TheologyWeb Campus

Packer Heat

TwilightPhoenix — Wed, 16 May 2012 20:50:27 GMT

What is J.I. Packer's stance?

The link can be found here

The text is as follows:

What does J.I. Packer say about Mike Licona? Let's talk about it on Deeper Waters.

In point 22 of his long response to Mike Licona, Norman Geisler says the following:

Speaking of �The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy [which] defines it most exhaustively,� Licona claims, �But even those who helped compose it aren�t in complete agreement about its meaning. I continue to be a biblical inerrantist and subscribe to both the Lausanne Covenant and the Chicago Statement.� However, this claim by Licona is flatly false. There are only three living framers of the ICBI statements (J. I. Packer, R.C. Sproul, and myself), and we all agree that Licona�s views are not compatible with the ICBI statements (see # 3). What Licona does to the ICBI statements is typical of what many of his peers do with the New Testament, namely, they read their meaning into it (eisegesis) rather than reading the framer�s view out of it (exegesis). Indeed, Licona is so bold as to affirm that those of us who are living ICBI framers do not properly understand the statements we framed! No wonder they misinterpret the New Testament. If Washington, Madison, and Jefferson were here today, by this same logic they would no doubt say to them that they did not properly understand The Declaration of Independence!

We are quite pleased that Geisler has enlisted the support of J.I. Packer, who gives a fine recommendation by the way of Henri Blocher's "In The Beginning", a fine work that is very sympathetic to theistic evolution. For the Framework hypothesis of creation, it really wouldn't matter if evolution is true or not. Genesis is meant to tell the who and why. It is not meant to tell the when and how.

If Packer understands the ICBI statement so well, then what are we to make of the post that was put on Mike Licona's Facebook page?

Dr. Licona, I noticed that Dr. Geisler has written a reply to your recent interview by TheBestSchools. Geisler�s response is at http://www.normgeisler.com/articles/...erview2012.htm

I noticed in his point 22 that he disagrees with your statement that the framers of the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy (ICBI) don�t always agree on how to interpret ICBI. Dr. Geisler says there were only 3 framers of ICBI, R. C. Sproul, J. I. Packer, and himself. He then says �we all agree that Licona�s views are not compatible with the ICBI statements.� I just wanted you to know that I emailed J. I. Packer last fall and asked him what he thought of your view of Matthew�s raised saints. I received this reply from him on 24 February forwarded from David Horn, the Academic Secretary at Regent College:

Hello Johan,

Thank you for your email. I have just today received the following handwritten reply from Dr. Packer.

Dear Johan Erasmus,

I apologise for lateness in responding to your email.

What Dr. Licona offers is an interpretive hypothesis as to Matthew's meaning. What biblical inerrancy means is that Scripture, rightly interpreted, is true and trustworthy. I don't think Licona's guess about Matthew's meaning is plausible, but it is not an inerrancy question.

Sincerely in Christ,

J.I. Packer

With this email, Packer is saying that Licona's stance is one entirely of hermeneutics. He doesn't agree with Licona's reasoning, and that is fine, but it is not an issue of Inerrancy. If this is the case, then it would seem that Packer obviously does not understand Inerrancy.

At this point, one of two things could be done.

Either Geisler could finally drop this whole thing and realize he's fighting a battle that is not harming Mike at all but is rather harming himself every step of the way. He could seek to make restitution for the damage that has been done and move on and familiarize himself more with NT studies.

Or, Packer could be thrown under the bus somehow.

As for Sproul, from what I have seen, he has not spoken on this at all and being a Preterist, is not quite likely to be as literal as Geisler and could have even more sympathies. If this is the case, then two out of three framers have no problem whatsoever with Licona's view. Again, it does not mean they agree, but they do not see it as an Inerrancy issue.

