness the fools and heroes-and yet stay protected.
faithful artists should provide sabbaths, not escapes.
we should be crafting periods of rest and inspiration
that will feed, fuel and empower readers to engage more deeply in reality as men and women.
to step out of the shelter when the time comes.
in your picnic shelter, pack stories that bless the meek and shatter the proud.
stories that use hardship to burn away the dross in characters.
stories that honor the honorable and damn the damnable, (note: yes!)
childhood is the time for truth and adulthood is the time for a deeper understanding of the same.
to seed courage, we must show fear.
to reveal triumph, we must build enemies.
to tell the truth about what it means to be heroic, we must spin a fiction full of danger.
wisdom from g.k. chesterton:
'if the characters are not wicked, the book is'.
we must tell stories the way God does,
stories in which a sister must float her little brother on a river with nothing but a basket between him
and the crocodiles.
stories in which a king is a coward
and a shepherd boy steps forward to face the giant.
stories with fiery serpents and leviathans and sermons in whirlwinds.
stories in which murderers are blinded on donkeys and become heroes.
stories with dens of lions and fiery furnaces
and lone prophets laughing at kings and priests and demons.
stories with heads on platters.
stories with courage and crosses and redemption.
stories with resurrections.
and resurrections require deaths.
we do no one any favors when we pretend away darkness in the world.
we've only neutered the need for grace.
and we've neutered the glorious triumph on the other side of darkness.
yes, darkness should be mediated and even muted in art for children (and adults).
at some point, the knowledge of evil can damage a reader or viewer.
but the relationship between good and evil in our stories should mirror
the relationship between good and evil in God's stories.
that relationship should present one consistent worldview in art
meant for 8 year olds and in art meant for 80 year olds.
our goal is to produce and consume truth,
to feed,
to be strengthened,
and to rise up from our narrative sabbaths ready to live harder lives, ready to love and laugh more deeply.
we emerge from such stories ready to step into the roar of glory
that leads us all to our own graves
and out the other side.
our stories should feed us, young and old, for that journey.
Tuesday, January 14, 2014
1.14.2014 PSALM 27.4 ONE THING HAVE I DESIRED OF THE LORD
taken from spurgeon's treasury of david...
'one thing'...
the man of one book is eminent, the man of one pursuit is successful.
let all our affections be bound up in one affection and that affection set upon heavenly things.
(note: God Himself)
'have i desired'...what we cannot at once attain, it is well to desire.
God judges us very much by the desire of our hearts.
he who rides a lame horse is not blamed by his master for want of speed,
if he makes all the haste he can and would make more if he could.
God takes the will for the deed with His children. (really?..)
'of the Lord'...this is the right target for desires,
this is the well into which to dip our buckets,
this is the door to knock at,
the bank to draw upon;
desire of men and lie on the dunghill with lazarus;
desire of the Lord and be carried of angels into abraham's bosom.
our desires of the lord would be sanctified, humble, constant, submissive, fervent
and it is well if, as with the psalmist, they are all molten into one mass.
under david's painful circumstances we might have expected him to desire
repose, safety and a thousand other good things, but no.
he has set his heart on the pearl and leaves the rest.
'that will i seek after'...holy desires must lead to resolute action.
the old proverb says, 'wishers and woulders are never good housekeepers'
and 'wishing never fills a sack'.
desires are seeds which must be sown in the good soil of activity or they will yield no harvest.
we shall find our desires to be like clouds without rain, unless followed up by practical endeavours.
'that i may dwell in the house of the Lord all the days of my life'...for the sake of communion with the King,
david longed to dwell always in the palace
so far from being wearied with the services of the tabernacle,
he longed to be constantly engaged in them, as his life long pleasure.
he desired above all things to be one of the household of God,
a home born child, living at home with his Father.
'to behold the beauty of the Lord'..
(note: can happen reading,
better yet when falling into meditation over a passage/verse/phrase/word
best when meditation is mingled with talking with, inquiring of Jesus how to.... or seeking grace to imitate
full of glory when Jesus is sweetly present and His essence is in a thought, a word, an action...)
'and to enquire in His temple'...
(note: am i relating to God as an It, a docile genie or inanimate vending machine
dedicated to doing my every desire?
or am i asking Him about every blessed and cursed thing...what Lord? how can You be seen..known..loved?
spurgeon
verse 4...some interpreters vary concerning what the psalmist aims at;
i understand thus much in a generality, which is clear that
he means a communion and fellowship with God, which is that one desire...john stoughton
one thing...the first thing, then, is david's choice, summarily described in the word, 'one thing'.
so Christ confirmeth the prophet's word while He called mary' choice (of sitting at His feet listening)
'one thing' in luke 10.42 ('but only a few things are necessary,
really only one,
for mary has chosen the good part, which shall not be taken away from her.') ...william struther 1633
...'changes, great changes and many bereavements there have been in my life.
i have been emptied from vessel to vessel.
but one thing has never failed-one thing makes me feel that my life has been ONE;
it has calmed my joys,
it has soothed my sorrows,
it has guided me in difficulty,
it has strengthened me in weakness.
