In Defense of the Online Church

A priori argumentation assumes definitions and therefore can be somewhat dissatisfying. Certain presuppositions anchor the propositions and if interpreted in the manner they are presented become a compelling foundation but if interpreted differently from the intention of the arguer create a dissonance that destroys the entire framework of the argument. In short, if I didn't believe it, to begin with, it'll hardly convince me to believe it after the fact.

I, not unlike many of you I'm sure, have read a litany of articles both short and long, weighty and light, humorous and stern, from the young and the old, from the conservative to the perhaps less so on the weaknesses and difficulties of doing church in an online format. I italicize because I feel no matter how strongly these well-meaning authors distance themselves from that concept, they ultimately fall prey to the underlying implications. At the end of reading each one, I am left with that a priori taste in my mouth. A fundamental proposition to everyone's argument is "gathering cannot be done virtually" and then they proceed to show that the church must gather. That being a local church is being a local gathering. That oversight of the Elders must be in person. That the sacraments are inherently physical and must meet certain parameters to be legitimate, including personal presence. All of which are compelling arguments if "gathering cannot be done virtually."

I finish these articles and immediately feel the urge to call the author and ask, "why?" Their explanations in the articles themselves range from "there's something missing" to "of course we know it's not the same" which serves perfectly well for convincing someone who already agrees with them. Hardly airtight logic or Theological proof. More personal conversations typically end up with me being kindly referred to as a "semantic" and the same general "feeling" of something missing, something unachievable in a virtual setting, being the shifting sand of a foundation for the argument. Thinking about it has finally burst into writing, so I present my defense of the Online Church.

What is gathering? Mirriam-Webster defines it by linking to two other words: Assembly and Meeting. Assembly uses gathering in its definition so that's not necessarily that helpful but its "a company of persons gathered for deliberation and legislation, worship, or entertainment." In this definition, common intent is the key to an assembly. Meeting adds an element: "an act or process of coming together." So that implies movement from not together to together. In both of these cases, physical presence is not specified. A virtual gathering can be both intentional and moves from not together (video call not connected) to together. A common proof text is Hebrews 10:25 (ESV) "not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near." I'm no Greek scholar but I can look things up with the best of them, that is ἐπισυναγωγὴν and is translated "assembly" by the KJV and other times "assembling together" and according to Bible Hub has an implication of a complete group. Again, maybe physically is assumed but an ancient near-eastern thinker wouldn't even be able to conceive of a virtual gathering so the absence of an insistence on physical presence is not evidence for either concept. 

Commands to the church in Scripture are given to individual groups with the ultimate result of being instructional, binding, edifying, and directed towards the rest of the Body in the Universal sense. I in no way deny the logistical and Theological importance of the local assembly. Each autonomous unit is a relationship-center of believers who worship, serve, and minister through the structure and agency of the local body. So, what does attending church physically provide that attending it virtually does not? I'd contend nothing of spiritual importance. It can provide a sense of separation from the day-to-day which could enhance the ability of a worshipper to "get in the frame of mind" to worship. Which is all well and good, as long as we don't lose the fact that we should be always be worshipping! We fall into the trap of compartmentalizing our lives and then when circumstances mash our neatly sorted divisions together we get out of sorts. Maybe this is just the kickstart the American church needs to remember our responsibilities as worshippers don't begin and end on Sundays?

What about the ordinances? Can someone be Baptized virtually? It would certainly be odd. Picture it, the Pastor on one screen, the convert on another, the Pastor recites his favorite Baptismal passage as the convert submerges in his bathtub. Not a particularly convenient or effective ceremony, but is it wrong? If the convert is following Christ's example, the process is observed in as public a setting as a local church assembly (not that public really), and its purpose is to identify with Christ and join the local membership I see no reason it could not be called a Baptism. It is reasonable to argue that the individual cannot Baptize himself, but is it really the being physically submerged into the water that makes it Baptism? Immersion is by definition submersion, I don't suggest the modality isn't important but it derives its importance from its meaning - not its meaning from its form. Hence in extreme circumstances, full immersion may not be entirely necessary while preserving the intent and message of the act of obedience. As such, in an extreme circumstance that prevents physical presence, Baptism is not such a rigid physical ritual to be impossible.

How about the Lord's Supper? Can the Eucharist be observed virtually? This, to me, is much easier to answer. Of course, it can. Generally, I'd say the Lord's Supper is designed to represent the unity of the body both in the identification as recipients of Christ's atoning sacrifice and in the longing for His imminent coming and the Marriage Feast celebration. What about physically being in a room changes the experience of the Lord's Supper? Are the nursery workers no longer members of the Body? If it is a physical manifestation of grace and the elements must be blessed by the ordained clergy and each member must take a piece of the same loaf and a sip from the same cup to physically receive a spiritual blessing than sure, can't be done virtually. St. Bernard's can't hold Mass virtually, or at least shouldn't by their own rules. But the benefits of The Lord's Supper are not given to me by the elements or the Pastors or the holding hands and singing Blessed Be the Tie That Binds. All of those things are physical representations of spiritual benefits, representations that can be replicated in a virtual setting.

Is physical church attendance preferable? Certainly! I enjoy physical presence more than virtual presence. I am less distracted and forced to prepare physically and mentally to a higher degree to be in another person's presence. However, with time and adjustment, if the current way of life continues or gets worse this will change. We will grow more comfortable in the virtual space and the negatives will fade. Ultimately, the outcry against virtual church smacks of sacramentalism and closes off local churches from a modality of ministry that could be explored. Perhaps the best thing that could come of this difficult time would be an expansion of The Church's presence in the online world. We live in the digital age and the Church is called to minister to people where they are.

What My Wedding Band Means

Divorce. It's ugly, it's prevalent, and there's a growing sense that it's permissible in the church.

Let me interject that I am not writing this as a response to any particular person going through a divorce, though I have several friends and acquaintances that have recently or will be soon.

The Biblical arguments for the permissibility of divorce are not my battleground here. I have a different approach.

Why get a divorce?

Offense intended, unless you are in physical danger, there is no good reason.

I say offense intended, because I have experienced the bitterness questioning a divorce can stir up. I know the pain is real. I believe the emotions are strong. But I also believe there is an undercurrent of our faith which must be stronger.

Why get a divorce? Because forgiveness is not possible.

Really? Forgiveness is not possible? I have it easy. My wife is fantastic. She's beautiful, she's smart, she's a wonderful mother and she loves me despite of myself. Its easy to forgive her when she slips up. She hasn't done anything significant enough to warrant even the little bits of anger I've shown towards her. Divorce? Certainly out of the question!

But what if she cheated? What if I found her weaving a web of deceit and lust defiling my home and my bed? What if she intentionally hurt my child? What if she gambled away my hard earned money or stupidly lost our savings to a con? Could I forgive her?

If not, then divorce is the only way to move on. I've heard it said, "I just can't forgive that person for doing that to me." The hurt, anger, bitterness, and despair billowing out of the divorcee's heart like smoke. The pain blinding them to the only thing that really matters.

God forgave.

My wife cheated on me? I killed Jesus, I think I can forgive her. My wife lost my life savings on a stupid credit scam? I nailed the perfect Son of God to a cross, I think I can forgive her. My wife put the life of my precious son in danger? I took God's only Son from Him and slew Him, I think I can forgive her.

Hosea the prophet was called to take a harlot for a wife. Why? Because God was using their marriage as a symbol for His relationship with Israel. If God had the same response to unfaithfulness some Christians do, the book of Hosea would read very differently. Hosea would probably stone Gomer and then prophesy about all the horrible things about to happen to Israel. Instead, judgment for sin is followed by FORGIVENESS! Salvation! Restoration!