We all hope for the former, but as of this point, the ball is not in our court and we will wait to see what happens.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

"Tough Questions" with Dr. Greg Boyd

Xmansmommy — Wed, 16 May 2012 15:38:01 GMT

Why does God allow evil and suffering? How could a loving God send people to hell? How do I know if God even exists? From skeptic to believer, we all have tough questions we�d love to get answered. Wednesday, May 16, nationally-known author and speaker Greg Boyd will tackle your questions live from the stage. Greg is the author of Letters from a Skeptic, Repenting of Religion, Escaping the Matrix, The Problem of Evil, and more. Greg will answer ANY hot-potato questions about God, religion, or theology, straight from the audience.

Anyone interested in watching via live streaming can do so at www.kensingtonchurch.tv

Why do Mormon Churches have "Too Many Women?"

Cow Poke — Wed, 16 May 2012 15:26:55 GMT

I thought this was a really odd statement. In the "glass half full" kind of logic, it seems that the problem is "not enough men". Or, more specifically, not enough committed men.

In another thread, OC offered this article as (I'm guessing) a rationale for why Smith married other women, and why "plural marriage" was acceptable or even necessary in Smith's day.

Too Many Women?

Many congregations of the international Church struggle with the lack of adequate local priesthood leadership and small numbers of active Melchizedek priesthood holders. A predominance of female attendees is frequently noted. "There are too many women in the [local] Church," stated one mission president. The problem of "too many women" is a frequent theme of discussion by missionaries and mission leaders and has been the target of numerous local initiatives over the years in the form of restrictions on the teaching of women in order to remedy the lack of local priesthood and "fix" the imbalance. Yet official LDS membership statistics today show that 49 percent of LDS members are male, while 51 percent are female. An examination of the membership rolls of most units where the problem of "too many women" is noted typically reveals the presence of a large number of adult male members, the vast majority of whom are inactive. Even in nations where mission leaders have long decried the paucity of local priesthood leadership, national census data show only marginally more female than male members. The 2002 Chilean census demonstrated relative parity between self-identified female and male LDS members, especially among young adults -- 20,985 versus 20,780 in the fifteen to twenty-nine range and 18,700 versus 14,617 in the thirty to forty-four range. The real pathology is not that too many sisters are living their covenants, but that international male activity and retention rates are low.

It really seems that the problem is not "too many women", but "not enough men". Why are the men less committed to Mormonism than women, when there is so much emphasis in Mormonism on "men" -- all the priesthoods, and such?

Philippians 2:6-7 -- in the "form" of God

Christian2 — Wed, 16 May 2012 13:29:18 GMT

Philippians 2:6-7

Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB)

6 who, existing in the form of God,
did not consider equality with God(A)
as something to be used for His own advantage.[a]
7 Instead He emptied Himself(B)
by assuming the form of a slave,(C)
taking on the likeness of men.(D)
And when He had come as a man
in His external form,

What is the Greek word behind "form"? I would think it does not support a physical form since God is Spirit.

I have seen the word translated as "nature" but does the Greek support that translation?

Thank you.

Popper - Falsification and a Life's Struggle

magellan004 — Wed, 16 May 2012 12:29:27 GMT

This thread is to examine the concept of Falsification as presented by Karl Popper in the essay Science as Falsification http://nsmserver2.fullerton.edu/depa...web/Popper.htm .The speech excerpt is fairly short and easy to read. In that speech Popper refers to a theory of Einstein to do with bending of light and a related �test� carried out by Arthur Stanley Eddington. Details of the Eddington expedition are outlined in Einstein, Eddington and the 1919 Eclipse by Peter Coles http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0102462v1.pdf .

Karl popper was born in 1902. The events he describes in the above essay took place around 1919 and he delivered his speech around 1963. So after the passage of 44 years and a life spent contemplating philosophical ideas Science as Falsification might be seen as more of an exploration into how Popper was profoundly affected as a teenager and his quest to come to terms with his own struggle with his affectations � which remained unaltered over the passage of time.

But for this thread I will concentrate on the logic of his concept of Falsification.

All contributions are welcome and there is only one rule and it is mainly for Tiggy � Be well mannered, use people�s ID�s, do not insult or ridicule.