it is the presence of God-a faithful and loving God.
yes, brethren, the presence of God is not only light, it is unity.
it gives unity to the heart that believes it
-unity to the life that is conformed to it.
it was the presence of God in david's soul that enabled him to say,
'One thing have i desired of the Lord'
and in st. paul's soul that enabled him to say,
THIS ONE THING I DO, forgetting those thing that are behind
and reaching forth to those things which are before
I PRESS TOWARD THE GOAL
for the prize
of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus. philippians 3.13-4
george wagner, in the 'wanderings of the children of israel' 1862
'one master passion in the breast,
like aaron's serpent, swallows up the rest. alexander pope
'that i may dwell in the house of the Lord all the days of my life'...
to approach continually unto the temple and thither continually to repair
was the dwelling, no doubt, here meant;
to dwell, to reside continually there, not to come for a spurt or a fit...
and thus dwelt hannah, the daughter of phanuel, who is said, in..luke,
(note: all these examples during times when copies of the bible were not readily available)
for a space of four score and four years not to have gone out of the temple.
not that she was there always, but often, saith Lyra and the venerable bede to the same purpose...
and the same luke, speaking of our saviour's disciples,
after they had seen Him ascended into heaven-
'they returned..to jerusalem with great joy: and were continually in the temple,
praising and blessing God.'.
thus st. austin's mother, in her time too, might be said
to dwell in God's house...that she, in Thy scriptures, saith st. austin,
might hear o God, what Thou saidst to her and Thou, in her prayers, what she said to Thee'.
in another place whom he calleth the emmets (ants) of God.
'behold the emmet of God, saith he, it riseth early every day,
it runneth to God's church,
it there prayeth,
it heareth the lesson read,
it singeth a psalm,
it ruminateth what it heareth,
it meditateth thereupon
and hoardeth up within itself the precious corn gathered from that barn floor
john day's 'david's desire to go to church', 1609
'the house of the Lord'...it (the tabernacle, the sanctuary), is called the house of God
because he is present there, as a man delights to be present in his house.
it is the place where God will be met withal.
as a man will be found in his house and there he will have suitors come to him, where he reveals his secrets.
a man rests, he lies and lodgeth in his house.
where is a man so familiar as in his house?
and what other place hath he such care to protect and provide for as his house?
and he lays up his treasures and his jewels in his house.
so God lays up all the treasures of grace and comfort in the visible church.
in the church he is to be spoken with as a man in his house.
there he gives us sweet meetings;
there are mutual, spiritual kisses..'let Him kiss me with the kisses of His mouth cant. 1.2
a man's house is his castle, as we say, that he will protect and provide for.
God will be sure to protect and provide for His church.
therefore He calls the church of God, that is, the tabernacle (that was the church at that time),
the house of God. richard sibbes
'the beauty of the Lord'...in connection with these words, we would try to show that
the character of God is attractive and fitted to inspire us with love for Him
and to make us, as it were, run after Him. ..
1. some of the elements of the beauty of the Lord.
God is a Spirit. hence His beauty is spiritual and its elements must be sought for in spiritual perfection.
one of the elements of this beauty is holiness.
but the elements of the divine beauty on which we intend at this time to dwell,
are those which are included under the general description of God's mercy and grace.
the attractiveness of God's mercy and grace.
the attractiveness of these is more easily perceived and their influence is sooner felt
by persons in our fallen condition.
it is mainly through the instrumentality of these that sinners are won over from their enmity against God
and that the Holy Ghost sheds abroad the love of God in our hearts.
another thing , which we may call an element of beauty in God,
is the combination of his various attributes in one harmonious whole.
the colours of the rainbow are beautiful, when taken one by one;
but there is a beauty in the rainbow, which arises not from any single tint;\
there is a beauty in it which would not exist if the several hues were assumed in succession
-a beauty which is the result of their assemblage and collocation
(to set or place together, ie. especially side by side)
and consists in their blended radiance.
in like manner do the several perfections, which co exist and unite in the nature of God,
produce a glorious beauty.
holiness is beautiful;
mercy is beautiful
truth is beautiful.
but over and above, there is a beauty which belongs to such combinations and harmonies
as the psalmist describes, when he tells us, 'mercy and truth are met together;
righteousness and peace have kissed each other'.
Thy mercy, o Lord, is in the heavens and Thy faithfulness reacheth the clouds.
Thy righteousness is like the great mountains; Thy judgments are a great deep' etc.
