A modern parable

Did you ever hear of someone who made themselves really evil, but some people still stand up for them? Adolf Hitler and Josef Stalin would be two of the most abominable human devils the world has seen, but they both had devoted female partners and other followers loyal to them. And there are plenty of less famous examples: brutal, evil and violent individuals, gangsters, underworld figures, who have loyal friends and partners. Sometimes if a person is asked, how could they stand by someone like that, they answer 'You don't know them like I do.'
Well it might be good to see the good in someone, but it can be criminal stupidity to deny the evil that they do, as well.
Eva Braun married Adolf Hitler shortly before their deaths. It would be informative to know how she could be near someone who did what he did.
It seems Adolf Hitler was known for being kind to animals, and children - unless they were Jewish, Gypsy, or handicapped and consigned to euthenasia or the death camps. Josef Stalin had a loyal wife and several children. Did the woman who shared Stalin's home life know about the gulags?
The issue here is, can you relate to a person only according to their good side, or is it dishonest to do so? Does the bad they do exist inseparably with the good?
A classic modern parable here is Robert Louis Stephenson's work, "The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde." The terms "Jekyll and Hyde" are now part of the English language. That story shows the tragedy of it. It came about that, when Mr Hyde finally met his end, Dr Jekyll died with him. It couldn't happen any other way. Because they were both parts of the same person, to stop Hyde doing what he did, Jekyll had to go down too. Edward Hyde did gruesome and foul things like stomp on little children. Henry Jekyll saved peoples' lives. But to stop Hyde killing people, Henry Jekyll had to be locked up (or killed) with him. It was impossible to have Jekyll without also having Hyde. And that is both the tragedy of the good in a person being destroyed by the bad; and the impossibility of only recognizing the good in any person, and denying the bad.
Hyde is a fictitious figure, and an extreme case, but the point still stands. A human can be destroyed entirely if the bad in them is too severe. Having a good side doesn't make it all right. In controlling Hyde, you must also lock up Jekyll, because wherever he is, Hyde is there too.
That story seems to me a modern parable. It shows something about the human condition and life. You can't let a person be seen only by their good side, and ignore the bad if it becomes too severe. We all have a down side, but most people keep it under control, or the world would be impossible to live in. But the sinful side can't be ignored. That is how it GETS out of control.
It shows something about the truth of God and Divine Judgement, as well. I believe R.L. Stephenson was a Christian, and his inspiration for the story may be from his faith. God cannot ignore our bad side and only see our good, because He is Truth. That is why we can't attain salvation by our own deeds and works. We have a Henry Jekyll side, but also an Edward Hyde side. The two are part of the one individual. You can't lock up Hyde without Jekyll being locked up as well. So God can't admit the Henry Jekyll to His kingdom without the Hyde entering at the same time. His solution? Take on Himself the punishment for what Hyde does in us all. Suffer excruciatingly on the Cross and bury it. Then the evil we do is paid for.
But simply on our own merits, we can't enter God's peace and kingdom because no matter how much Jekyll we might claim, we can't deny the Hyde. We have to be forgiven. We need to remember that.

What's happening?

I wihs I knew what to think about the American Christian missionaries arrested in Haiti. The claim is that they wanted to rescue orphaned children from disaster and give them shelter and safety. The plan was to have them adopted in the U.S. If that is what they intend, then it sounds to be humane and good. But now the accusation is that some of the children were not real orphans, and the missionaries have been accused of child trafficking. Can anyone tell me what is happening? It's disturbing to see Christian brothers and sisters in distress, and being locked up in a country like Haiti could be a nightmare. Putting it bluntly, that nation has a bad reputation for corruption and it's in a state of chaos as well, after the earthquake-not that they can be blamed for that! So I've prayed that they will be upheld and that the truth will be fairly stated. That's the point, though: is it a case of Christians doing the Lord's work, and being persecuted by the world, which resents what Christians do sometimes. Or are they misunderstood, and being misrepresented? Or did those people really take some liberties with Haitian people that they should not have done?
It is a great humane calling to help those in need. There really are some Haitian orphan children who badly need such help. We have some young Haitians in Australia, adopted by Australian families, and two brothers recently expressed their gratitude for it. Still, it sometimes happens that those claiming to help get rather heavy-handed and presume to do things without making sure their help is wanted. So that is what I'm wondering: did these missionaries set out to follow God's calling and find their actions were misunderstood, or did they get carried away and overstep the mark?
I should pray for their well-being no matter what. I've made too many mistakes myself to reproach anyone else. It's just that I'd be glad to know what's happening. If anyone reads this and can tell me more, I'd be glad to hear. Blessings.