First � the groundwork:
True and False
Truth is invariable and non-contradictory.
IF �2+2 = 4� is true today then it was true yesterday and will be true tomorrow.
IF �2+2 = 4� is true then �2 + 2 = 5� is False.
The Statement �A� �2+2=5 is False� can only be True under one condition � that A is a true statement.
IF the Statement �This swan is White� is refuted by �I observe that this swan is black� then the statement �I observe this swan is black � is true.
The Statement �This swan is White� is not refuted by an observation by John Smith � a chronic liar and fraud, lying and stating �I observe � �.
To refute a claim requires a true statement.

As used by Popper ��refute�, falsify� and �show false� are equivalent terms.

To refute a statement is to show the statement is false.
Only a true statement can refute a claim.
Observation as Refutation
Getting back to Popper, he says �If observation shows that the predicted effect is definitely absent, then the theory is simply refuted.�.
We know that only a true statement can refute so if a report of Observation Y (say from Eddington) refutes claim A then Observation Y must be true. If Observation Y was provisional, conditional or qualified then it has no power to refute.

What do you think?

Coming up � The Empirical Process and Testing

Magellan

NSM Evotional 05/16/2012

GPiper — Wed, 16 May 2012 11:10:33 GMT

A Glory Seed Devotional
Home Sweet PSALMS�

In a world where life is moving faster than a speeding mind the journey of solitude seems so needed yet so far away.

In lifestyles that have become meaningless and fragmented the journey of solitude seems so needed yet so alien.

In lives that have become �powder kegs� ready to explode because of the stresses of life the journey of solitude seems so powerless.

�Be Still and know that I am God.� (Psalms 46:10) God said it and the Psalmist felt it and then wrote it. Wise words from a time that was far different than ours. Wiser words for times such as ours.

In the world of solitude, you will come face to face with person you once were, with the person you are, with person you have yet to become. You will be journeying into world where there is no weakness, no sickness. It is world where you can dump your burdens in the empty tomb of Jesus and watch them fall into the abyss of hell where they really belong. You will never find rejection, only forgiveness.

Perhaps it will take you into the beauty of the great outdoors.
Perhaps you�ll find yourself in a good book where you can escape the realities and pressures of life.
Perhaps you�ll find yourself on a golf course or into the sanctuary of a church.
Perhaps you'll be writing in a journal.
Perhaps you will go to a movie or a host of other activities.

The journey of solitude is a journey to a world far removed from hustle and bustle of life. It is a journey to a world of quietness, of tranquility, and of anticipation. It is world with a population of three, Jesus Christ, God, and yourself. It is a world where the hidden recesses of your thoughts are opened. It is world where time beats to the pulse of eternity. The journey of solitude is a journey through the pages of your life, it is journey where past, present, and future meet.

As the clock ticks away the minutes and hours of today take a few minutes and ask God to send his Holy Spirit to whisk you away on the Wings of His Spirit to the world of Solitude.

You need it!
You deserve it!
You go for it!
But you won�t be alone Jesus will be with you!

Grace and PEACE!
Gary

��
"Be still, and know that I am God. I will be exalted among the nations, I will be exalted in the earth!" (Psalms 46:10 ESV)

Note: Should you want to go back and review this Glory Seed or others you can do so by clicking on this link: http://gloryseeds.wordpress.com/.

Scripture quotations marked ESV "Are from The Holy Bible, English Standard Version, copyright � 2001 by Crossway Bibles, a division of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved."

Leviticus 20:14 is not the Word of God

ZackMartin — Wed, 16 May 2012 08:54:04 GMT

Conservative Christians generally subscribe to what I might call "full inspiration" - the whole of the Bible is inspired by God.

I believe in God, so I have no inherent objection to the idea of revelation or inspired scripture. And it is certainly possible to me that parts of the Bible are revelation or inspired scripture. So I can endorse the "partial inspiration" view - parts of the Bible, but not the whole of it, is inspired by God. But the remainder, is not divinely inspired, and is not the Word of God.

Let me give an example of this, with reference to a specific passage - Lev 20:14 (KJV) "And if a man take a wife and her mother, it is wickedness: they shall be burnt with fire, both he and they; that there be no wickedness among you."