2. we are next to inquire where the beauty of the Lord may be seen.
it may so far be seen in the natural world.
the throne of nature, although in some respects clouds and darkness are round about it,
is not without its rainbow of beauty, any more than the throne of grace.
the beauty of the Lord may be seen in the moral law. in the law! even so.
in the unbending law, with its terrible anathema, his beauty and amiableness shine forth.
the law is full of love.
the duties of the law are duties of love.
love is the fulfilling of the law. the curse of the law is designed and employed for the maintenance of love.
obedience to the law and the reign of love, are but different aspects of the same state of things.
and one of the sublimest lessons of the law is the fact that God is love.
again, the beauty of the Lord may be seen in the gospel.
we see it, as it were, by reflection, in the law; in the gospel we see it directly.
the law shows us the hearts of men, as god would have them to be;
the gospel shows us God's own heart.
again, the beauty of the Lord is seen in Christ.
it is seen in Christ, for he is the brightness of the Father's glory and the express image of His person
and he that hath seen Christ, hath seen the Father.
the beauty of the Lord is seen in Christ, when we consider Him as the Father's gift,
and when we look to His offices (prophet, priest, king) and to His character.
the character of Christ was the finest spectacle of moral beauty which men or angels ever set their eyes on.
3. we conclude by noticing some traits of the beauty of the Lord.
a. it never deceives
2. it never fades
3. it never loses its power
4. it never disappoints condensed from andrew gray 1805-61, in the 'gospel contrasts and parallels
to enquire in His temple...the more grace the more business ye will find ye have to do with God
in His ordinances;
(arrangement in regular sequence or proper relative order...in this case, speaking of God's attributes
-that which is attributed to a person...characteristic, quality)
little grace hath little to do
and much grace hath much to do;
he hath always business with God, special earnest business
to behold the beauty of the Lord and to enquire in His temple.
oh i have somewhat to enquire after;
i am to do something by this duty and therefore cannot trifle.
he that comes to visit his friend in a compliment,
he talks, he walks, he trifles and goes home again;
but he that comes upon business, he is full of it;
he is like abraham's honest and faithful servant. gen. 24.33
'and there was set meat before him to eat:
but he said, i will not eat, until i have told my errand'.
i have great business with the Lord, about the church and about my soul
and i will not eat nor talk nor think nor dally about anything,
till i have told mine errand or heard my Maker's errand unto me.
and for this end it's a rare thing to carry somewhat always on the spirit,
to spread before God, a heart pregnant with some needful request or matter
whereof to treat (deal) with God.
psalm 45.1 my hear overflows with a good theme;
i address my verses to the king
my tongue is the pen of a ready writer....richard steele's antidote against distractions, 1673
'one thing'...
the man of one book is eminent, the man of one pursuit is successful.
let all our affections be bound up in one affection and that affection set upon heavenly things.
(note: God Himself)
'have i desired'...what we cannot at once attain, it is well to desire.
God judges us very much by the desire of our hearts.
he who rides a lame horse is not blamed by his master for want of speed,
if he makes all the haste he can and would make more if he could.
God takes the will for the deed with His children. (really?..)
'of the Lord'...this is the right target for desires,
this is the well into which to dip our buckets,
this is the door to knock at,
the bank to draw upon;
desire of men and lie on the dunghill with lazarus;
desire of the Lord and be carried of angels into abraham's bosom.
our desires of the lord would be sanctified, humble, constant, submissive, fervent
and it is well if, as with the psalmist, they are all molten into one mass.
under david's painful circumstances we might have expected him to desire
repose, safety and a thousand other good things, but no.
he has set his heart on the pearl and leaves the rest.
'that will i seek after'...holy desires must lead to resolute action.
the old proverb says, 'wishers and woulders are never good housekeepers'
and 'wishing never fills a sack'.
desires are seeds which must be sown in the good soil of activity or they will yield no harvest.
we shall find our desires to be like clouds without rain, unless followed up by practical endeavours.
'that i may dwell in the house of the Lord all the days of my life'...for the sake of communion with the King,
david longed to dwell always in the palace
so far from being wearied with the services of the tabernacle,
he longed to be constantly engaged in them, as his life long pleasure.
he desired above all things to be one of the household of God,
a home born child, living at home with his Father.
'to behold the beauty of the Lord'..
(note: can happen reading,
better yet when falling into meditation over a passage/verse/phrase/word
best when meditation is mingled with talking with, inquiring of Jesus how to.... or seeking grace to imitate
full of glory when Jesus is sweetly present and His essence is in a thought, a word, an action...)
'and to enquire in His temple'...
(note: am i relating to God as an It, a docile genie or inanimate vending machine
dedicated to doing my every desire?
or am i asking Him about every blessed and cursed thing...what Lord? how can You be seen..known..loved?
spurgeon
verse 4...some interpreters vary concerning what the psalmist aims at;
i understand thus much in a generality, which is clear that
he means a communion and fellowship with God, which is that one desire...john stoughton
one thing...the first thing, then, is david's choice, summarily described in the word, 'one thing'.
so Christ confirmeth the prophet's word while He called mary' choice (of sitting at His feet listening)
'one thing' in luke 10.42 ('but only a few things are necessary,
really only one,
for mary has chosen the good part, which shall not be taken away from her.') ...william struther 1633
...'changes, great changes and many bereavements there have been in my life.
i have been emptied from vessel to vessel.
but one thing has never failed-one thing makes me feel that my life has been ONE;
it has calmed my joys,
it has soothed my sorrows,
it has guided me in difficulty,
it has strengthened me in weakness.
it is the presence of God-a faithful and loving God.