Paul describes the marriage relationship as a picture of Christ relationship with the church. He says the husbands are to love their wives as Christ loved the church. If Christ loved the church the way some Christians do, we'd be out on the street and Christ would be looking for a new lover. But Christ gave His life for the church. He died that we might live. How utterly selfish is someone who can't forgive?

How about no-fault divorce? Just a mutual parting ways. "We just weren't happy" "I married the wrong person" "I didn't know this person I married"

God is not in the business of making mistakes. The mindset of what marriage is meant to be has eroded into fluff. You just weren't happy? How do you think Hosea felt? God told him to marry Gomer. The laziness and selfishness of the no-fault divorce almost didn't even make this article. The ring on my finger is both a reminder to be faithful, of my wife's faithfulness and, most importantly, of God's faithfulness to us. For Christians to abandon each other for such a pathetic reason as "compatibility" casts a shadow on the church's presentation of God. Trust Him that the person you've found yourself promised to is exactly who He intended. Then you might find that happiness you so overvalue. 

I would go so far as to say, their are 0 scenarios in which divorce is the right course of action. But, I must listen to the same arguments I'm giving. If a divorcee wants forgiveness, they are just as entitled to it as I am, despite their inability to give it. How awesome is that?

Life isn't about being comfortable. It isn't about being happy. Its not even about being good. Its about the glory of the indescribable God. Which response brings God more glory? Forgiveness or Divorce?

SS Lesson 8-4-13 Prov 9:1-18

As I mentioned last week, with my Dad in Argentina I'm teaching his Proverbs Sunday School class. Last week seemed to go well, I made it a full 40 min and then squeezed 5 more with questions/discussion meaning we dismissed only 10 min early. Not bad seeing as last time I taught I was done 15 min in. This week we're in Proverbs chapter 9 which is only 18 verses long, so I'm sure it will be short. However, going to try to be as long-winded as possible and stretch it out. We'll see how it goes. Once again, if you're going to be there Sunday and want to be surprised, now is the time to go do something else, otherwise this is what I'll be speaking about.

Outline and most thoughts are my Dad's.

After hammering the benefits of Wisdom versus the consequences of Folly for 8 straight chapters, this one seems a little bit "superfluous" as my Dad puts it. I mean, surely we get the point. But, instead of assuming we do, Solomon paints one more word picture describing the contrast of Wisdom and Folly. It is organized into 3 sections, each with 6 versus, laid out as such: The Feast of Wisdom, The Responses to Wisdom's Appeal, and The Feast of Folly. As we noted last week, Solomon leaves the worst for last so that the warning of Folly lingers longest.


I. The Feast of Wisdom (vs 1-6)
  A. Her Preparations (vs. 1-3)
     1. Her House is Ready
        "seven pillars" - there is no specific meaning here that anyone has determined as of yet. As Dad notes, we aren't describing a particularly well-built house or a particular type of house from Solomonic Israel. However, it is ok to numerologize the number 7 and suggest the house is perfect. Wisdom lives in a perfect place. The kind of place we should want to live in.
    2. Her meal is ready
        meat and wine with spices, would be the ultimate meal - just like today, a big steak, a fancy drink and no expense spared on the seasonings
        this doesn't mean Wisdom is a meal. Obviously its referring to how it satisfies, it provides all we need and leaves us lacking nothing. We live a fulfilling life when we embrace Wisdom and feast on its meaty-ness.
    3. Her invitations are ready
        As we saw in chapter 8, she's out where we can see her. She's crying from the hilltops, not a subtle message, a loud, open, transparent one. This leads to the fact its all-inclusive. Everyone is invited, personally invited to partake in the feast.
  B. Her Invitation (vs 4-6)
     1. Who?
         The simple and those lacking understanding - everyone without Wisdom
     2. What does she invite them to do?
         Eat the bread, drink the wine - enjoy the feast, taste of Wisdom, to learn, not just to sample it but to sit down and fully partake of its benefits
     3. Why?
         Wisdom is offering life, she contrasts it from foolishness. She wants a decision to be made, reject foolishness and come partake of my feast, this is an either-or

II. Responses to Wisdom's Appeal (vs 7-12)
   A. The Scoffer's Response (vs 7-8)
       1. This is the fool who has heard this all before, he's hardened his heart, he mocks Wisdom openly to draw others away from it.
       2. His rejection is to be avoided, stay away from the scoffer, Christ taught us not to toss pearls before swine (Matt 7:6), arguing is not profitable. I had to opportunity several times to travel down to State Street in Madison while at college to hand out tracts and speak with the people walking up and down that busy street. Sometimes very profitable discussions occurred. Often they didn't. One night a friend of mine handed a tract to a guy and he stopped to talk. He had a blue Mohawk, several tattoos and piercings and looked rather disinterested in the actual discussion and more interested in getting a laugh. My buddy, Marc, launched into the Gospel and a little ways in casually asked, or more suggested, people would care what happened to them after they died. He cut in responding, "why should I care? I'll be dead. I couldn't care less." Marc objected, suggesting that the same thing that makes us care about whether we take our next breath in this life will not leave us in the next. He shot back that he didn't care about his next breath here either. I responded wrong to this, scoffing myself, and said, "So really, you don't care if you die and turn into a bird, or die and have to watch reruns of Seinfeld forever, or die and just sit in darkness forever or..." But he turned and walked off before I could finish. That was dumb, and it was casting pearls before swine. Once we had presented the Gospel, trying to argue along presuppositional lines was going to go nowhere. He was a scoffer and responding in kind would not help anybody.
   B. The Wise Man's Response (vs 8-11)
        1. Unlike the scoffer, the wise man desires disagreement and instruction. He wants to get smarter and he knows delving into the marketplace of ideas will grow his Wisdom. As Christians we should not shy away from learning. We should shy away from spending undue time diving into the depths of the philosophies of man, but being smarter is always better. More specifically, the wise man is looking to live better. He wants to improve his life. He knows others will know better, he knows the Bible will have better ways. He is not arrogant, he does not suppose he's figured it out.
        2. This Wisdom in inexhaustible, the wise man can search wisdom from the day he is born to the eons of eternity and forever be gaining. It says, "teach a just man and he will increase in learning" This is already a just man, yet he can always take more teaching and always can increase in learning.
        3. Again we see the theme. This Wisdom = The Fear of the Lord
        4. As I mentioned last week, we can learn about and increasingly "fear the Lord" for eternity. This is the inexhaustible nature of wisdom, it is contained in the Being of the eternal God
    C. The Contrast (12)
        1. "If thou be wise, thou shalt be wise for thyself" means wisdom is rewarding. It is apparently an extremely literal translation. The satisfaction of wisdom is often merely the attainment of it.
        2. So yes, Wisdom is the Fear of the Lord and ultimately we seek it to please Him, but we also receive the most blessing in our lives from it
        3. However, the scoffer thinks he's getting other people to come down to his level, but in the end its his own life that's in shambles. Solomon will describe this later when he says "The way of the fool is hard"

III. The Feast of Folly
     A. Her Character (vs 13-15)
         1. Lady Folly, like Wisdom, has prepared us a "feast"
         2. This is the same Folly we've seen before - loud, undisciplined, ignorant - she is intentionally evil and deceptive
         3. Unlike previously, this time she's out in the open, she's trying to mimic Wisdom - Dad suggests the picture is like a crossroads with Folly on one corner and Wisdom on the other. A decision must be made, they're both making their case, now we must decide.
         4. The passengers in verse 15 are just people going by, they have no clue what's in store, like the simple man in Chapter 7.
     B. Her Invitation (vs 16-17)
          1. Like Wisdom, Folly calls out to the fools, the simple, the people who haven't chosen Wisdom already.
          2. She appeals directly to our sin nature - stolen water is sweet, bread eaten in secret is delicious. Its not the water and the bread which are satisfying, its the manner in which we get them. However, that satisfaction is fleeting, false and damning. This is precisely what the adulterous woman said in her passages. No one will ever know, You can get away with it. Instead of getting a massive delicious feast at Wisdom's table, the fool is happy to sneak around in the dark gnawing on some stolen bread. Why? Because he's getting away with it. He's deceived into thinking because "he did it" its better than what God has provided for him.
     C. The Consequences of Accepting Folly's Invitation (vs 18)
          1. The same consequences from the adulteress.
          2. Foolishness is death. It is not only losing one's life but also losing the joy, fulfillment and purpose of that life. As Dad says, its a macabre picture of people gathered around a rotting meal already dead but not realizing it.