1] As I interpret it, this is essentially a prohibition on a man marrying his mother-in-law or stepdaughter, and/or sleeping with them. As a moral prohibition, it is fair enough - I'm sure both scenarios most commonly just result in people getting hurt. So I can't really object to the prohibition itself. I can see why God might want to discourage or prohibit such behaviour.

2] The penalty is a different story though. My entire life, ever since I was a child, I have always believed that capital punishment was gravely wrong. As such, I cannot accept the idea that God would endorse it. Now, some people reading this will agree with me on capital punishment, and others will disagree with me. But if you don't agree with me, let me put it this way: Surely there is something (or probably several things) you are convinced in the bottom of your heart is wrong, and always have been. Like human sacrifice, child sacrifice, widow burning, whatever it is for you. Someone comes to you and says "God has revealed a new scripture to me". You read this new scripture, and find it endorses that thing you are convinced in the bottom of your heart to be wrong. Might you not reject the claim that this scripture was from God on that basis? Would that not be a good reason to do so?

3] But even among those who support the death penalty, most would agree that capital punishment should only be reserved for the most serious crimes. Is sleeping consensually with your mother-in-law or stepdaughter wrong enough to deserve the death penalty? Very few today would say yes. So this is another reason to believe this verse is not the Word of God.

4] Executing all three people involved also seems very questionable. The verse never says that the two woman must be aware of and consent to what is going on. So if your husband sleeps with your mother-in-law, without your knowledge and consent, you are to be executed? If a man sleeps with his step-daughter, the step-daughter is to be executed? Even if she is an adult, the ability of a stepdaughter to freely consent to sexual relations with her stepfather must be questioned; it is likely she is under his long-established influence in choosing to do so. So we should execute her? This seems utterly barbaric, and clearly not the Word of God.

5] Finally, even those who accept the death penalty, who would endorse capital punishment by burning? A painful and gruesome death. This is clearly not the Word of God.

So if it is not the Word of God, what is it? I can think of only two other possibilities: the Word of Man, or the Word of Satan.

Is Christianity due for a government-imposed Reformation?

OtherCheek — Wed, 16 May 2012 05:34:18 GMT

This is a re-post from the same sex marriage thread, but I thought I would give it its own thread. If it contains too many links, then I would only ask the moderators to let me know, and I will remove them all, and furnish them upon request only--one at a time. I only cite the links so that there is no question regarding the authenticity of these cases of actual intolerance and bigotry against Christians who happen to oppose homosexual endorsement and/or promotion by the government. Much of the intolerance and discrimination against certain Christian beliefs happens to already be sanctioned by the government. Hence the title of this thread.

---------------

Let's take a look at some ramifications that have already taken place with regards to same-sex marriage, and see some examples of the bigotry that looms ahead for people who hold to a stricter form of Christianity than others.

The Observatory's Report on Intolerance and Discrimination against Christians in the Year 2011 was released on March 19th, 2012.

This report portrays the most important developments with regard to freedom of religion, the most striking cases of intolerance and discrimination throughout Europe – and what individuals and institutions say about it. The report includes several statistics as well as analysis of the meaning of freedom of religion in the European context.

Dr. Gudrun Kugler, director of the Observatory, explains: „Studies suggest that 85% of all hate crimes with an anti-religion background in Europe are directed against Christians. It is high time for the public debate to respond to this reality! We also notice professionial restrictions for Christians: a restrictive application of freedom of conscience leads to professions such as magistrates, doctors, nurses and midwives as well as pharmacists slowly closing for Christians. Teachers and parents get into trouble when they disagree with state-defined sexual ethics. Our research shows that only with a more accommodating approach to religion and specifically to Christianity, Europe will live up to its foundational value of freedom.“
http://www.intoleranceagainstchristi...port-2011.html

"Judge Rules Christian facility cannot ban same-sex civil union ceremony on its own premises"
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/jud...on-ceremony-on

Yeshiva University, an Orthodox Jewish institution in New York, has been sued over its refusal to offer student housing to a lesbian couple.
http://articles.latimes.com/1998/jul/04/local/me-632

Same-sex marriage will be a real boon for lawyers. That's pretty obvious.

