Consider it all joy when you fall into various trials. You're joking right?

The morning of the day I knew was going to be the most difficult in my life, I woke up with an old hymn on my heart:- “Oh joy that seeks me through the pain, I cannot ask to hide from thee. I trace the rainbow through the rain and feel the promise is not vain, that morn will tearless be.” Next came the memory of a verse from Hebrews speaking of Jesus “who for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross despising the shame.” I felt I was being told that pain is a barrier the other side of which is joy.

I have wrestled with the admonition in the title of this post. I know at some level secular Psychology and even common sense will tell us that “it is no use crying over spilt milk.” Your (my) kicking, screaming and staying in denial is not going to help! So why not just suck it up and get on with life? It all makes perfect sense logically, but our emotions (mine in particular) are not necessarily subject to cold cool and hard logic. Even the best advice is more often than not far easier to say, than it is to do!

But for me, there is One who works in me both in my desire to do and in the wherewithal to do what otherwise would be impossible. I did kick and scream for a while, before I came to the stage where I can say that I am learning to stop fighting the people and circumstances I have no influence over. It's called acceptance. But I can also say that I really am finding that path, and that strangely the deeper the trial the more (with His help) I am able to stay close to the One who comforts and strengthens me. In fact I am even having joy in these times. So no I am not joking and, by the way in case you did not guess it, His name is Jesus!

You make me mad! Really?

How many times do we hear this, but how can someone force you to be mad? Am I without control over my reactions to what others say and do to us. Is there a “mad” gene within us that absolves us of any and all responsibility of taking control over our lives?

The teaching about Jesus being the God man is important here. Being God, Jesus shows what God is like ("If you have seen me you have seen the Father" – gracious, kind, loving full of grace and truth). Being man, Jesus shows us man as God intends man to be (Man? Women are off the hook! :)). He demonstrates grace, kindness, love, gentleness and (in terms of this post) self control (i.e. all the fruit of the Spirit). As thy drive cruel nails through His hands and His feet He prays “Father forgive them, they do not know what they do!” So did they make Him mad? In the moment of greatest pain He is forgiving and looking after His mother. How is this possible? Only by the Spirit, and again part of the fruit of the Spirit is self control.

Certainly we loose our temper at times (I have not yet arrived have you?). Part of the problem is that we have failed to exercise the self control of those who, with constant practice, have by the Spirit overcome the sinful nature. We do not have a choice about what wrong is done to us, but we do have a choice as to how we react to the wrong done to us. More often than not, our response to wrong done is wrong too. We are told to be angry and sin not, and to cease from wrath (getting mad – in particular allowing ourselves to be out of control). We (I) need to change these patterns. As for me, I am not yet what I should be, but thank God I am not what I once was!

On open letter to Emma Teitel concerning Trinity Western's covenant (Maclean's 12th May 2014)

Dear Emma,

Against what I consider my better judgement, I am finding your article on Trinity Western University (TWU) persuasive. I can see clearly, at least from your point of view, why you feel that lawyers graduating from TWU should not be allowed to practice law. The article is well thought out, well written and is perhaps one of the better representatives of your point of view.

On the other hand, I find your rewording of the TWU covenant as “in other words Gays are not welcome,” a bit puzzling. You yourself admit that this covenant has been in place for a long time, long before homosexuality was at the forefront of our thinking in terms of sexuality. Why do you not say heterosexuals are not welcome? Is that not equally logical (illogical)?

While it is certainly true that Gay rights have been trampled and need to be upheld, should we trample the rights of others in an attempt to rectify that? What about the rights of those of us who do not want to be defined by our sexuality, who want to find some shelter from the seductive forces of the current pseudo hyper sexuality of our society? Your article seems to trash any such rights. From the point of view of one who discovered the hard way that promiscuity is destructive in many ways, I also want to promote such rights which are increasingly being trampled.

I did not always felt the way that I feel today. I came to my current position by graduating from the school of hard knocks. I came to see that my self gratification was not about love, but rather selfishness, as I looked back on the trail of destruction and broken hearts (my own and others). Even after I stopped sleeping around, got married and was faithful to my wife, the addictive effects of my former behaviour continued to impact the intimacy in my marriage. I have come to feel that sexuality is a precious gift from God and not to be squandered and devalued outside of a monogamous life long relationship. I want better for my children and grand children, and hope that they can learn from what I now consider to be my wrong moves. Is this not what lies behind the impetus of the non-religious “second virginity” movement? Do not those of us who feel this way have rights too, or must we bow to the god of Political Correctness?

Respectfully Phil Heath

Saved from the penalty, being saved from the power, will be saved from the presence of sin

Been studying Psalm 103 in the fellowship. As far as the east is from the west so far has He removed our transgressions from us. That is even further than the North is from the south (I can keep going east or west forever!) But in what ways are our transgressions (sins) removed? Well first and foremost it means that He has separated me from the penalty (eternal consequences) of my sin. He is just to do this because He Himself has paid the penalty on the cross. I don't fully understand this, but I gladly and gratefully receive it.