Do you get the idea now? Chapters 1-9 of Proverbs have one central theme. Will you, (will Solomon's son), choose Wisdom and her innumerable benefits? Will you choose the Fear of the Lord, the righteous path, the revealed Word of God? Or will you choose Folly? The easy path at first, but the difficult way in the end. The way of death and misery.

Why is this so hard? I mentioned it last week. We still have the old man hanging on us. That old man which wars against God. So yes, if all things were equal, the blessings of Wisdom would make her the obvious choice. However, The Fear of the Lord is Wisdom, and our old man wants nothing to do with that. This is why we need Faith. We need God's power which is channeled to us through the conduit of the Holy Spirit living within us. We need to rest in the power and in the specific instruction of His Word.


That's it. So before I close, I want to touch on something. I mentioned it for a second last week. But we kept seeing Folly and the Adulteress present sexual temptation. I believe this is Solomon's lesser-to-greater way of describing all temptation. As an example, take the story in Chapter 7. The simple man is walking down the street in the middle of the night and the adulteress springs on him, seduces him, and he falls. This same process can be used to describe ANY temptation. Picture instead, young man walking down Madison Ave, sees a pair of new Nike Tennis Shoes he just has to have (the adulteress springs out and lands a kiss). He walks into the store and notices they're just sitting on a shelf, no locks, guards anything (the adulteress mentions her Husband is away)...he looks both ways and grabs them. (He succumbs to the temptation and the result? Death). Folly is not just making poor decisions. It is sinning and not believing God and the Bible when they say "the wages of sin is death." So don't think that you, if you haven't struggled with or believe you've dealt sufficiently with sexual temptation, are invulnerable to Folly's charm. She is lurking behind every weakness we have and without God's supernatural intervention - the Holy Scripture and Himself in the person of the Spirit - we are helpless.



Short! But it's a short chapter so I think its ok. I'm off work for a week, starting yesterday, because I strained my left oblique. I'm on a 10 lb restriction and taking a couple pills for the pain and to help it heal. Totally awesome. Its also my birthday on Saturday, Happy Birthday to me, I'll be 25.

Braves are cruising, 6 games in a row. Beachy is back, Heyward, Mac, Freddie and Simba are all raking. Things couldn't be better.

SS Lesson: 7-28-13 "Prov. 8"

     My dad is in Argentine for the next two weeks teaching a class. He is currently working through the book of Proverbs for one of the adult Sunday School classes at our church. He asked me to cover for him the next two weeks while he's gone, but in order to maintain the flow of the series he gave he his Proverbs notes. He teaches a 2 hour elective on the book at MBBC and has 3-5 page lectures already prepared. He has trimmed them to fit the Sunday School format and is 7 chapters in. He also missed the two weeks prior to last week while in VA but I was also in VA so our Pastor covered them.

     I get Proverbs chapters 8 and 9. I'm pretty excited and, as usual, irrationally nervous. For some reason that I can't seem to put a finger on, I have a completely biological, and to this point unavoidable, physical reaction to speaking in front of people. Not just speaking, also singing, playing the piano and competing in an individual sports event/act. I shake, hands sweat, yawn uncontrollably, sick feeling in stomach, nothing particularly startling but definitely annoying. I've tried several things to alleviate said response but yet to no avail. Writing about it seems to cause it so I'll move on.

     I'm going to try blogging a transcript of sorts for my lesson to see if that helps me organize my thoughts better. If you're going to be their Sunday and want to be surprised, skip this post. If you're going to be their Sunday and want to go to Mr.'s Blevins' or Moores' lessons, you get two for the price of one! If you're not going to be there, hopefully you'll enjoy.

(Outline is essentially stolen from my dad, seeing as he gave it to me)

Proverbs 8:1-36

Dad's Title: Wisdom's Extraordinary Value

1. Wisdom's Invitation (vs 1-3)
    A. An open, free offer
What immediately jumps out is the contrast between the adulteress and Wisdom. "She standeth in the high places" "She crieth...at the coming in at the doors" Wisdom isn't hiding out to catch anybody. Nothing sneaky, no hidden agenda. The adulteress waited till the dark of night before pouncing, Wisdom shouts from the mountain.
She cries out from: a) The hilltops - where everyone can see ("top of high places")
                             b) The crossroads - where everyone will pass ("places of the paths")
                             c) The gates - where decisions are rendered
Wisdom wants everyone to see her, everyone to go with her, and everyone to use her help in their decisions. She's an obvious choice, the transparent option.
We can draw application to what Wisdom is like to how we should be - not only should we desire the Wisdom that is out in the open, we should live out in the open. We should be willing to "shout" our lives from the hilltop, or more directly, we should be able to shout our lives from the hilltop without shame. Folly, adulteress, has to hide or we'd see her true colors, Wisdom shines out brightly.
    B. A practical offer
     Someone wrote: "I would like a job as tutor, teacher, and adviser to your family. I will never take a vacation. I will never be out of humor. I don't drink or smoke. I won't borrow your clothes or raid your refrigerator. I will be up in the morning as early as anyone in the household and will stay up as late as anyone wishes. I will help solve any problems your children might have. I will give you the satisfaction of knowing that no questions your children ask will go unanswered. For that matter, I will answer any of your own questions on subjects that range from 'How did we get here?' to 'Where are we headed?' I will help settle differences of opinion. I will give you information that will help you with your job, you family, and all of your other interests. In short, I will give you the knowledge that will insure the continued success of your family. I am God's Word. Do I get the job?" -- Pastor David Whitcomb, our family's Pastor in South Carolina.

When I say Wisdom, when Solomon says Wisdom, he's not referring to an ethereal force which can be tapped into, or some sort of magical recipe for happiness. The Wisdom described here is God's Word. You're holding it and most of you have owned it nearly all your life. This is not an unattainable secret protected by some mysterious monks. It is the book you're reading out of right now.

We talk about the leading of the Holy Spirit. In this dispensation, the primary way to experience this leading is through the Word of God. Wisdom's call to "Hear" her voice is obeyed when we spend time reading, applying and living the Scriptures. This is not "esoteric and mystical but rather very practical for the believer" as my dad says.