Forever

All lives on Earth shall pass and end,
In few or many years,
But though the earthly bodies walk
No more this vale of tears,
The minds that know, the souls that feel
Lie not where our bones fall.
When Jesus Christ comes back to Earth
They shall rise, one and all.

Some mockers ridicule Christians for using what they call a euphemism, a word meant to make something more pleasant than it is. They describe it as escapism, saying that Christians are unable to face up to the fact of death. To them, it sounds brave and honest to call death by that name, and to talk bluntly about it saying that when you're gone, you're gone: get used to it.
The mistake is theirs. To say that someone has 'passed on' might sound gentler than saying 'died', but the reason for putting it that way is to be accurate about what happens. When a human spirit leaves that person's body, then the body ceases to function, and that can give the appearance of ceasing to exist if you only accept the existence of what you can see. But that spirit has not ceased to exist. It never will. That spirit has gone somewhere else. It waits, and at some future time the Maker of this world is going to come back to it, in One of His Three Persons. That person is God the Son, who we know as Jesus Christ. So it is actually saying it like it is when you talk about 'passing on'. The real essence of the person, their mind and feelings and consciousness, have passed on from this Earth to the next stage of their existence. So it is no euphemism. It is stark truth. I say 'stark' because some people don't want to know! It might be easier for the scoffers if they did cease to be at all. Then there would not be a time to stand before the Throne of God. There would be no need to have to admit that they rejected Him, and trashed the priceless gift He held out.
On the positive side, if people find comfort in saying 'passed on', the God bless them. Those who left this Earth in faith and believing are waiting down the line.
Like anyone else, I've been bereaved from time to time. The longer you live the more it has happened. So like so many others I can feel the pure joy of knowing that we will meet again, those of us still here and those of us who have fallen asleep in the Lord and are waiting. The time is coming when there will be no more pain of parting.
Human beings seem to think that what they can't see they don't have to think about. That might be why they think if they throw something in the sea it no longer has any effect on anything. "Out of sight, out of mind," is an admission of the mind's tricks on itself rather than a sensible statement of fact about life. But few people see their own brain, yet they believe they have on. Likewise we can't see our own heart, yet we know we have one. Okay, so the clever cynics believe that the existence of the heart can be proved. They then challenge the believer to prove the existence of God. Enter the Word in Romans 1 verse 20: "For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen,". God's reality is clear if you look at the world with an open mind and heart.
That is why we worship and celebrate Him. He didn't leave us to perish and return just to dust. And He didn't leave us to suffer what we bring on ourselves. He rescued all who believe and gives us everything - without end. Forever.

Not the end.

Though when death comes, and we decay,
And our bones scattered be,
Though they may lie beneath the sky,
Or covered by the sea,
When back to Earth Lord Jesus comes,
The Holy One descend,
Then all who lived shall rise and see -
The grave is not the end!

That's not a masterpiece, but it came to me recently. It's worth reminding myself. John Donne put it in far better form when he wrote "Death be not proude". He tells death to give up its pretensions. It is not a condition which captures people. It is an event which they (we!) go through. The spirit leaves the body. And when that happens, even though physical remains may be scattered and lost, the spirit remains intact and alive. It is immortal. Sometime in the future the day will come when Jesus returns to Earth, and then....
Some years ago I heard a body builder who did some male modelling say: "If you've got something, why not show it off? We'll all be dust in two hundred years."
He reckons, does he? Some people might be better off if we were only unfeeling dust. Then there would be no consequences to face.
When the souls of all who ever lived rise from bodily death, we stand before God and it will be known: who believed God, believed Jesus, and was given the collossal blessing of pardoning for all wrong doing? And who thought it was all rubbish, and ignored Jesus' calling? Come to that, who am I to get up on a high horse about it? The answer: someone who was saved, even though I did not deserve it; and the least I can do is tell anyone else who will listen.
We won't be dust. The greatest part of our existence will start then, and it goes forever. The grave is NOT the end. It is the beginning. So we need to get it right. We need to know how we escape the hurt anger of God asking,'what did you do with the life I gave you?'
I can still cringe inwardly thinking of some of the stupid, mean, selfish or plain nasty things I've done in life, and ask God for forgiveness. It's probably a good thing, so I don't get complacent and forget that I need pardoning - big time. And it would even be vain to talk as if my sins were worse than lots of other peoples'. But waiting beyond this life is either non-ceasing joy or non-ceasing regret. The grave is only the departing point from this earth. When the women went to Jesus' tomb to find His body the angel said that He was not there, because He had risen. Now Jesus is a special and unique case; but He made the way for resurrection, and in a sense it is true to say at any persons' grave that they are not there. The earthly remains are still there, but the real them, the spirit, their real identity is not. It has passed on.
A Christian brother I met recently shared this. The letters BIBLE can stand for
Basic
Instructions
Before
Leaving
Earth.
For our own good we need to know certain things before we do so: who Jesus is, and why we need to know and follow Him.
That way the grave leads to entry to God's Kingdom, not to rejection from it.
The grave is not the end.
That is why Jesus came - to tell us.
That's why we celebrate Christmas. He came to save us.
Blessings.

