Saturday, December 10, 2005
MySpace
There has been a lack of posts around here because of two reasons. First, this last week was finals at school and almost every minute was spent studying. Second, I have recently discovered the addiction to MySpace and have had to force myself to not check it every half hour to see if someone has left a message or comment. The high of seeing "NEW MESSAGES!" keeps me hooked and exhilarated. However, I've seen a decrease in my time spent with more meaningful subjects. I'm considering shutting my account off completely. Thank you for hanging in there for me...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
33 comments:
shut it off :)
Does the fact that you are really interested in that website:
1) You need friends
2) You desire a date
?
You seem like such an amiable person without having to make friends on a website
and your picture shows that you are quite attractive as well, in conjunction with the fact you seem quite intelligent, so you shouldn't have a problem finding a date
Just my observations...
Antonio
BTW thank you for linking to my Free Grace Theology Blog where I am writing a series on James 2:14ff.
antonio,
what the heck?
I have final exams and final papers, and I still waste my time on blogs :) just kidding. Good poll!
I still waste my time on blogspot and I have final exams and final papers. Just kidding. :) good poll...
Ana,
Thanks! We'll be in this thing together!
Frank,
Very wise advice.
Antonio,
I'm surprised that you limited the two options for being on MySpace to only two. Are you really that narrow-minded? (j/k) My reason for getting an account in the first place was to comment on my friends' blogs. I actually haven't met anyone whom I don't know in "real" life.
Jason,
Thanks for commenting! I'm glad you can relate! :)
Torn aclu,
are you 24 yet know something about Zane Hodges? He spent more years teaching Greek and New Testament at Dallas Theological Seminary (27).
Are you familiar with just his detractors or have you actually read his writings themselves, that you would put forth your arrogant chide?
On a side note, are you certian that you are saved, Mr. Torn Aclu?
D.A. Carson says that you can't be.
"Whoever said, 'The Calvinist knows that he cannot fall from salvation but does not know whether he has got it,' summed it up nicely." (D.A. Carson)
Before you go and open your mouth and quickly proceed to put your foot in it, it may be wise to actually know what you are talking about.
Antonio
Frank obviously has a "crush" on Julianne...
hehe
Antonio
It can't be him. He doesn't have Antonio Banderas' accent.
Plus his profile picture doesn't look anything like Antonio Banderas.
Antonio Banderas' autograph? I don't know Matador. If you really wanted someone's autograph make it someone really famous. Liam Neeson is a good choice.
Maybe we should ask him for Antonio Banderas' and Liam Neeson's autograph.
Sometimes you just blow my mind Matador, but you are right. Antonio, it is time to account for yourselves.
I am actually Keanu Reeves in disguise. You may purchase my autograph on ebay...
It was a good thing we did here Matador. Now quick, to the Batmobile.
Wow! He finally speaks. Hey Keanu could you send us some Matrix memorabilia
I leave for a couple hours and my blog loses all it's dignity...
Look for my upcoming post which will feature...Weazel "The Theologist" Ball...(my newest friend)
Ah the weazel ball such a cute lil fella.
"Amazing! Antonio, REVEAL YOURSELVES!"
...
"I think we may have scared them off, "
Haha, multiple "personalities" in one poster? Hmmm... I think that profile is possessed!
Any takers?
Antonio, I would comment on your utter lack of maturity, but your comments seem to speak for themselves.
Julianne, there are some TMC folks with MySpace as well... I have one xanga account that I use for the same purpose (receiving comments; www.xanga.com/christmylife777), hoping that fellow TMC peers will leave a message. I know what you mean...
See you around the blogosphere!
Julianne, sorry for the lighthearted levity.
Antonio
Julianne,
Thank you for visiting my blog. You asked a very good question, specifically, where in the Bible do we see that God is not concerned with the outcome of a situation, only the person's response?