The California Supreme Court ruled against a clinic and Catholic doctors who declined on grounds of religious convictions to give assisted reproduction services to a lesbian even though they referred her to another physician. The court rejected their defense of free exercise of religion and freedom of expression.
http://www.lambdalegal.org/in-court/...-medical-group

In New Mexico a Christian couple in the marriage photography business were found guilty and charged $6,600 because they declined on grounds of religious principle to photograph a civil commitment ceremony of a lesbian couple.http://www.onenewsnow.com/Legal/Default.aspx?id=75547

After California voters passed Proposition 8, supporters of Prop I were vilified and harassed. Mormons, in particular, were singled out and widely blamed. Names and addresses of Mormons and others who donated to support Pro 8 were published on the internet. The result was violent threats against, attacks upon, and intrusions upon selected Mormons, their places of worship, their communities, their businesses, and their employment.
http://www.wnd.com/2010/03/127072/

California Musical Theatre Artistic Director Scott Eckern, a Mormon and graduate of Brigham Young University, resigned from his position with the Sacramento theater group on Nov. 12 after undergoing pressure from artists who scorned his decision to give $1,000 to the Yes on 8 campaign.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,459544,00.html

Richard Raddon, Director, Los Angeles Film Festival. Resigned on November 25, 2008, after the LA Film Festival publicly distanced itself from Raddon's actions.[10] Raddon donated $1,500 to Yes on 8.
http://www.alliancesupport.org/news/...es/002506.html

Fred Karger, pro-same-sex marriage activist, filed to revoke LDS Church 501(c)(3) status. "I quite genuinely do not understand how the Mormon Church can keep its federal tax-exempt status after its meddling in Prop 8."
http://www.alternet.org/rights/10880...t_with_prop_8/

"Peter Vidmar, the new head of the U.S. Olympic team criticized for his antigay activism, resigned abruptly Friday, USA Today reports.
There was an immediate storm of negative reaction after the Chicago Tribune reported this week that Vidmar had contributed to the campaign to pass Proposition 8, the 2008 ballot initiative that rescinded marriage rights for California same-sex couples.
http://www.advocate.com/news/daily-n...-chief-resigns

MOUNT DORA, Fla. — He was Teacher of the Year last year, but just days before the new school year begins at Mount Dora High School in Mount Dora, Fla., Jerry Buell has been removed from teaching duties.
His offense?
He said he opposed gay marriage on his private Facebook page.
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/7...-marriage.html

A new era of tolerance just days after Prop. 8 passed in California:
http://yesproposition8.blogspot.com/...tolerance.html
http://pool.fairmormon.org/images/a/...ndalism.1B.png
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/7...ate-crime.html
Look at the pictures and read the signs such as "Mormon Scum" http://www.ldsmag.com/church/article/4070?ac=1?ac=1
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/arc...8/nov/08111010
http://www.sltrib.com/News/ci_11062014

When a reasonable person sees these images and cases of real intolerance he can make a pretty fair assessment, I think, of who the intolerant bigots REALLY are. And much of it is now government sanctioned and endorsed in some states.

Do you think it is the governments duty to impose a "New Reformation" upon Christianity?

Is Habermas A Heretic?

TwilightPhoenix — Tue, 15 May 2012 22:46:05 GMT

Shall we all stone Gary Habermas?

The link can be found here

The text is as follows:

Can we trust Gary Habermas any more? Let's talk about it on Deeper Waters.

While checking up on affairs today, I noticed that Norm Geisler has responded to an interview that Mike Licona did.

Yes. That's right. Responding to an interview.

My ministry partner, J.P. Holding, has already critiqued several aspects of this long article that Geisler has written. Links will be available to both at the end. For now, I wish to take the time to comment on some of the matters that Holding did not.

First off, nowhere in this is a response to the writings that have been put forward against Geisler's handling of this and nowhere in this is there any recognition that Geisler has decided to deal with the responses that have been put forward. One wonders if Geisler has any problem with Richard Dawkins speaking on topics where the challenges he raises have already been addressed.