yes, brethren, the presence of God is not only light, it is unity.
it gives unity to the heart that believes it
-unity to the life that is conformed to it.
it was the presence of God in david's soul that enabled him to say,
'One thing have i desired of the Lord'
and in st. paul's soul that enabled him to say,
THIS ONE THING I DO, forgetting those thing that are behind
and reaching forth to those things which are before
I PRESS TOWARD THE GOAL
for the prize
of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus. philippians 3.13-4
george wagner, in the 'wanderings of the children of israel' 1862
'one master passion in the breast,
like aaron's serpent, swallows up the rest. alexander pope
'that i may dwell in the house of the Lord all the days of my life'...
to approach continually unto the temple and thither continually to repair
was the dwelling, no doubt, here meant;
to dwell, to reside continually there, not to come for a spurt or a fit...
and thus dwelt hannah, the daughter of phanuel, who is said, in..luke,
(note: all these examples during times when copies of the bible were not readily available)
for a space of four score and four years not to have gone out of the temple.
not that she was there always, but often, saith Lyra and the venerable bede to the same purpose...
and the same luke, speaking of our saviour's disciples,
after they had seen Him ascended into heaven-
'they returned..to jerusalem with great joy: and were continually in the temple,
praising and blessing God.'.
thus st. austin's mother, in her time too, might be said
to dwell in God's house...that she, in Thy scriptures, saith st. austin,
might hear o God, what Thou saidst to her and Thou, in her prayers, what she said to Thee'.
in another place whom he calleth the emmets (ants) of God.
'behold the emmet of God, saith he, it riseth early every day,
it runneth to God's church,
it there prayeth,
it heareth the lesson read,
it singeth a psalm,
it ruminateth what it heareth,
it meditateth thereupon
and hoardeth up within itself the precious corn gathered from that barn floor
john day's 'david's desire to go to church', 1609
'the house of the Lord'...it (the tabernacle, the sanctuary), is called the house of God
because he is present there, as a man delights to be present in his house.
it is the place where God will be met withal.
as a man will be found in his house and there he will have suitors come to him, where he reveals his secrets.
a man rests, he lies and lodgeth in his house.
where is a man so familiar as in his house?
and what other place hath he such care to protect and provide for as his house?
and he lays up his treasures and his jewels in his house.
so God lays up all the treasures of grace and comfort in the visible church.
in the church he is to be spoken with as a man in his house.
there he gives us sweet meetings;
there are mutual, spiritual kisses..'let Him kiss me with the kisses of His mouth cant. 1.2
a man's house is his castle, as we say, that he will protect and provide for.
God will be sure to protect and provide for His church.
therefore He calls the church of God, that is, the tabernacle (that was the church at that time),
the house of God. richard sibbes
'the beauty of the Lord'...in connection with these words, we would try to show that
the character of God is attractive and fitted to inspire us with love for Him
and to make us, as it were, run after Him. ..
1. some of the elements of the beauty of the Lord.
God is a Spirit. hence His beauty is spiritual and its elements must be sought for in spiritual perfection.
one of the elements of this beauty is holiness.
but the elements of the divine beauty on which we intend at this time to dwell,
are those which are included under the general description of God's mercy and grace.
the attractiveness of God's mercy and grace.
the attractiveness of these is more easily perceived and their influence is sooner felt
by persons in our fallen condition.
it is mainly through the instrumentality of these that sinners are won over from their enmity against God
and that the Holy Ghost sheds abroad the love of God in our hearts.
another thing , which we may call an element of beauty in God,
is the combination of his various attributes in one harmonious whole.
the colours of the rainbow are beautiful, when taken one by one;
but there is a beauty in the rainbow, which arises not from any single tint;\
there is a beauty in it which would not exist if the several hues were assumed in succession
-a beauty which is the result of their assemblage and collocation
(to set or place together, ie. especially side by side)
and consists in their blended radiance.
in like manner do the several perfections, which co exist and unite in the nature of God,
produce a glorious beauty.
holiness is beautiful;
mercy is beautiful
truth is beautiful.
but over and above, there is a beauty which belongs to such combinations and harmonies
as the psalmist describes, when he tells us, 'mercy and truth are met together;
righteousness and peace have kissed each other'.
Thy mercy, o Lord, is in the heavens and Thy faithfulness reacheth the clouds.
Thy righteousness is like the great mountains; Thy judgments are a great deep' etc.
2. we are next to inquire where the beauty of the Lord may be seen.
it may so far be seen in the natural world.
the throne of nature, although in some respects clouds and darkness are round about it,
is not without its rainbow of beauty, any more than the throne of grace.
the beauty of the Lord may be seen in the moral law. in the law! even so.
in the unbending law, with its terrible anathema, his beauty and amiableness shine forth.
the law is full of love.
the duties of the law are duties of love.
love is the fulfilling of the law. the curse of the law is designed and employed for the maintenance of love.
obedience to the law and the reign of love, are but different aspects of the same state of things.
and one of the sublimest lessons of the law is the fact that God is love.
again, the beauty of the Lord may be seen in the gospel.
we see it, as it were, by reflection, in the law; in the gospel we see it directly.
the law shows us the hearts of men, as god would have them to be;
the gospel shows us God's own heart.
again, the beauty of the Lord is seen in Christ.
it is seen in Christ, for he is the brightness of the Father's glory and the express image of His person
and he that hath seen Christ, hath seen the Father.
the beauty of the Lord is seen in Christ, when we consider Him as the Father's gift,
and when we look to His offices (prophet, priest, king) and to His character.
the character of Christ was the finest spectacle of moral beauty which men or angels ever set their eyes on.