While there are many places, the one that I learned this principle from was Matt. 26:36-39. Here, Jesus speaks to His Heavenly Father, and says that if there is any way possible, don't let me have to endure this. Yet, it is not what I want, but what You want. God knew that Jesus would have to die a painful physical death. Did Jesus have a choice? Yes. He could either choose His own will or the will of His Father.
However, as I was responding to your comment, another example came to mind. Do you remember Uriah, the husband of Bathsheba? David had Uriah murdered to cover up David's sin. Yet, had he not been murdered, Solomon would not have been born. Why was Solomon born? Because of David's response to his inquity. When people focus on the outcome of a situation, they want to ask "Why, Lord?" Yet, our response should be "Whatever your will is in this situation, Lord."
This is why God tells us in 1 John that if we ask anything according to His will, He hears us. I used to wonder why God did not respond to Jesus in the garden of Gethsemane. He spoke to Jesus after John baptized Him; so why not in this case? I realized that there was no need for a response. God was not going to take this burden away from Jesus, so there was nothing to discuss. I could go on, but I look forward to hearing your thoughts.
Julianne,
I loved your question. And I responded to in in Ron's blog...kinda in the form of a mini-paper :)
Julianne, blessings on your education I don't have to worry about this 'comments high'. Since hardly any one knows that I exist. :( Poor me, Poor me!!! By the way what does that High feel like? ;)
As regard to shutting off your account here, remember Luther's dictum "to go against conscience is neither save, nor right." And The Westminster Confession of Faith reminds us that the 'Lord alone is the lord of the conscience'.
I just felt compelled to share these things with you,and God will grant you wisdom to know what to do.
Ron: I totaly disagree with you, on many things that you stated above. "God is not concerned about the outcome of a situation..."
The example that you gave has no such proof to your false conclusion. Jesus (being God) knew exactly what He had to do, thus his agony. Jesus being very God and without a sin nature could not have choosen any other way, but to submit to the Father(God). Since He always submitted to the Father even outside of time, God would be a liar and not fullfulling hundreds of prophecies fortold thousands of years before hand. Plus we see and are told that it was God's plan before time and outside of time, before the foundation of the world.
Are you telling us that there was broken communion between the Father and the Son prior to the curse being placed on Jesus, at the cross. I say this cause Jesus always did the things that pleased His Father. The fact that sacred scripture here does not give us words that the Father said to the Son can not infer that the Father said nothing. Tell us from scripture what other things the father said to the Son. Hardly anything is recorded for us to read. Would you then say the Father had not spoken much to the Son during all of Jesus's eathly ministry. The words given to the Son are for Him, not for us. Plus we know the Father heard His prayer for the text tells us that Angels came and ministered to Jesus.
We should ask 'Why Lord? So the Lord may come and give us wisdom to know why we are going through any given situation and thus grow and become conformed into the likeness of Christ Jesus. Granted we don't blaspheme God's name by demanding that He doesn't know what he is doing.
James 1:2-5 Consider it pure joy, my brothers, whenever you face trials of many kinds, because you know that the testing of your faith develops perseverance. Perseverance must finish its work so that you may be mature and complete, not lacking anything. If any of you lacks wisdom, he should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to him.
These verses show that the trials (Situations) we find ourselves in have a purpose namely verse 3 to develop perseverance. And verse 4 maturity,and perfection. Which leads to verse 5, asking for wisdom as we go through this testing, trial, (situation) so we can know how to persevere and become mature.
So as an example, when a husband and wife's baby dies, your view would not offer comfort, rather you would tell them that they should just buckle up and have a right attitude. The verses above indicate that we should consider the situation pure joy for our benefit of being made unto perfection. Asking God for wisdom 'why God?' what are you showing us to learn through this trial?
And we know that in all things (situations) God works for the good (God has purpose for the situation) of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose. - Romans 8:28
Antonio:
I wrote this pior, on an ealier Comment slot. I don't think anyone saw it.