Also in here is the idea that Mike's son-in-law, being me, and J.P. Holding produced a video. Geisler has an odd idea of producing. All that was done was that I did some voice in the film for the ghost of Inerrancy Future. If that is producing, then there are several producers including some members of TheologyWeb who did the voices of Geisler and Licona and my own wife who did the voice of Inerrancy Past.

In case anyone does not know, I don't have a clue how to do that. As it stands right now, the layout of this blog is not really anything stupendous and the reason for that is that I do not possess the computer knowledge to know how to do that. My reading is in theology, philosophy, history, etc. It is not in computer knowledge. I would not know the first thing about putting together a video and putting it on YouTube. Let alone would I know anything about animation.

Furthermore, Geisler also speaks about the ongoing debate. I used to check regularly on the internet for new mentions of this, but the reality is that no one really writes about this anymore. In the blogosphere, there are far more important issues being discussed. Frankly, Mike has moved on to get a job at Houston Baptist University and has started his ministry going full throttle.

Geisler can complain about being referred to as a tar baby all he wants, but perhaps could it be that there is a grain of truth to the criticism? Could it be Licona is being quite wise in not getting himself tangled into this debate when he could be doing far more important things such as, oh, I don't know, presenting and defending the Christian gospel in a secular world. Keep in mind, the central proclamation of the gospel after all is "He is risen!" It is not "It is Inerrant!" While Mike and I both hold to Inerrancy, it is not the gospel.

The most unique aspect of all of this now is that Habermas is now definitely included in the Rogues' Gallery. Anyone can see this in point 9 of the article written.

"Licona also mentions the strong influence Gary Habermas was on him and that they became close friends. Indeed, he refers here and elsewhere to the advice given to him by a close friend not to engage in dialog with me on this matter. However, Habermas�s view on inerrancy straddles both sides of the fence. It is for this that he was let go from the Faculty of Veritas Evangelical Seminary, namely, �It was ��because of your own view of inerrancy that was contrary to the Veritas Seminary doctrinal statement on inerrancy. That is, your view accepts: the belief that inerrancy is consistent with the view that rejects Gospel narratives as completely historical (angels at the tomb, falling down of those seizing Jesus, and resurrection of saints)�.� (VES Letter from the president, 11/21/11)."

So now, it's Habermas. What's it going to be then? Is Geisler going to take the leading scholars on the resurrection who have done invaluable work for the kingdom and let them be shunned by the Christian community because of this? Is there going to be an open letter to Liberty saying they need to get rid of Habermas for his views on Inerrancy?

Is this really worth it? One gets the impression that this is more about Geisler than it is about Inerrancy.

What needs to be done? First, this whole thing needs to be dropped as several have said on Geisler's own Facebook page. There needs to be reconciliation. Note that Mike has been the one offering a face-to-face meeting and has even said that if an apology came forward, all would be forgiven. Mike has simply asked for witnesses to be present. There is nothing unreasonable about this request.

Second, evangelicals needs to speak out on this and not just on the blogosphere. Evangelicals in scholarship and apologetics should speak. We can all sit back some and say "He's going after Licona now and a little bit he's going after Habermas. He won't go after me." How would that be known? Furthermore, even if he wouldn't, he's going after someone else in the body in a way that shouldn't be done and over something that is not worth it.

A silly debate like this is being an embarrassment on the body of Christ. How long will it go on? Will we, the evangelical church who have stood so strong for orthodox beliefs also take a stand for orthodox behavior and how we will handle debates in our midst in a way that avoids bullying?

Let us hope so, for if we cower before those within the church, we will most certainly cower to those without.

In Christ,
Nick Peters

Geisler's article can be found here.

J.P. Holding's response can be found here.

Diablo 3 is here . . .

Xru — Tue, 15 May 2012 21:31:57 GMT

Got my Classic Diablo 3 today. Really cool with a complete Diablo 2 with LOD included on a custom usb drive, art book of Diablo 3, a development DVD and a bunch more.

I'm hoping there are some Diablo 3 enthusiasts here on TWeb and that we can do some gaming in Diablo 3 together.

PM me if anyone is interested.