3. we conclude by noticing some traits of the beauty of the Lord.
a. it never deceives
2. it never fades
3. it never loses its power
4. it never disappoints condensed from andrew gray 1805-61, in the 'gospel contrasts and parallels
to enquire in His temple...the more grace the more business ye will find ye have to do with God
in His ordinances;
(arrangement in regular sequence or proper relative order...in this case, speaking of God's attributes
-that which is attributed to a person...characteristic, quality)
little grace hath little to do
and much grace hath much to do;
he hath always business with God, special earnest business
to behold the beauty of the Lord and to enquire in His temple.
oh i have somewhat to enquire after;
i am to do something by this duty and therefore cannot trifle.
he that comes to visit his friend in a compliment,
he talks, he walks, he trifles and goes home again;
but he that comes upon business, he is full of it;
he is like abraham's honest and faithful servant. gen. 24.33
'and there was set meat before him to eat:
but he said, i will not eat, until i have told my errand'.
i have great business with the Lord, about the church and about my soul
and i will not eat nor talk nor think nor dally about anything,
till i have told mine errand or heard my Maker's errand unto me.
and for this end it's a rare thing to carry somewhat always on the spirit,
to spread before God, a heart pregnant with some needful request or matter
whereof to treat (deal) with God.
psalm 45.1 my hear overflows with a good theme;
i address my verses to the king
my tongue is the pen of a ready writer....richard steele's antidote against distractions, 1673
Saturday, January 11, 2014
1.11.2014 COMMUNICATING ABOUT PESTICIDES TO CONSUMERS-WHO SAYS WHAT AND WHY
article by melinda hemmelgarn, M.S., R.D. in communities alliance for responsible eco farming (CARE)
paper, fall 2013
'as a registered dietitian, i'm dedicated to understanding the relationships between food and health,
from the ground up.
so you can imagine my interest in a webinar (is this a seminar that occurs on the web?)
sponsored by the Produce for Better Health Foundation,
titled: 'pesticide residues: what to communicate to consumers'.
the webinar was advertised specifically to dietitians
and other food, nutrition and health professionals nationwide, who educate the public.
based on my 30+ years of experience and relationships with both farmers and research scientists
who study the effects of pesticides on soil, plants, animals and human health,
especially related to cancer risk and birth defects,
i feel confident in what i communicate to consumers about the issue.
in a nutshell: PRACTICE PRECAUTION.
AVOID pesticide residues when and if you can
because these endocrine disrupting, neuro toxic compounds
can have negative effects on our health lasting for generations.
children, pregnant and lactating women and women of child bearing age are most vulnerable to harm.
i also encourage consumers to question the outdated toxicological theory that
'THE DOSE MAKES THE POISON'.
in some cases, the adage holds true, as with alcohol for example.
the more we drink, the more toxic the effects.
but we are learning that extremely low doses of some chemical compounds
may actually be more biologically active than previously thought,
such as with the popular herbicide, Atrazine.
so if someone tells you that pesticide or other chemical residues are to low to be of concern,
question that assumption and ask to see the proof.
professionally, i'm required to back up my statements with'sound' science.
that means i must review a study's research methods;
i need to know who funded the study to identify a potential bias
and i want to know if the study has been repeated by independent researchers.
i also check references to see if a report leaves out critical studies that would influence conclusions.
THE 'HE SAID/SHE SAID' DILEMMA
unfortunately, most consumers don't have the time or skills to sort through studies published
in difficult to access journals.
as a result, we are often faced with the media's interpretation of 'he said, she said' arguments,
leaving us unsure of who or what to believe.
understandably, if an authority figure with stellar credentials from a prestigious university makes a statement
that pesticide residues are nothing to fear,
it's hard not to believe them.
it's easier and more comfortable to think that our food is safe
and authorities in government and universities are looking out for our best interests.
but as research becomes increasingly funded by private interests,
and government increasingly influenced by profit driven corporations,
it may be difficult for individuals to speak out and dispute the status quo.
when they do, their research is often unfairly discredited and their reputations tarnished.