Yes, I read the absolutely terrible book (Zane Hodge's book). It is a proponent of easy believerism. Millions of of people are self deluded into thinking that they are saved and on their way to Heaven when in fact they remain ungenerated and God haters. They will see God only in judgement against them. Thus they will be cast into hell with the wrath of God upon their heads.
Is this any thing to us? Do we care for the Lost?
the puritans use to say..." better to tremble all the way to the gates of Heaven, than to walk confidently into the jaws of Hell".
I agree with torn aclu
everyone seems to be responding to Ron here, guess I will too! :)Sorry, I just got going and couldn't stop!
I think by not getting mad you did respond remarkably to God. I would have been angry. But I also believe, a God who is concerned about justice and suffering, and therefore would be upset that someone slashed one of his children’s car tires. Did your tires only get slashed so God could teach you a lesson and receive a response? Or did your tires get slashed because this is a broken and fallen world that so desperately needs God? Would not the best response overall be, not to look at God for the cause of your tires getting slashed, but to think of the person who did it and verbally declare you forgive them in the same way God forgives us? Yes, God can teach us in these and we do respond to Him, but our relationship with God, and Him with us is so much more than a response to Him.
Therefore, I love Julianne’s question. “Where in the Bible do we see that God is not concerned with the outcome of a situation, only the person's response?”
Very good question indeed. Proposing that God does not really care about the outcome of a situation seems a bit problematic to me and requires some hermetical gymnastics.
I believe the God whom I believe in cares very much about the outcomes of any given situation. I don’t view God as a propositionalist who only cares about our response as of its and ends to a means of a response. If God only cared about our response to a situation, there would be little need for Christ. The Old Covenant system was more concerned about response to God, while the New Covenant saw that response alone was not enough, that a relationship was needed. When I look at the cross, I do not see a response required of myself to God, but God’s response to humanity, which most fully discloses the divine hospitality of God. This God, in the words of Cyril of Jerusalem “God stretched out His hands on the cross, that he might embrace the whole world.”
The cross itself represents God’s concern for humanity. If He was only concerned about our response to Him, the Old Covenant would have remained sufficient. But God knew the Old Covenant sinner/response system was not enough, so He responded himself. The words “The Word became Flesh and Dwelt Amongst us” in the words of Karl Barth “signifies the God who speaks with man in promise and command. It represents God’s existence, intercession, and activity for man…”
The God “only cares about our response” seems to have striking focus on mans reaching to and responding to God, rather than God coming to us and responding to us and to our situation. Yet, The God who came to us did so because he was concerned about our entire being. The word soteria has nothing to do with our response to God, but God’s action to the world, which represents a holistic action (the word implies complete, whole action) of healing and restoration for the whole world (I am not advocating universalism). The God of Romans is a God of action, who responds to man who has fallen short of His glory. This is not a passive God reduced to only caring about the human response.
Does not Jesus Christ’s action on earth reveal the heart of God? Did Jesus only heal people for the end result of hoping they would come to salvation? Why did he embrace the children? Did he only die and rise again so that we would respond to God? Or was all of this revealing That God is active, loves and cares for us, and came to us, not only seeking a response from us, but also to restore us? Isn’t the only response we can give to God conditioned by His action and work in us in some form? Did any of this half to do with active love? Or was it only a passive action that focused on a means to and ends to receive a particular response? This is clearest in Luke, where Jesus’ concern is most fully emphasized on the current situation of the suffering people, rather than their eschatological future. I cannot see how every action God has done on our behalf is only a means to and ends for us to respond to Him. I see it as God responding to us, saying that He is for us, and that he is restoring us.
Even with the Old Testament prophets, Yahweh was very concerned about the present action of his people. One of the biggest faults charged against Israel and Judah by the prophets is that they oppressed the poor and denied justice to the weak (Amos especially). Yahweh did not judge His people as a means to an ends to get a better response. He did so in order that they not only would appropriately respond to YAHWEH, but also live better lives both to YAHWEH and to each other. This God is the God of Esther and Ruth. This is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. This is a God who has acted for His people through out the biblical narrative, which comes to its fullest sense at the cross. This a God who fights for his people and leads them through life. He does not do this just so we can respond to him, but so that he can be in a covenant relationship with us. God throughout the OT and NT is clearly shown to be concerned with justice and suffering, because they and we are His people.