II. Motivation to Accept Her Invitation (vs 4-21)
    A. Wisdom cries out to all (vs 4-5)
Immediacy, A point of decision ("ye fools, be ye of an understanding heart")
The past several chapters, the same concepts, the value of Wisdom and the danger of Folly, have been reiterated again and again. Now is the time to respond. After a lecture like chapters 1-7, the only way to choose Folly would be unbelief, the information is all there. It's not a difficult decision, all things being equal. However, if we lack faith, if we don't believe that God and His way are best for us, if we listen to the flesh, world and Devil, we will choose Folly. Every act lacking Wisdom, is an act devoid of Faith. The Faith that says, God knows what is best, God knows what will be most effective, efficient and edifying, I need to trust Him.
    B. Wisdom has excellent characteristics (vs 6-9)
Once again, almost casually, we are given a list of Wisdom's benefits.
       1. Excellent - princely, above the wisdom of the world
       2. Truth - correct, precise, not deceiving (unlike the adulteress)
       3. Right - straight, the standard, contrasted to the twisted perversions of Folly
       4. Plain - not difficult to understand
            a. Dad describes verse 9 as a tautology, a phrase which describes itself. Understandable things are                   understandable to the understanding. Why does Solomon say this?
            b. 1 Cor. 2:14 "But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."
        c. Notice the contrast between the "natural man" and "him that understandeth" God's Wisdom is only understood through the lens of the illumination of the Holy Spirit. Wisdom is the pair of glasses we are to see world through.
            d. I would like to explain this further, but to do so, we need to talk about Immanuel Kant. It is extremely important to understand how we apply Wisdom to our lives and Kant describes it in a fascinating way. He was a very important philosopher in Germany, writing primarily in the mid to late 1700s. He has been called the "central figure of modern philosophy." He wrote several books, one of which discussed the ways and reasons people react to each other. In this book he describes "duty" or what we would call morality. The knowledge of what is the right thing to do. Prior to Kant's work, it was suggested morality was a result of experience. I see the man kill the other man. I see one man is dead, so not happy, other man is guilty, so not happy. Killing = bad. My experience informs my morality. This fails, mainly because sinful people find joy in sin, but also because no two people experience anything exactly the same way. Kant argued "duty" is a priori or without any prior cause. It is a part of us, a thing which makes us human. Boy he's close. The way he illustrated it, is with the rose colored glasses.

Have you ever been wearing you sun glasses so long you forgot you had them on? After awhile, you don't notice the darker shade which descended on the world when you put them on. Imagine for a minute you're in that situation and somebody asks you to describe a color. If you don't remember you're wearing your sunglasses, you will inevitably describe it to be a darker shade/version of the color the other person sees. Not only that, but if you're stubborn, and still forget you're wearing the sunglasses, you'll be inclined to argue your view. Only after you've remembered you've got the glasses on, or have removed them, you'll see they were changing your whole view of the world and the people in it. Not only do we see things differently, we expect everyone else to as well.

This is a bad thing, unless the glasses we are wearing are perfect. vs 8-9 "All the words of my mouth...are all plain to him that understandeth" could read "My instructions are obvious to the person with his glasses on." So what are a Christian's glasses?

The blood of Christ, the person of the Holy Spirit, and the Word of God. We see the world though those lenses and we'll experience all the benefits Wisdom describes in the next few verses.

    C. Wisdom is More Valuable than Riches (vs 10-11)
Dad says "What good is stuff when you don't understand how to use the stuff or what its real value is?"
    D. Wisdom is Godliness (vs 12-13)
         vs 12 - Prudence - discerning, carefully making the right choice
                  - Knowledge of witty inventions - resourceful, crafty
         vs 13 But not "Yankee ingenuity"
                      We've seen before (You've seen before) Wisdom = The Fear of the Lord and here is more equation. Wisdom = The Fear of the Lord = Hating evil, pride, arrogance, the evil way and a froward mouth

Wisdom is loving right and hating wrong. Having the same view of sin as God does. (Wearing our glasses)

   E. Wisdom is Rewarding (vs 14-21)
More reiteration. The rewards of living wise.
vs 14-16 Wise counsel - answers questions
vs 17-21 Blessings - fulfills needs and desires

III. Description of the Wisdom That Is Offered (vs 22-31)
In Chapter 4 Dad briefly addressed Wisdom's role in Creation. This section hits that again with more detail. Consider that for a second. The same Wisdom that created the Universe is offering itself to you!
   
   A. God's Eternal Wisdom
"The Lord possessed me in the beginning of His way" This Wisdom in an eternal attribute of God, His Omniscience.

Over the last 2000 years, Theologians have suggested this Wisdom is the 2nd person of the Trinity: Christ, the Logos. (The female pronouns and descriptions do not matter, the Hebrew word is feminine)
Very popular in the early church. Based on John's use of Logos describing Christ in John 1 and Paul's statement in 1 Cor 1 that Jesus is made Wisdom for believers.
Dad disagrees. I don't speak Greek or Hebrew, so I'm going to disagree too. :)

This interpretation allows for bad Theology. The word possessed was translated created in the Septuagint, though it was a bad translation, and also vs 23 "set up" and vs 24 "brought forth" seem to suggest a cause-effect relationship between God and Wisdom. Deniers of the Eternality of Christ have used this passage to argue God "brought forth" the Son. Therefore, the Son would not be coequal and coeternal with God. The Arians, and their modern versions such as Mormons or JW's, used this argument.

This is not a passage about Christology, as my dad says, and the Wisdom here, as in the rest of the book, is a personification of God's attribute of Wisdom.

    B. God's Creative Wisdom (vs 24-31)
This shows as dad says, "God's Wisdom is awesome"

IV. Wisdom's Final Appeal (vs 32-36)
    A. Final Request (vs 32-34)
Once again, "Listen Up!" Dad may have addressed this already, but I think part of Solomon's repetition is due to his own hardheadedness. Solomon made many of the same mistakes he's going to warn against in the book, so he knows constant reminders are necessary.  vs 33 "refuse it not"
    B. Final Results (vs 35-36)
Fittingly, chapter ends on a direct contrast: Finding Wisdom is finding Life, losing Wisdom is losing Life. Life here is not just Heaven, death not just Hell. Those are the points of no return, instead the Life we find though Wisdom is the "blessed Life" the day-day relationship with  God. The death, a life of disappointment, judgement and failure.

Seems like an easy choice! Next week, chapter 9, even more evidence to help with the decision.


Sorry about the length. Last time I taught SS I finished just 15 min through the 50 min time block. Hoping to get at least 30 min deep this time.



Well, listening to the Braves-Mets game on the radio so gotta go. Pray for me on Sunday if you would please, I'd appreciate it.

Prayer - What, When, Where, Why and How

That's enough NBA talk for a little while, back to something a little more important. I wouldn't begin to know who to source regarding my ideas on Prayer, I know CS Lewis, John Piper and my Dad have all played vital rolls in the formation of the following. However, there are many other things I've read and people I've heard that lead me to these conclusions. I'll try the W ?'s as a framework and see if that organizes this better. 

What - Prayer is defined as "a devout petition to God, or an object of worship" on dictionary.com, "an invocation or act that seeks to to activate rapport with a deity, an object of worship, or a spiritual entity through deliberate communication" by wikipedia, which breaks my third rule of definition: don't use words that would need to be looked up when defining a word, but is a much fuller definition. In Scripture the word Prayer, Pray and Praying are used a combined 439 times in the Bible. Which is a statistic I've never understood the value of. Sure, when comparing particular author's word usages I get it, but not just intro-ing a sermon on a topic and rattling off its usage stats and various Greek & Hebrew modes. Nonetheless, despite only appearing 439 times, prayer is a very important topic in the Bible. There's no recorded instance of God pulling aside Adam, Noah, Abraham or any other Patriarchal figure and explaining to them how to talk to Him. The word prayer first appears in 2 Sam but I think its safe to assume the practice had been going on since the beginning of time itself. Of course, the "Lord's Prayer" story is the most commonly used template to teach how to pray and is also relates Christ teaching His disciples. However, do you think the disciples really didn't know how to pray? When they asked Christ to teach them, was it out of total ignorance in the process? These are Jews, they've been watching and participating in prayers their whole lives. They were asking for special guidance, not start-up instruction. Christ prayed differently because Christ was speaking to His Father within perfect harmony of His will. 