GOOD REASON FOR PESTICIDE CONCERNS
one of my favorite resources that hardly receives any media attention is
'THE PRESIDENT'S CANCER PANEL REPORT ON REDUCING ENVIRONMENTAL
CANCER 5RISK: WHAT WE CAN DO NOW'
the report makes clear recommendations to lower cancer risk, including:
*CHOOSE food grown without pesticides or chemical fertilizers
*EAT free range meat raised without antibiotics and growth hormones
*FILTER home tap or well water
*BECOME AN ACTIVE VOICE in your community;
DEVELOP and DISSEMINATE public health messages
to raise awareness of environmental cancer risks and
encourage people to reduce or eliminate exposures whenever possible.
the report emphasizes that 'children are at special risk for cancer due to environmental contaminant'
because of 'their smaller body mass and rapid physical development,
both of which magnify their vulnerability to known or suspected carcinogens...'
the report further explains how EPA approval of a pesticide does not guarantee safety:
'nearly 1400 pesticides have been registered (ie. approved)
by the Environmental protection agency (EPA) for agricultual and non agricultural use.
yet despite EPA approval,
'exposure to these chemicals has been linked to
brain/central nervous system, breast, colon, lung, ovarian, pancreatic, kidney, testicular and stomach
cancers,
as well as hodgkin and non hodgkin lymphoma, multiple myeloma and soft tissue sarcoma.
pesticide exposed farmers, pesticide applicators, crop duster pilots and manufacturers
also have been found to have elevated rates of prostate cancer, melanoma, other skin cancers...
approximately 40 chemicals classified by the International agency for research on cancer (IARC)
as known, probable or possible human carcinogens,
are used in EPA registered pesticides now on the market'.
plus, because some of these chemicals are used
in several different pesticide products from different companies,
the total number of registered pesticide products containing known or suspected carcinogens
is far greater than 40.
according to the Report, the USDA's Pesticide data program samples and tests more than 80 types of
fruits, vegetables, nuts, meat, grains, dairy products and other foods for
residues of insecticides,m herbicides, fungicides and growth regulators.
in its most recent report on 11,683 samples,
only 23.1% of samples had 0 pesticide residues detected;
29.5% had one residue and the remainder had two or more..
the majority of residues were at levels far below EPA tolerances or limits on pesticide residues on foods.
however, the Report recognizes that
'the data on which the tolerances are based are heavily criticized
by environmental health professionals and advocates
as being inadequate and unduly influenced by industry'.
in addition, PESTICIDES ARE NOT TESTED FOR ADVERSE EFFECTS IN COMBINATION.
however, we would be wise to assume that there would be interactions between chemicals,
possibly having a synergistic (total effect of the whole is greater than the sum of the individual parts)
and negative effect on our health.
REVEALING THE PRODUCE INDUSTRY'S VOICE
the Produce for better health foundation's webcast
features dr. carl keen, professor of nutrition and internal medicine at the university of california-davis.
keen will try to convince dietitians that conventionally raised fruits and vegetables
(those produced with pesticides and herbicides)
are not 'unsafe' or 'inferior' due to their pesticide residues.
he's going to try to convince nutritionists like me to
stop 'scaring' parents with the research showing increased risk for cancer and ADHD.
he's going to tell us that what matters most is that we all eat more fruits and vegetables,
regardless of how they are produced.
even though dr. keen has stellar credentials, we should question his message and who stands behind it.
with all due respect to dr. keen i'm going to encourage parents to err on the side of safety,
especially when it comes to their children's health.
and i'm going to continue to interview researchers on Food slueth radio
who are specifically studying the effects of pesticides on our environment and public health.
if the issue of COST comes up, as it always does,
i want to help consumers understand the concept of 'full cost accounting'.
in other words, look beyond the price at the register.
CONSIDER how much cancer and birth defects cost society
or the cost to taxpayers to clean up polluted water.
it's likely safe to assume that we all know farmers and farmers' family members
who have lost their lives prematurely to cancer.
i don't want any more farmers to fall ill because they think they need to use pesticides
to 'feed the world'.
by design and for power, influence and convenience,
the Produce for better health foundation has formed partnerships with respectable health organizations,
such as the Centers for disease control and prevention to help disseminate their message
that eating more fruits and vegetables is all that really matters.
in addition to reaching nutrition educators on webinars,
part of the Foundation's communication game plan includes using social media to reach out to moms directly.
with all the data that we have accumulated about the risks of pesticides to
farmers, children, public health and the environment,
i have to wonder:
why wouldn't the Foundation join forces to produce and promote more organic fruits and vegetables
and agro ecological farming methods?
the answer to this question may become evident
if we look into the foundation's list of donors, sponsors and board of trustees,
which include syngenta (makers of atrazine),
bayer crop science which produces a long list of herbicides, fungicides and insecticides
and monsanto vegetable seeds.
as farmers, citizens, consumers, parents and land stewards
LET'S SPEAK OUT.
let's give the president's report more air play and social media time.
bring the report's conclusions to your organization's next meeting or newsletter.
then tell your own personal stories.
stories from individual organic and agro ecological farmers can beat any madison ave. ad campaign,
because your stories are genuine.
and consumers are hungry to hear from you.
in the words of author, biologist and environmentalist, sandra steingraber:
'i believe it is time for a new human experiment.
the old experiment..is that we have sprayed pesticides which are inherent poisons..
throughout our shared environment.
they are now in amniotic fluid.
they're in our blood.
they're in our urine.
they're in our exhaled breath.
they are in mothers' milk..
what is the burden of cancer that we can attribute to this use of poisons in our agricultural system?