This is the God who defends the weary and oppressed. Not because they will respond to God better than someone else, but because God’s heart is for the oppressed and broken. It seems to be a bit of a leap to suggest that all of this was for His own sake, coming in the form of a response by us.
I cannot read the Bible as a story of how people responded to God. Rather it is the story of an active God in Creation, Fall, and Redemption (my favorite theological paradigm). I cannot get away from believing God is active and cares for us in every way. In how we live. In how we grow. In the pain we experience. In the joy we experience. Yes, and in how we respond to not only Him, but to those he has placed in our life. I cannot fathom God being so cut off from human existence that He only cares about the end-result—us responding to Him. The Bible is very much a story of the covenant relationship that God has developed with us that will lead to the marriage supper of the lamb. I won’t deny that God is concerned with how we respond to Him, but there seems to be so much more to this covenant relationship than it only being centered on us responding to God. It seems the Bible is a lot more about how God has responded to our failures and sufferings, than how we have responded to Him. I see so much more than only a response from us.
Now I am going to get back to studying for a final exam!
Ah... yes, finals. I just cracked three of 'em today. One in the morning, and one Thursday morning (then I'm done)... here I go!
Daniel,
I was going to write on your blog, but I chose to respond :) here! I know that many of the things you have stated here are the same things I believe, but you have confused me on one important point.
You stated "James 1:2-5 Consider it pure joy, my brothers, whenever you face trials of many kinds, because you know that the testing of your faith develops perseverance. Perseverance must finish its work so that you may be mature and complete, not lacking anything. If any of you lacks wisdom, he should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to him.
"These verses show that the trials (Situations) we find ourselves in have a purpose namely verse 3 to develop perseverance. And verse 4 maturity,and perfection. Which leads to verse 5, asking for wisdom as we go through this testing, trial, (situation) so we can know how to persevere and become mature.
So as an example, when a husband and wife's baby dies, your view would not offer comfort, rather you would tell them that they should just buckle up and have a right attitude. The verses above indicate that we should consider the situation pure joy for our benefit of being made unto perfection. Asking God for wisdom 'why God?' what are you showing us to learn through this trial?"
You stated that the trials have a purpose, to ask for wisdom in a situation so that we can know how to develop perseverence and maturity (the asking is a response). Then you say my view does not offer comfort in the scenario you described. Yet, even in your argument, you state that we should respond by asking God what He wants us to learn. So what is the difference between what I said and what you are saying? If, in your situation, the child dies, the test is not for the child, it is for the parents.
Deut. 8:2 - And thou shalt remember all the way which the LORD thy God led thee these forty years in the wilderness, to humble thee, and to prove thee, to know what was in thine heart, whether thou wouldest keep his commandments, or no.
Every situation we go through is a test to see what is in our hearts. For many people, this is a hard saying, but true nonetheless. Even earthly relationships are not based on how situations turn out. If they were, we would have shallow relationships. Relationships are built on responses, however.
It was because you chose to respond to my statement that I even know you exist! Think about it; the beginning of this relationship is based on a response!
But think about this - imagine what Nicodemus had to be going through when Jesus spoke to him about being born again. He just could not understand! Here was one of the most knowledgeable teachers in the land, and he could not get it! I have another one for you, but I will wait until we finish this discussion to share it with you!
Julianne, thank you for allowing this discussion on your blog. You are a blessing!
Ron: Thanks for the dialogue, however I will respond on my blog. We don't want to get this sweet lady ticked off at us and fill her blogosphere.
Daniel,
I look forward to the conversation!
Daniel,
I saw you and Dave on Main St. today doing the church office. I could have asked you for jumper cables...
Yes, you should of, I had some in my humbler. But I am glad you got taken care of.
Post a Comment