My definition of prayer:

The intentional and sometimes audible presentation of praise, information and requests with expected results from the created to the Creator. 

When - Paul tells us to "pray without ceasing" or "pray constantly." I've heard it preached that in a perfect world we could sit on our knees and talk to God all day. That's dumb. God is eternally long suffering so we can't annoy Him per se, but He created and saved us for a reason and as far as I can tell, it wasn't to sit on our knees all day. Maybe the Muslims are on to something here. Just like Daniel, they have set times to gather and pray. This is good and a lot of Christians I know are similar, just less public (which is recommended in the Sermon on the Mount) but it doesn't quite fit into "without ceasing." I don't think I'm going to blow anybody's mind by saying Paul is talking about maintaining a close, sharing, open communication channel between God and ourselves at all times. Does this mean we don't have to bless our meals? Yes. Is it a good practice to do it anyway? Of course it is. But my mom saying "You're going to choke on that because you ate it before we prayed" is frankly ridiculous. In fact, suggesting we can't start anything without "praying first" suggests we weren't praying to begin with, which misses the point entirely. Praying for ritual's sake cheapens the act. Prayer should be spontaneous, legitimate and passionate. However, I think we should also have public prayer before ballgames, meetings, meals and the Sunday morning offering. But public prayer is a different beast altogether than personal prayer, I'll explain more as we go.

Where - If we are praying "without ceasing" then everywhere. There are some recommendations though. The parable of the Publican and the Sinner shows that a prayer's legitimacy is dependent on the heart not the performance. This concept is attached to the corollary that requests made known to God in secret are fulfilled in the open. Meaning relying on God alone in our prayer lives will strengthen our faith more, make us more like Christ (who prayed alone on numerous occasions) and promises results. 

Side note - teaching "how to get prayers answered" is borderline blasphemous. God is not a tool to be used or a daddy figure to be manipulated. Take care

Why - Everything we do should be to the Glory of God, correct? So prayer fits into that same category. In the case of public prayer, a benediction or invocation at the beginning or end of an event symbolizes God's presence there, His power over the proceedings and the utter dependence on Him of the participants. This is beneficial for all in attendance and I believe "beneficial" to God in that it gives Him glory or as we've mentioned before, demonstrates His glory fuller. 

Side note - If you think Ben Franklin's request to open the Constitutional Congress session with prayer is evidence of his faith, consider these facts. 1 - Franklin was a well-documented Deist who believed God had no or little interest in the affairs of men and 2 - the task facing the members of that Congress was enormous to say the least. I believe Franklin was showing his hand regarding prayer and throwing up what was in his mind the most desperate "Hail Mary" (pun intended) he could think of. I suggested as much my sophomore year in "Early American Political Thought" and the prof, who has since retired, about burned me at the stake. oh well.

In regards to personal prayer. The benefits for an individual frequently praying are clear - a closer relationship to God, there are more chances to repent so sins have less of chance to fester, constant prayer means Christ-like thinking more often which wards off sins to begin with, a more direct connection can be made between requests and results which increases faith, the transforming power of the Holy Ghost which works through direct contact with the Divine (this occurs only 2 ways: prayer and the reading/meditation of Scripture), etc. 

How - as I said before, "how to pray in order to get results" is a false teaching. Christ lays out a template in the Lord's Prayer, the Saxon Paraphrase goes like this:

Heavenly Father, the Almighty God, 

may your perfect will be accomplished, 

You've promised to provide and as You know I need ________, thank You for Your provision. 

Forgive me for ______ and help me to forgive ________ for __________, thank You for You forgiveness. Protect me from myself and the darkness of this World, thank You for Your protection. In the name of the Christ, the Supreme King Jesus, Amen. 

Braves have won only 13 of their last 36 on the road. They dropped yesterday's in extras to the Royals. This 3 games series is their first ever at Kauffman stadium, one of 2 active stadiums Chipper Jones never played in. They did win game 1 however, Jason Heyward blasting off in a big way with 3 rbis and a big fly. As the All-Star game approaches here are my picks for the starters, always a bunch of tough picks:

NL

C - YMolina 1B - FFreeman 2B - MCarpenter SS - TTulowitzki (hurt but deserving) 3B - DWright

LF - JUpton CF - SChoo RF - CBeltran

Bench - JVotto, PGoldschmidt, YPuig, BHarper, ACraig, CGonzalez, JSegura (start), CGomez, BPosey

SP - AWainwright

AL

C - CSantana 1B - CDavis 2B - RCano SS - JJHardy 3B - MCabrera DH - PFielder

LF - AGordon CF - AJones RF - NCruz

Bench - NMarkakis, JLowrie, YCespedes, JMauer, MNapoli, JEllsbury, VMartinez, JBautista

SP - MScherzer

A Theology of Regret

     My wife would not hesitate to tell you that she and I come from very different backgrounds. One of the areas that has moved to the forefront of our relationship is our mindset towards decisions. On one hand, I make decisions with irrational confidence. I launch myself towards a door, even if its only open a crack, merely based on a "gut feeling" or "seems like God is orchestrating this." I have no fear of failing, failure is inevitable and the mortar with which we build our lives. Jenni has lived with a different mindset for most of her life. A caution to the extreme which is more concerned with one thing above all else: regret.

     Every decision is painstakingly slow if the primary thought is, "I really don't want to pick the wrong thing, what if I regret it?" There are several logical and theological problems with this mindset, and I've been slowing showing my very teachable wife the wonder a life free from worry can be. So, I'll share some of my thoughts here.

     I don't want to call it regret-free because that sounds too much like the YOLO, live life to the fullest crowd. But because I don't have a good name for it yet, I'd love your help by the way, I'll call it just that. To be regret-free you have to have certain presuppositions.

First - God is in control. It all comes down to this, the rest of the thought process revolves around God's sovereign authority over everything. From Creation to Christ to the 2nd Coming and Cosmic Ending (oh yeah) we are taught one thing above all else, God > _____. Regret-Free living is "God > _____" thinking. (Copyright 2013 PrinceofSaxony)

Second - God loves you. His sovereignty would be the most frightening truth possible were it not for His love. However, knowing His love compels us to Trust Him. As Paul says in Romans 8:28-29, Saxon Paraphrase Version (SPV) "God has planned out everything for His children's gain, the ones He handpicked and saved and is perfecting to be like Christ."

--- Side note, I prefer to paraphrase scripture for two reasons, #1 - I try not to fill my writing with quotes, this is supposed to be what I think #2 - You don't truly understand something until you can paraphrase it ---

Third - Sometimes there is no right choice. This may be the toughest one for some people to swallow. But lets face it, Big Mac or Double Quarter Pounder? They're both so good and yet they're both so so bad. Poor example, I know, but the concept should be clear, millions of times each day we make innocuous decisions, why fret over them? This shirt or that shirt? Apple or Banana? Apple or Microsoft? (We both know there's a right answer to that one...Microsoft) The list goes on and on. I have seen people, my beautiful wife in particular, slave over such simple decisions because they're afraid of making the "wrong" one. As Kevin DeYoung so elegantly put it, "Just Do Something" (I have the book, haven't sat down and read all the way through it, too busy just doing something I suppose).