..we won't really know the answer until we do the other experiment,
which is to take the poisons out of our food chain,
embrace a different kind of agriculture and see what happens.
you can listen to melinda hemmelgarn on Food Sleuth radio on line: www.kopn.org.
you can reach her at: foodsleuth@gmail.com
paper, fall 2013
'as a registered dietitian, i'm dedicated to understanding the relationships between food and health,
from the ground up.
so you can imagine my interest in a webinar (is this a seminar that occurs on the web?)
sponsored by the Produce for Better Health Foundation,
titled: 'pesticide residues: what to communicate to consumers'.
the webinar was advertised specifically to dietitians
and other food, nutrition and health professionals nationwide, who educate the public.
based on my 30+ years of experience and relationships with both farmers and research scientists
who study the effects of pesticides on soil, plants, animals and human health,
especially related to cancer risk and birth defects,
i feel confident in what i communicate to consumers about the issue.
in a nutshell: PRACTICE PRECAUTION.
AVOID pesticide residues when and if you can
because these endocrine disrupting, neuro toxic compounds
can have negative effects on our health lasting for generations.
children, pregnant and lactating women and women of child bearing age are most vulnerable to harm.
i also encourage consumers to question the outdated toxicological theory that
'THE DOSE MAKES THE POISON'.
in some cases, the adage holds true, as with alcohol for example.
the more we drink, the more toxic the effects.
but we are learning that extremely low doses of some chemical compounds
may actually be more biologically active than previously thought,
such as with the popular herbicide, Atrazine.
so if someone tells you that pesticide or other chemical residues are to low to be of concern,
question that assumption and ask to see the proof.
professionally, i'm required to back up my statements with'sound' science.
that means i must review a study's research methods;
i need to know who funded the study to identify a potential bias
and i want to know if the study has been repeated by independent researchers.
i also check references to see if a report leaves out critical studies that would influence conclusions.
THE 'HE SAID/SHE SAID' DILEMMA
unfortunately, most consumers don't have the time or skills to sort through studies published
in difficult to access journals.
as a result, we are often faced with the media's interpretation of 'he said, she said' arguments,
leaving us unsure of who or what to believe.
understandably, if an authority figure with stellar credentials from a prestigious university makes a statement
that pesticide residues are nothing to fear,
it's hard not to believe them.
it's easier and more comfortable to think that our food is safe
and authorities in government and universities are looking out for our best interests.
but as research becomes increasingly funded by private interests,
and government increasingly influenced by profit driven corporations,
it may be difficult for individuals to speak out and dispute the status quo.
when they do, their research is often unfairly discredited and their reputations tarnished.
GOOD REASON FOR PESTICIDE CONCERNS
one of my favorite resources that hardly receives any media attention is
'THE PRESIDENT'S CANCER PANEL REPORT ON REDUCING ENVIRONMENTAL
CANCER 5RISK: WHAT WE CAN DO NOW'
the report makes clear recommendations to lower cancer risk, including:
*CHOOSE food grown without pesticides or chemical fertilizers
*EAT free range meat raised without antibiotics and growth hormones
*FILTER home tap or well water
*BECOME AN ACTIVE VOICE in your community;
DEVELOP and DISSEMINATE public health messages
to raise awareness of environmental cancer risks and
encourage people to reduce or eliminate exposures whenever possible.
the report emphasizes that 'children are at special risk for cancer due to environmental contaminant'
because of 'their smaller body mass and rapid physical development,
both of which magnify their vulnerability to known or suspected carcinogens...'
the report further explains how EPA approval of a pesticide does not guarantee safety:
'nearly 1400 pesticides have been registered (ie. approved)
by the Environmental protection agency (EPA) for agricultual and non agricultural use.
yet despite EPA approval,
'exposure to these chemicals has been linked to
brain/central nervous system, breast, colon, lung, ovarian, pancreatic, kidney, testicular and stomach
cancers,
as well as hodgkin and non hodgkin lymphoma, multiple myeloma and soft tissue sarcoma.
pesticide exposed farmers, pesticide applicators, crop duster pilots and manufacturers
also have been found to have elevated rates of prostate cancer, melanoma, other skin cancers...
approximately 40 chemicals classified by the International agency for research on cancer (IARC)
as known, probable or possible human carcinogens,
are used in EPA registered pesticides now on the market'.
plus, because some of these chemicals are used
in several different pesticide products from different companies,
the total number of registered pesticide products containing known or suspected carcinogens
is far greater than 40.
according to the Report, the USDA's Pesticide data program samples and tests more than 80 types of
fruits, vegetables, nuts, meat, grains, dairy products and other foods for
residues of insecticides,m herbicides, fungicides and growth regulators.
in its most recent report on 11,683 samples,
only 23.1% of samples had 0 pesticide residues detected;
29.5% had one residue and the remainder had two or more..
the majority of residues were at levels far below EPA tolerances or limits on pesticide residues on foods.
however, the Report recognizes that
'the data on which the tolerances are based are heavily criticized
by environmental health professionals and advocates
as being inadequate and unduly influenced by industry'.
in addition, PESTICIDES ARE NOT TESTED FOR ADVERSE EFFECTS IN COMBINATION.
however, we would be wise to assume that there would be interactions between chemicals,
possibly having a synergistic (total effect of the whole is greater than the sum of the individual parts)
and negative effect on our health.