When my attitude is right (walking in gratitude for what He has done for me) He is then actively at work also removing (separating) me from the power of my hurts, hang ups and habits. When I confess and choose with His help, the ongoing process of forsaking the wrong things, He is quick to forgive and restore me to full fellowship with Him. In this way He is involved in the complicated process of separating me from the power of my transgressions. I may not yet be what I (and probably you) want me to be, but thank God that, through this process, I am not what I once was! This process (called sanctification) even helps to separate me from my negative attitudes such as ingratitude, unforgiveness etc., all of which tend to drag me down. My sanctification will only be finished when I meet Him face to face.

And there is one more thing that helps with my ongoing growth in Him, and that is the sure hope that it will not always be wrestling with my hurts, hang ups and habits. Since I will be with Him for ever and ever and ever, it is necessary that I submit to this process of refinement, because when I finally get to go home with Him, I will be separated not only from the penalty, not only fully separated from the power, but also fully separated from the very presence of sin. Just think about it, no more hate, no more put downs, no more manipulation, no more grief (He personally will wipe away every tear), no more death, no more separations.

I know that I have not yet arrived (if you know me you will know that too), but on that day the process of sanctification will be complete. Just think all the annoying things about me will disappear! What a hope that up there, I will not even want to do negative things as He, in the blink of eye, changes me. Hallelujah – praise (hallel) the Lord (jah)!

Repentance requires greater intimacy with God than with our sin

It is a quotation from Rosaria Champagne Butterfield a former lesbian convert to Christ, who considers herself healed. But what does she mean?

Christianity is not primarily about rules and regulations, though they do play a part. Christianity is first and foremost about relationship with God. Jesus himself said as much in His high priestly prayer to the Father where He said “this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.” There is a reality about relationship. You cannot have a relationship with something or someone who does not exist, but those of us who have known true intimacy know it's reality, be it an earthly or Heavenly relationship. The problem though is that our passions get in the way, at least mine do, and I think Rosaria's too.

Passions are a lot like appetites. Those of us who gain weight by even looking at deserts know full well that left to our own devices we would soon become as big as a house. What seems to happen is that the more we indulge, the grater our capacity to indulge. I am told that when we eat a lot, our stomachs stretch, and that creates greater hunger pangs. Part of what we need to do when trying to loose weight is to starve ourselves a little so that our stomachs (and hence our appetites) shrink.

I have experienced the same thing with desires that lead me away from God. The more I feed the desire either by indulging it, or by fantasizing, the further away from God that I feel, and the less real my relationship (with God) feels. In order to get back to the intimacy with Him, I need to starve my inapropriate passions. I need His help for this, and it is help He freely gives when we ask. The point is that I seem to be a leaky vessel (for the Holy Spirit). But I miss Him when I am not close, and I need to exercise discipline to return (repent). I think this is at least part of what Rosaria is saying!

Is there a heaven and a hell?

I was in jail (no not as an inmate, they didn't catch me yet :) ) when the above question came up. I was there as part of an alpha team and we were having this discussion with the “guests” (captive audience :) ). It's not a question we talk a lot about on the outside, but prison (and the hard knocks of life) have a way of focusing the mind. My response was that if God exists and He is just, there has to be a heaven and a hell. I mean death is not good enough for the likes of Hitler, Bashar Al-Assad and a lot more (probably including myself!).

Someone voiced the opinion that Heaven and hell are here on earth. It seems to me that there is something in this, I mean if we remove all the bad out of life, it gives us a glimpse (probably a poor one) of what heaven is like, and if we remove all the good out of life we likely have a glimpse of hell. These can be uncomfortable thoughts, but for me there is comfort in the gospel which tells us that if we admit that we are wrong (easier to do in the pen) and turn our lives over to Him, there is forgiveness and provision for life in all its fullness in the here and now, and even fuller in the hereafter.

Can questions be wrong?

During my daily readings today, I came across a question by the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection (that is why they were sad-u-c :) sorry I can resist anything by temptation). The question boiled down to asking in the resurrection whose wife would a woman widowed and remarried be. Jesus answers “Do you not greatly err because you do know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God?” Jesus is essentially saying “Your question is wrong.” When questions are wrong, it is usually because of ignorance or because they cloak a hidden assumption. “Have you stopped beating your wife yet?” is a much a statement as it is a question. It's hard to answer that one well, no matter what I say I condemn myself!

I find this a lot in discussing God. “Can you prove to me that God exists?” If I say “no,” I am dismissed because most of our society has bought the lie that only things that can be verified scientifically are valid. But you cannot prove scientifically that you were in bed last night, nor can you prove scientifically that love is real. We are however the poorer if we live our lives as if things that cannot be proved scientifically are false. And actually nobody does. We all act in faith in something, or we would not get on a bus or a plane! If I say “yes” (to the above question), and give one of the classical proofs of God's existence, I am met with such statements as “all truth is relative.” I do need to say though, that in my experience that line is only brought out when the other person is starting to loose the argument!

Most questions by skeptics involving God, have some hidden presupposition. The last question above assumes (and assumes wrongly) that scientific proof is the only valid proof. If this were the case many criminals would go free who should not go free. What I am saying is that the testimony of a witnesses is held up in court as a valid “proof.” It does need to be examined and tested, and this involves the character of the witness. This by the way, is one way we can find God, through the testimony of credible witnesses. Perhaps you don't know any. In my book that would be a valid excuse. But hey, I'm not God (ask my kids :)).