     So, there's the foundation to regret-free living. Recognizing when a decision is not right/wrong, acknowledging God's love for me, and keeping "God >" at the front of my mind. This leads to the ultimate question, what if two good people disagree on what's right/wrong? How do I know who to listen to? "If I speak I am condemned, but if I stay silent...I am damned." Catch 22s, "rock and a hard place" situations, strain even the calmest regret-free lifer. However, if God is truly in control then no situation find myself in is the "wrong" one. Also, if God truly loves me, then I will be able to handle any difficulty with His help. I don't have to worry that I lost some chance to serve, or lost some reward somewhere, we can't go back in time. Regret leads to despair and in despair lurks death. I would venture that a sizable majority of suicides stem from regret. Granted, some are spurred by impending consequences but the thought pattern that results in the false-escape of suicide most often is a cesspool of regret and despair.

     The Theology of Regret also introduces an enormous amount of stress into your life. I sounds goofy, but living regret-free is healthier. Not YOLO, gonna party like the Epicureans, regret-free. But no-regret, make a choice and live in the confidence that 1 Peter 4:19 is true: (SVP) "We endure this life knowing that our King, the Creator God, who we can trust explicitly, is holding us in His hands." regret-free.

     Should we regret sin? No. and yes. But mostly no. Did Christ die on the cross for my sin? Yes. Did He die for my sins already committed, that is past sins? Yes. But didn't He also die for the sins yet to be committed? Of course. Does this mean I should go out and sin? Of course not! But, Romans 8:1 reminds us of the most liberating truth, "For Christ's children, the verdict is not guilty." (SVP) Hey, David wept over his sin. True, and he begged for forgiveness. He didn't write a Psalm that said, "People of Israel, I have massively erred and therefore must remove myself from the ministry God has appointed me to and forever be marked a failure in the Christian Life" although if you look around in today's Evangelical circles, you'd think he did. True repentance releases regret. Let that sink in, cuz its HUGE. Place your sins at the cross and let Christ give you the gift of new life. Let me rephrase, live in the freedom and blessing Christ died to secure for you, not in the bondage of guilt Satan works tirelessly to maintain.

     Are you living in regret? Stop it, and don't worry about it if you think you are, cuz that's just more regret about being in regret, and it can cycle for awhile, just ask my wife. Instead, change your thinking altogether, through the renewing of your mind by the power of the Holy Spirit, and focus on "God >" and His undying (and dying but resurrected) love for you.

  Braves just dropped 3 straight to San Diego, ugh, but we pitched pretty well, just can't get any consistency from the lineup. Nasty, no good, horrible parallels between this team and late 90s Braves teams are cropping up, but I'll ignore them and maybe they'll go away. Home for 3 with the Mets and 4 with the Giants before coming up here to MILWAUKEE!!!! WHIPEEEEEEE!!!! Already gots my tix for all 3 games, come out and support America's Team - if you don't you're a traitor and should watch out for the NSA cuz they're watching you.

The Kingdom of Heaven

Some thoughts, though not organized well because sometimes I just need to ramble.

Seemingly contradictory statements in Scripture are where most of the major Christian controversies are born. The most discussed in Evangelical circles are Calvinism vs Arminianism, the Atonement, and the Kingdom. The first two I may devote a post or series of posts too in the future, but today I'd like to tackle the third.

The contradictions that introduce the argument come straight from the teachings of Christ, so suggesting that they truly are contradictions is a gross misunderstanding and near-blasphemous misrepresentation of Christ Himself. "The Kingdom of Heaven is like..." beings several Parables which are given directly to His disciples. Couple those with the Sermon on the Mount and several statements Christ made to various people and you get a somewhat hazy but important theology of the Kingdom. Here's the Saxon Paraphrase Bible version.

So, open your Bibles to Matthew chapter 3...

John the Baptist is preaching and he says "Jesus is coming" but he uses the words "The Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!"

then in chapter 4

Christ preaches the exact same thing as John - "I'm here" but He also uses these words "The Kingdom of Heaven is at hand"

chapter 5

He gathers a group of followers, people who were interested in Him because of His miracles, His words and probably curiosity. He describes to them how a Kingdom citizen is to live. He describes a moral person with a love for God and man. He describes someone interested in what God thinks and with a keen sense of the suffering of others. He describes someone who isn't selfish, isn't greedy, isn't blood-thirsty, and most of all isn't prideful. He uses contemporaries (the Pharisees) as an example of how not to be a Kingdom citizen. He is describing a culture, but a culture of ideas and paradigms not actions. When he says "blessed are the poor" He means "happiness comes from spiritual things, not material" when he says "love your enemy" he means "we are in a struggle for souls, not territory, we are not trying to conquer the world, we are trying to convert the masses". This is not a description of thousands of years from then. This is not Heaven in the sense of Zion with the elders, angels, beasts, and the golden streets. This is Heaven, Christ reigning over the people of His church, His own flesh and blood, the Body of the Living King. But I'm getting ahead of myself.

chapter 10

Christ commissions his "army" to go an preach the same thing "I'm here, your King has arrived" using those same words "The Kingdom of Heaven is at hand"

chapter 11

The Kingdom of Heaven is filled with Saints, and those Saints are the most valuable things in God's Universe

chapter 12

Christ casts out demons either by Satan (illogical) or by God (logical) and then draws the corollary that if it is by God then the Kingdom is here

chapter 13

starting at verse 24,

The Kingdom of Heaven is like a group of people, some of which are followers of Christ, some of which are not --- and they won't be separated until its time to judge finally.

now at verse 31,

The Kingdom of Heaven is greatness born out of small, specific actions, thoughts and ideas

verse 33

The Kingdom of Heaven should (and will) permeate every aspect of your life

verse 44 & 45

The Kingdom of Heaven should be valued above all else

verse 47

The Kingdom of Heaven will be purified, and the judgement will make sure of it -- this and the sower shows that at first it will not be pure, and that it will need to be purified

chapter 16

Here's where you've got some "contradiction"

Christ hands Peter the "keys to the Kingdom" (seemingly future tense) and then declares that those present will "not taste death till they see the coming of the Son of Man in His Kingdom" (also seemingly future) I think these back me up from my previous claims in the Sermon on the Mount. Christ was telling them that His crucifixion, resurrection (the coming of the Son of Man in His Kingdom) and Ascension were very near (even could be described as "at hand"), so near the listeners would not have time to die.

How do you describe getting saved to a 5 year old? Jesus Christ is coming to live in your heart.
What is He doing there? Reigning. Unlike the sin that before had "reigned in your mortal body" He is King now. The Church is His body and the Kingdom is then/now/then. Or as my dad says (he didn't originate it, just "bleeds it" haha) already, not yet.

So, am I an amillennial, Heaven Forbid! The same common sense approach to Kingdom teaching allows for a common sense Eschatology suggesting that when John describes a 1000 yr period of physical a Kingdom with particular defining aspects (such as Saints judging Angels, the reinstatement of Israel, the bodily reign of Christ in Jerusalem, the binding and eventual loosing of Satan and the final judgment) he isn't drawing pictures.


Next time, possibly I'll address missions in light of the Kingdom mandates, or not I'll see how I'm feeling.

Braves are going through a bit of an up and down stretch. JUpton is mired in a horrible slump which has countered the emergence of Uggla's and BJ's production. It is becoming evident that the reason the Braves are good is because their starting pitching is phenomenal. That leads to a difficult query - who does Brandon Beachy replace? BB was the staff ace, no doubt about it, before he had to get TJ. Now Minor is the 2nd or 3rd best lefty in the NL (Kershaw, Lee, Corbin and Minor is some order), Medlen is the guy who started 25 straight wins last year, Maholm has been stellar, Huddy is a future HoFamer and Teheran has given up more than 2 runs only 3 times over his last 9 starts. I hate to say it, but either Juilo gets sent down or Maholm gets traded, but we better get half the farm and an impact now reliever or Frank's got some 'splainin to do.