Bible Lesson about Hebrews 4:15

siliconwafer — Tue, 15 May 2012 16:41:41 GMT

In the near future, I'll be teaching some 3rd and 4th graders about Hebrews 4:15. I will not ignore the context of this verse. I'll let the children know about the context. These are my talking points: Jesus is our high priest, Jesus sympathizes with our weaknesses, Jesus resisted temptation, and Jesus never sinned. Can anyone here think of a good introduction and conclusion that I can use for my lesson? How would you explain what the word "sympathizes" means to 3rd and 4th graders?

Who needs The Onion

Darth Executor — Tue, 15 May 2012 16:00:45 GMT

When reality is just as funny:

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/20...l-biographies/

Quote:

The Heritage Foundation�s Rory Cooper tweeted that Obama had casually dropped his own name into Ronald Reagan�s official biography on www.whitehouse.gov, claiming credit for taking up the mantle of Reagan�s tax reform advocacy with his �Buffett Rule� gimmick. My first thought was, he must be joking. But he wasn�t�it turns out Obama has added bullet points bragging about his own accomplishments to the biographical sketches of every single U.S. president since Calvin Coolidge (except, for some reason, Gerald Ford). Here are a few examples:

:twitch: :rofl:

Article doesn't link to the pages for some reason, so here's the one on Coolidge. Sure enough, Obama's right there at the bottom (in more than one way):

http://www.whitehouse.gov/about/pres...calvincoolidge

NSM Evotional 05/15/2012

GPiper — Tue, 15 May 2012 10:36:25 GMT

A Glory Seed Devotional
Home Sweet PSALMS�

One of the hardest things for us humans to believe is that God doesn�t tell time! He doesn�t have an alarm to wake him up at 6:00 AM. He doesn�t get dressed, go down for breakfast, read the Celestial Daily News, and then head to the office to dispense the blessings of the day.

In some mysteriously and un-understandable way every second of our life he�s aware of our needs and with great patience, wisdom, and diligence he waits for just the right minute to give us the blessings we need.

As King David lived out his life, he always kept God close to his heart even though his life at times did not reflect it. When he made mistakes, when enemies were closing in, when hope was disappearing God would rise up at just the right time and give him victory through forgiveness, through protection, through peace. As you read following Psalm look for the one thing that told David God had also drawn him close to His Heart.

To the choirmaster. A Psalm of David. O LORD, in your strength the king rejoices, and in your salvation how greatly he exults! You have given him his heart's desire and have not withheld the request of his lips. Selah. For you meet him with rich blessings; you set a crown of fine gold upon his head. He asked life of you; you gave it to him, length of days forever and ever. His glory is great through your salvation; splendor and majesty you bestow on him. For you make him most blessed forever; you make him glad with the joy of your presence. For the king trusts in the LORD, and through the steadfast love of the Most High he shall not be moved. (Psalms 21:1-7 ESV)

Did you catch it? Do you know what kept the king going? �For the kings trusts in the Lord,� David knew through experience that God would not fail him. David�s level of trust came at a high price because it came from his mistakes and from the adversities he experienced.

What�s good enough for the king is good enough for you!

God�s not a clock-watcher he�s a you watcher! Trust him to do what is right for you and remember failure is not in the Celestial Dictionary.

Grace and PEACE!
Gary

��
"Be still, and know that I am God. I will be exalted among the nations, I will be exalted in the earth!" (Psalms 46:10 ESV)

Note: Should you want to go back and review this Glory Seed or others you can do so by clicking on this link: http://gloryseeds.wordpress.com/.

Scriptures marked CEV, �Scripture taken from the Contemporary English Version � 1991, 1992, 1995 by American Bible Society, Used by Permission.�

Scripture quotations marked ESV "Are from The Holy Bible, English Standard Version, copyright � 2001 by Crossway Bibles, a division of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved."

Multi-Word Add or Take Away One Letter, Rearrange

Ben Zwycky — Tue, 15 May 2012 08:23:16 GMT

I had some serious fun with Freezbee [While he was still with us :sad: ] with this format a while ago in another thread, but people wanted to return that to the single word version, so here's a thread specifically for multiple words:

Add or take away one letter from the previous person's entry to make a word or combination of words that make some sort of sense together.