Check your focus.

Someone was having a bit of a grumble about our church recently. They asked me if I felt there was enough leadership in it. Their view is that the church pastor is a leader and should lead.
I didn't have an arguement, just heard him out. But I've heard those comments before and it makes me wonder: do people sometimes get the focus a bit wrong, and look to the church, the human congregation and the pastor, for things that should come from the Holy Spirit?
Yes, a church pastor has a leadership role in their church, so do the elders. But it can be a mistake, I believe, if the pastor or any group within the church take too much on themselves in telling other people what to do. Some churches, especially those ones that might be called sects, have gained a bad reputation for being too heavy handed and controlling in their attitude to their congregations. They may be assuming an authority that only belongs to God. The human leaders of the church are there to teach and guide, but the ultimate Lordship is God's alone. And the most critical leadership for any Christian does not come from another mere human being. It comes from the Holy Spirit dwelling within you. The Spirit's guidance goes hand in hand with the Scriptures. If anyone claims they have been told 'in the spirit' to do or say something, and that something contradicts the teachings of the Bible, then it is a false leading. That is why we need both. But if human leaders gain or claim too much influence, too much power in running other peoples' lives then you get the Jim Jones mistake. It seems Jones acted and said things contrary to what the Bible actually teaches, and his followers did not see it because they looked to him for things that they should have found from the Written Word and the guidance of the Holy Spirit in prayer. Some more mainstream churches can lead their followers astray, also, when in an attempt to be 'modern' they compromise the Word.
The moral of the story is, do not mistake the mere human body of the church, its pastor or any one else for He who is not of this flesh and world. The leadership of a church should always be subject to that limit. Ultimately we do not rely on the human members of the church, although it is good to join in worship and seek the guidance of others where it can help. But too much emphasis on leadership in a church can lead people astray. I heard of one pastor who told some of his congregants that if they left the church they would break the bond with the Holy Spirit. He as good as said that they could only communicate with God through him. That man was, I think, going way over the top claiming that. And all humans are fallible and imperfect. No human should claim the mantle of God in holding too much power or authority over others. We need to remember that when we talk about church leadership. Its real leader is not the pastor, but the God who calls him and all of us too.

"Expelled": They just don't get it!