A New(?) Approach to Missions

If you talked to me for any amount of time about my goals in life you've heard about this. I still haven't found another person/group that is doing it this way, except in a history book. Doing things the same way over and over again and expecting different results is a classic definition of insanity. Its also on of the most frustrating tenets of traditionalism. "It was good enough for _______ its good enough for me!" (usually emphasized with hearty "guffaw"). I bristle at such inane argumentation and instead pursue the novel and creative ways to accomplish my goals. This concept is as such. If you are aware of someone doing things this way please let me know, I'd love to get in contact with them. Anyway, here's how I think missions should be done.

First, get schooled. None of this backwoods "all I need is to be able to read my Bible" stuff. Take advantage of other people's work. Learn how to do your own work. Learn the original languages even if you don't do the balance of the preaching. Don't stop at an undergraduate degree especially if its from ________ Bible College. You need more.

Second, get a team. Don't go by yourself. You're not Hudson Taylor, you're not Amy Carmichael don't try.

-- Philosophical interjection: When discussing a method for anything Utilitarianism is the word on the street. We're looking for what works. --

Get a group of people, families and singles, that are committed to the ministry and committed to the method. A group that has received the call of God on their life and has been commissioned by a local body of believers. The ideal team in my opinion is 3 families and 2 singles/retired people. I'll say more about this.

Third, pick a specific target group. Jews? Not specific enough. Jews in Germany? Closer. Jews in Berlin and the surrounding area? Better. Jews in _______ section of Berlin? Perfect. This allows you to fashion your ministry for that group's needs. Yes, all people need ministers but ministers cannot focus on all people. My Pastor is specifically called to Columbus and the surrounding area. He doesn't concern himself with the day-to-day workings of the underground church in China. Can he help them? Of course. But his personal ministry is specific. Therefore he can pour his life into us and be effective. There are seeming exceptions (John Piper) but they still have specific ministries merely with more scope.

Fourth, support yourself. Up to this point, most people are doing what I'm suggesting. Here is the shake up. Don't go on deputation. Go to college. Huh? How will you garner support? How will you gain valuable experience? How will you get 12 kids? (just kidding). Remember the team? 3 families and 2 others. Each piece has a role to play. Family 1 gets a full-time job in the field and lives on 60% of it. Family 2 gets a full-time job and lives on 60% of it. Other 1 gets a part-time job and lives on it plus church support. Other 2 gets a part-time job and lives on it plus church support. Family 3 lives on 30% of Family's 1&2 while being full-time in the ministry. The remaining 100% is for the ministry. Sending churches for each send enough to fill-in the gaps. If everybody needs 80% of Family's 1&2 to live and a part-time job is 50%. The sending churches (preferably at least 2 but up to 4) send 100% (from 50% to 25% each) of a year's wages to be divided up, 50% to Family 3 and 25% each to the Others.

Are you familiar with the Moravian Church? They were missionaries in Western Europe that used this system. 3 men would enter an area, one would be a barrel maker, one would be a blacksmith and one would preach. The preacher would live on the other two's incomes. Why? Because the 5 years spent on deputation (your average these days) could be spent getting a Masters Degree. Because a business man with a 40 hour a week job will have more credibility than a religious nut being supported wholesale by a bunch a radicals thousands of miles away. I'm not saying any missionaries currently supported wholesale by a group of churches is a religious nut, I'm saying they can look like they are. A job visa is easier to come by in most cases and much easier to hold for longer periods of time. Finally, once the ministry is self-supporting and native they become a partner in the process. This is common but extremely effective in my opinion both for the health of the native ministry and for the missionaries.

Sound good? This is precisely what I want to end up doing. At this point I want to be Family 1, but things can change. If you want to be on a team together let me know.

Braves lost two in a row after winning 8 straight. Losing 4-3 in the 1st in Toronto as I type. Going to see Oakland @ Milwaukee next Tuesday, will be Chipper's first game...can't wait. Will have a "Bonus Post" from the game on the 5th.

Demons Part III: "...because their deeds are evil."

If you randomly clicked this link you may want to check out Demons part I and II first. If you've been following along, thanks.

I'll list a few more world religions and their connections to demons. I'm not a "demon behind every bush" type of guy but as far as the spirituality of non-believers goes I think its hard to ignore what kind of impact a malicious group of spirit-beings would have. In any case - onward!

4. Buddhism

     This is probably the biggest stretch yet. Buddhist are typically classified as "non-theists" but I think more accurately are humanists. They believe in the "middle way" of moral living which will allow the soul to escape this world's suffering and achieve nirvana. Buddha was a real person who became "enlightened" and decided to abandon any worldly treasure and position and starve himself while wondering around ancient China. Not sure how that avoids suffering but he seemed to think it did. In a sense he is the original ascetic. This seems to have little or no connection to the demonic world; however, watch this. Creepy. Camera trick or no, this is an example of a phenomenon clouded in myth but consistent with other descriptions of meditative powers. Spiritual Transrelocation is one way to describe it and a quick google search will reveal thousands of "documented" cases varying from the ridiculous to the video-and-two-witnesses level of veracity. I mentioned Transcendental Meditation in my paragraph about Hinduism, most likely this is the same process. While eschewing the concept that spiritual beings would assist them in their pursuit of the middle way, a Buddhist would still believe he is tapping into his own soul and achieving some disconnect from the scientific parameters of nature. Read that sentence again, it totally rocks. In any case, a Buddhist who delves into the meditation proscribed by his faith will encounter the demonic world and in my opinion worship it, if not actively, tacitly.

5. Spiritism (aka, Shintoism, Pantheism)

     Not a surprise here. The Native Americans and Japanese, interestingly enough, share a religious affection for their ancestors. They worship the dead that went before them and rely on these fallen forefathers for help in doing right and escaping difficulty. The Japanese are more philosophical, at least outwardly, and tend to mesh Confucius or Taoism with their Shinto. The Native Americans are typically more pantheistic, worshiping the Great Spirit along with the spirit of the trees and the spirit of the wind. Watch Pocahontas, its the leaves in the wind thing. Now watch it and consider the wind to be demon possessed, changes things (exactly the same for Avatar only the whole planet is demon possessed...really leads to some interesting ideas regarding naturalism and the goddess).

6. Islam

     One of my life goals is to get a PhD in Islam from Berlin University. In the meantime I'll settle for "spoke to several Muslims while in Turkey" as my credentials for writing about it. As far as the origins of the religion, Muhammad (pbuh) said he received the Koran from the angel Gabriel. Could this have been a demon? Sure. Also, some Muslims have syncretized Islam with their pagan tribalism (not unlike European and Latin American Catholics). This has resulted in a well-developed demonology including wards and amulets designed to chase off evil spirits. I have several "evil eyes" in my house. Supposedly if one were to fall and break it would mean it had warded off a spirit of despair and I would need another one to stay protected. This is not demon worship, this is demonology. I had the opportunity to listen to a lecture given by a Mrs. Baker, widow of a long time missionary to Muslims in Germany. They had composed a defense of Allah being a misrepresentation of God but in fact the same person or being. I had several issues with the argument some historical some linguistic. I hold that the being Allah is like Baal. Merely much more successful. Therefore, any Muslim who worships Allah is worshiping a demon. Not a popular thought, please don't shoot me.

7. The Church of Latter Day Saints...and some other pseudo-Christian cults

     Moroni is a demon or John Smith (what a boring name for a founder of a religion, Brigham Young is much cooler) made it all up. Take your pick, once the Mormon community was established the demonic powers took over. Benny Hinn is either possessed or a bodily manifestation of a demon, I truly believe this. The Masons have a disturbing amount of religious vibe to their community, I'd contend demonic (though I've yet to satisfy my curiosity regarding these guys). Name a cult and do some digging and you'll find a demon.