E.g.

enormous

iron mouse
morose nuts

In this format, there's enormous room for creativity.

A useful tool to help if you get stuck, since there can be a lot of letters to keep track of:

anagram maker

Let's start with

friendship

Mr. Fix-it Jesus

TwilightPhoenix — Mon, 14 May 2012 21:51:07 GMT

Can Jesus fix you? Let's talk about it.

The link can be found here

The text is as follows:

Can Jesus fix you up? Let's talk about it on Deeper Waters.

How many of you growing up or maybe even still today hear that when you have a burden, you should just take it to the Lord and leave it there.

Any idea how someone is supposed to do that?

I never figured it out. It was like you were supposed to be worrying about something and then when you took it to God, it would have been completely gone from your mind. It would be nice if that happened to more of us, but the reality is is that we know it does not.

Of course, we also know that we all have problems. All of us have issues and a lot of us have a subscription. Am I then saying that if we have Jesus in our lives that that should play no part whatsoever in dealing with our problems? Aren't we regularly encouraged to come to Jesus with our prayers?

Well, yes. Of course we are. I am also not saying that prayer is a waste of time or that knowing Jesus will not help you with your problems. I believe that we Christians should be people of prayer and I believe that knowing Jesus can help you with your problems.

So where is the happy medium?

To begin with, notice that we usually think we come to Jesus and He helps us with our problems and we get on with our lives. Back when I lived in Charlotte, I knew some boys who were twins. They were even groomsmen in my wedding. We were and are good friends and I'd spend Sunday nights with them.

Their Dad happened to be a doctor. I had a good relationship with him, but he was also my wife's doctor. One night I was having really bad stomach pains and my wife, who can't drive, called him up due to the fact that I was screaming. When he got there, he decided I should go to the Emergency Room to which he took us since my wife can't drive (As it turns out, I had to have my gallbladder removed). This doctor was a constant friend to us as we prepared to move here.

What kind of friendship would it have been however if my only talk to him was "Will you help me with my problems?"

Now we do go to doctors for that on an instrumental basis. Sometimes friendships do form. Sometimes they don't. At that point, the doctor does what he does as a service to keep his job and so he can bring home the bacon for his own family.

Jesus is not like that in the Bible. The reason doctors exist is to serve us when we are sick. The reason Jesus exists is not to be our servant. We rather exist to be His servants. The way we live often shows that we have that system in reverse.

When we treat Jesus like this, we are in fact saying "I am coming to you and asking you to fix me up so I can get back to living my own life of ignoring you." This is the same thing many people do when they are in financial stress and suddenly find that they need to turn to God.

The reality is Jesus is under no obligation to fix anyone. There are several good reasons he might not want to. When we treat Jesus as if His purpose for being is to just fix us, we are diminishing His sacrifice and resurrection and all that He has done. We are making the Lord of the universe our personal repairman.

What can we do? One step in this is to realize that if we want Jesus, we need to want Him for more than just what He does. Jesus is Lord and when we come to Him, we are to respect Him.

Many of our problems also need the aid of those who He has gifted. God has gifted many people in the body to be wonderful counselors and we should seek to partake of their services. I myself have seen a counselor a number of times and it's quite helpful. To this day, when there is a problem, I can often call a good friend and get their input. There is nothing anti-Christian about going to other people. In fact, it is anti-Christian to not do so as we are to bear one another's burdens. None of us is to be a Lone Ranger.

What does this mean for us? It means we can accept it if Jesus does not take away our problems. If He does not, we can be sure based on Romans 8 that He is going to use them for our good to conform us to His likeness. We know ultimately He will take away all such problems in the eschaton, but we are not there yet. When the last day comes, we will be free, but until then, our ultimate problem is sin and our way of dealing with it is to receive forgiveness and seek to be more like Him.

The reality is that we have instead shaped Jesus to be our servant. He is not. We are His. Jesus can heal us, but it is not so we can live for ourselves but rather so we can live for Him.

In Christ,
Nick Peters