REVEALING THE PRODUCE INDUSTRY'S VOICE
the Produce for better health foundation's webcast
features dr. carl keen, professor of nutrition and internal medicine at the university of california-davis.
keen will try to convince dietitians that conventionally raised fruits and vegetables
(those produced with pesticides and herbicides)
are not 'unsafe' or 'inferior' due to their pesticide residues.
he's going to try to convince nutritionists like me to
stop 'scaring' parents with the research showing increased risk for cancer and ADHD.
he's going to tell us that what matters most is that we all eat more fruits and vegetables,
regardless of how they are produced.
even though dr. keen has stellar credentials, we should question his message and who stands behind it.
with all due respect to dr. keen i'm going to encourage parents to err on the side of safety,
especially when it comes to their children's health.
and i'm going to continue to interview researchers on Food slueth radio
who are specifically studying the effects of pesticides on our environment and public health.
if the issue of COST comes up, as it always does,
i want to help consumers understand the concept of 'full cost accounting'.
in other words, look beyond the price at the register.
CONSIDER how much cancer and birth defects cost society
or the cost to taxpayers to clean up polluted water.
it's likely safe to assume that we all know farmers and farmers' family members
who have lost their lives prematurely to cancer.
i don't want any more farmers to fall ill because they think they need to use pesticides
to 'feed the world'.
by design and for power, influence and convenience,
the Produce for better health foundation has formed partnerships with respectable health organizations,
such as the Centers for disease control and prevention to help disseminate their message
that eating more fruits and vegetables is all that really matters.
in addition to reaching nutrition educators on webinars,
part of the Foundation's communication game plan includes using social media to reach out to moms directly.
with all the data that we have accumulated about the risks of pesticides to
farmers, children, public health and the environment,
i have to wonder:
why wouldn't the Foundation join forces to produce and promote more organic fruits and vegetables
and agro ecological farming methods?
the answer to this question may become evident
if we look into the foundation's list of donors, sponsors and board of trustees,
which include syngenta (makers of atrazine),
bayer crop science which produces a long list of herbicides, fungicides and insecticides
and monsanto vegetable seeds.
as farmers, citizens, consumers, parents and land stewards
LET'S SPEAK OUT.
let's give the president's report more air play and social media time.
bring the report's conclusions to your organization's next meeting or newsletter.
then tell your own personal stories.
stories from individual organic and agro ecological farmers can beat any madison ave. ad campaign,
because your stories are genuine.
and consumers are hungry to hear from you.
in the words of author, biologist and environmentalist, sandra steingraber:
'i believe it is time for a new human experiment.
the old experiment..is that we have sprayed pesticides which are inherent poisons..
throughout our shared environment.
they are now in amniotic fluid.
they're in our blood.
they're in our urine.
they're in our exhaled breath.
they are in mothers' milk..
what is the burden of cancer that we can attribute to this use of poisons in our agricultural system?
..we won't really know the answer until we do the other experiment,
which is to take the poisons out of our food chain,
embrace a different kind of agriculture and see what happens.
you can listen to melinda hemmelgarn on Food Sleuth radio on line: www.kopn.org.
you can reach her at: foodsleuth@gmail.com
1.11.2014 PSALM 18.35 THY GENTLENESS MAKES ME GREAT
this morning reading psalm 18 i was wondering whether i could understand better what the word
'gentleness' meant and so read in Keil the following.
first, he rendered gentleness by the word 'lowliness'
then comments 'the hebrew word means the bending of one's self.
what is intended is, that condescension of God to mankind and especially to the house of david,
which was in operation, with an ultimate view to the incarnation (of Jesus Christ),
in the life of the son of jesse from the time of His anointing to His death
ie. the divine chAstotAs and philathropEa
(titus 3.4 but when the kindness of God our savior and His love for mankind appeared, He saved us...)
which elected the shepherd boy to be king and did not cast him off
even when he fell into sin and his infirmities became manifest.
Bless Your holy name, Lord. were it not for You i would be in hell.
'gentleness' meant and so read in Keil the following.
first, he rendered gentleness by the word 'lowliness'
then comments 'the hebrew word means the bending of one's self.
what is intended is, that condescension of God to mankind and especially to the house of david,
which was in operation, with an ultimate view to the incarnation (of Jesus Christ),
in the life of the son of jesse from the time of His anointing to His death
ie. the divine chAstotAs and philathropEa
(titus 3.4 but when the kindness of God our savior and His love for mankind appeared, He saved us...)
which elected the shepherd boy to be king and did not cast him off
even when he fell into sin and his infirmities became manifest.
Bless Your holy name, Lord. were it not for You i would be in hell.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)