Watching "Expelled" I recall one of the non-believers saying that he and other rationalists don't want to 'abolish religion' as he put it. What he thinks will happen is that science will gradually cause the disappearance of religion. In his words, let people have their religion if it means getting together and having fun. But as time passes there will be more scientific discovery and religion will just fade away. He talked about 'a little bit more science, a little bit less religion, a little bit more science, a little bit less religion' until it simply doesn't have any followers anymore. That speaker, and others like him, just don't get it. They do not understand what faith and belief mean to people. Perhaps he perceives churches as social organizations or old-fashioned cultural things that have outlived their use. In fact if a person has a real faith, a really genuine belief in God, then all science does is reveal more of the genius of God. Or when science tries to prove the non-existence of God it gets caught out breaking its own rules, namely accepting what the evidence shows honestly instead of using it to suit itself. Some of the laws of science, like the Laws of Thermodyamics, are evidence against evolution. One of those laws says that things tend to go from a state of order to a state of disorder. That is the exact opposite of what evolutionary theory suggests, that things become more ordered and complex.
If science was going to stifle interest in faith it would have happened decades ago. It did not because even though scientific investigation can explain HOW things happen, that does not explain WHY things happened. Finding meaning in life is not just a matter of understanding what happens, it also requires us to see a point to it. From a purely rational viewpoint, an atheist viewpoint, humans exist like animals to propogate their own species. All that they do just serves to prolong their existence so that they will have more offspring. A belief in God gives you a reason to go on existing.
Discoveries made seem to give humans more power, so that they can start deluding themselves they've made God unnecessary, or become as powerful. So then people learn the hard way to respect His place. When antibiotics were discovered, some humans thought they had the power to scorn God's rules. They could control disease. Instead, antibiotic resistant strains began to appear. With discoveries enabling contraception, preventing pregnancy and STDs, some arrogant unbelievers thought they could disdain the rules God made. Then they found out the hard way that contraception can leave people sterile when they want to conceive, and STDs became antibiotic resistant. When science learned what was needed to build the Titanic, some FOOL wrote 'Even God can't sink this ship'. History records how clever that comment was. So humans think they can displace God by learning the things they do, and find they are just as helpless before Him as their ancestors thousands of years ago. They just managed to hide the fact with all their technological rinky-tinks. How humiliating!
The longer we go, the more we have to face the fact that there are things we cannot do, and ways in which only a superior intelligence has the answers. But there, one of the atheist speakers in "Expelled" ended up admitting that there must be some intelligent design in the beginning of life - and said it must be from another planet! That's the old von Danniken stuff, "Chariots of the Gods."
Some people will talk about men from Mars before they accept the place of God in this universe. But to those who believe, the reality of God is only shown more and more by human attempts to scorn Him. Religion will not disappear in the face of scientific discovery. The more science finds out and tells us, the less it will have answers to the question "Why are we here?"
Jesus Himself said, some people will hear but not understand, see but not believe, because their wicked hearts are hardened.
Jesus is eternal. So is the Holy Spirit, reaching out to us. Science can't equal that. Scientific discovery will all become redundant when Heaven and Earth pass away, but Jesus' words do not pass away.

Self-contradiction

I've finally seen "Expelled," after it came to the cinema here. So that's why it caused a stir! Scary stuff! People who dare even mention the idea of Intelligent Design find the thought police falling on them, and their jobs lost. A new version of the Spanish Inquisition, in which people were victimised for uttering ideas that those in power did not approve of. And here's the classic irony. The people behind the persecution claim to believe in freedom of thought and speech. Humbug!
How many cases were there? I'll have to see it again sometime and take notes. Academics, researchers and journalists found themselves in trouble because they even referred to the idea in passing. It's fear, partly. Some people who consider themselves the judges of what is right are scared rigid of the idea that there may be a God or any such being who could have made the universe and life in it take the forms that they did. There is no reason to be so ferocious about stifling an idea unless they are frightened of it.
The excuse used is that it leads to a belief in some 'religious' teaching, whether it be Christian, Jewish or any other. For that reason, they have to stifle any suggestion that life is not a gigantic accident and series of ongoing accidents called mutations. The opposition to religion is justified by saying that it creates division and starts wars. The claim there is that an atheistic, secular, 'logic and science based society is safer. Oh really? Did anyone here about the horrific human rights violations that occurred in the Soviet Union and the euphemistically misnamed "Peoples Republic" of China under Mao Zedong? The gulags? Mao's purges? The secret police state that existed in East Germany? So that is what the atheists do when they set up a society, do they? And that is safe?
I feel like telling some 'rational thinkers' who claim they offer a better way that people like them are the least likely to inspire my confidence. A world ruled by the hard-line leftists I've known would be a cold and ruthless place, lacking in the better, warmer side of humanity. That is to say, it would reflect them!
The problem is partly that to make a lie seem true you have to make sure everyone believes it. You can't have some bright spark speaking up and saying that the emperor has no clothes. So dissent has to be squashed if some dictator wants to set up their great new world based on science, rationality and atheism. Hence the blood on the hands of people like Lenin, Stalin and others. They spout about freedom of thought and proceed to deny freedom of thought.
It would alarm me if I didn't remember the words of the Psalm: "Do not fret because of evil men, or be envious of those who do wrong, for like the grass they will soon pass away." (Psalm 37, verses 1 and 2.) Again, "Do not fret when men succeed in their ways, when they carry out their evil schemes." (verse 7) "For evil men will be cut off, but those who hope in the Lord will inherit the land." (verse 9).
One of the reasons I became a Christian was a complete loss of hope that mere human beings could be relied on or make the world a good place - and that includes myself. I could see the weakness and sin in me.
Those who deny God His place will not only not succeed, but will earn His retribution.
As for our household, we will serve God. And may He shield and protect us.