    So what? Well, if you aren't already a bit apprehensive about witnessing to someone now you should be. You aren't just combating the cultural morays and individual experiences arrayed against you. There is a darker, more powerful enemy, lurking behind each soul, each system, each decision and each idea. Consider CS Lewis' classic Screwtape Letters, while not trying to be authoritative, Lewis suggests each person has a demon assigned to it and even conversion itself does not end the demon's influence. This knowledge and the apprehension that comes with it should lead us to better prepare. It should also lead us to not trust in our own power when facing this challenge. As Christ said, "This kind can come out by nothing but prayer and fasting." (Mark 9:29). We are in a war, and while we confidently stand on the winning side, we should understand Who gives victory and that everyday success is just as much His business as the ultimate victory.

I guess I got it all down in 3. Unless somebody asks a really good question I'll move on to something else Tuesday.

Brrrrrraves complete the 6 game double sweep! Evan Gattis is literally already a legend. I've never even considered penciling in a rookie 3rd string C to the all-star game but this guy deserves it. Also wondering if either Ramiro Pena or Paul Janish get swapped for a left handed reliever soon since we don't really need 4 backup middle infielders and JV and E Flo are out for the year. I would suspect we'd prefer to keep Pena but he'd definitely rate a better return. We'll see.

Demons Part II: Spirituality of Darkness

Most people are aware of the worship of demons and more specifically the worship of Satan. The word worship is being used in the sense of a religion based around the glorification of and service to the entity in question. I contend all religions apart from true Christianity are in fact demon worship. I will list here the major religions and how/why I think they connect to demonic activity. In my first part, "Demons Part I: A Biblical Framework" I listed most of my research sources.

1. Paganism

     If you asked a random person on the street if demons were worshiped anywhere they would probably reply "sure, Africa." That would be a creepy questions to ask a random person on the street but for the sake of argument say you did. Africa has the unfortunate combination of incredibly rich natural resources and incredibly weak nationalism which has led to a viscous cycle suppressing much of their development. In Europe, the "tribes" were united under national flags and the resulting unity gave the people strength. The African tribes have no such desire, or have not so far, and therefore the nations are weak and the continent is marked by strife and blood. Paganism has be known to flourish in a tribal society. In this case, paganism is the belief in an active and primarily malicious spirit-world closely connected to humanity. It often includes child sacrifice, blood feuds, magic and deep superstitions rooted in real events that have been sensationalized through the practice of oral history. I don't expect it to be difficult to convince anyone that demons are a part of this. In Spirit of the Rainforest, narrator and former witch doctor "Jungleman" describes his relationship with the spirit-world in grotesque detail. He describes a "house" inside his chest, something I dare say we'd call a heart, where his spirits would live. He describes how a drug induced trance would allow him to communicate with them and even travel great distances with them to do harm to his enemies. He describes the horror he felt when he realized they were not his friends but instead were controlling him. He describes how chasing them off was only half the solution and that the Great Enemy Spirit (what the other spirits called God) had to come and send His Son to live in his "house" in his chest to protect him from the spirits. I highly recommend reading Ritchie's book if you plan on doing any missions work, it'll change your view of the forces we are up against.

     Like I said, not a tough sell that Paganism is influenced by demonic activity. However, as I address other forms of religion, consider how the demons manifest in the Pagan system. They are guides to the "spiritual" leadership, witch doctors/wizards etc. They openly admit enmity with God and encourage their subjects to do the same. They are not bound by the rules of science.

2. Polytheism

     Similar to paganism, often put in the same category, but there are several differences in my opinion. I am not including Hinduism here even though it is the most popular Polytheistic religion, it will get its own paragraph. In this category I am referring to the Canaanite, Egyptian, Greco/Roman, Norse and South American religious structures. While Pagans have "little friends" on their shoulders, Polytheists have gods to look up to and appease. The Roman gods are the most famous, Zeus and Co, but from Baal to Loki to Isis you've got demons. Molech, for instance, was a deity of Ammon that God specifically mentions in Leviticus for Israel to avoid. Go figure, Solomon built an altar to Molech and Jeremiah pronounced judgment on the worshipers of Molech. Why? Molech demanded child sacrifice. The description of Molech are very specific. God does not say "do not burn your children before the altar of Molech" He does not say "do not sacrifice your children in Molech's name" He says "do not let your children pass through the fire to Molech." Molech, and the other gods, are not considered non-entities in Scripture, they're considered non-gods. Molech is powerless to kill God's children but if they offer themselves to him that is when he gains power. A modern scholar may suggest that this language is merely ancient-near-eastern and that the original author would have understood the Ammorite god to be a being but we are free from the cultural bias and understand him as a figment of the Ammorite imagination. This is a lazy approach in my opinion. The argument, that the idol being worshiped is just wood and can do nothing for the Israelites, that Isaiah uses still stands. The idols are what the people trusted in which is fruitless and as Isaiah says completely insane. They had built those idols, how could they have power? However, I believe Isaiah would have used a different tact when referring to who/what the idols represented. Molech was an evil power that had convinced the Ammorites to kill their own children. Molech was/is a demon. So next time you read about Zeus and watch Thor consider the original stories, most of which are born out of real events and have a real being trying to get a certain message across. I did like Thor though, cool movie.

3. Hinduism

     The oldest world religion, if you're reading a secular history, was founded in India sometime c.3000 BC. A word religion has a particular culture/set of teachings which has been adopted on a global scale. Not many people would say Hindus are demon worshipers. Unfortunately, not many people know what Hindus believe. 30,000,000 gods and goddesses is the most famous aspect of Hinduism, but they are not merely Polytheists. These gods (to be simple and of course chauvinistic I'll just say gods for gods and goddesses from now on) are almost pantheistic and at the same time almost humanistic. Placing the Hindu belief system into words is extremely difficult. Try talking to one, you get very little a western modernist can easily understand. I say the gods are pantheistic-ish because all things can be and in some Hindus' minds have a god attached to them. However, the thing is not the god, like a Pantheist would say, but instead the thing has a deity which is of it and for it. Kinda like how a Catholic Saint would be "the Saint of lost wallets" or something. They are also humanistic-ish because you and I can just create a god for a new thing. More or less. When computers showed up, I'm sure devout Hindus began believing in ___________ the god of computers. They are fully aware they have "imagined" him but they are not worshiping a being they are worshiping to fulfill their inner desire to worship and to reach the great soul and escape the cycle of reincarnation from the suffering and pain of this world. So where do demons fit in? A practice common among Hindus which has branched off into its own religion of sorts in the west called Transcendental Meditation is eerily similar to the trance Jungleman describes in Spirits. It is a centering of oneself which calms the mind and opens the soul to the guidance of the inner spirits. Demons. I have a book called The Spirit sent to guide us which I picked up figuring it was about the Holy Spirit. Nope, it could be naively read as a treatise on the conscience but a careful reading reveals the truth. Demon guides which can be used "to find peace and happiness in this life and the next." Listen to Linkin Park's song Blackout from their album Ten Thousand Suns (I must interject with an explicit content warning for both album and song). The first 2+ min Chester screams about his anger and frustration in his life. Then, with a brilliant musical shift, finds a peaceful eye-of-the-storm like place and gives his "inner voices" the credit. I say its Hinduism and by extension demon worship.

Wow, that was more words then I expected. Guess we'll be amending to at least a 4 part series on demons and next time we'll hit up a few more religions.

Braves have won 4 straight, looking good again. Teheran with a dominant 8 1/3 shutout innings against Minnesota yesterday. The injury bug has decimated our bullpen with Venters and O'Flaherty, our two best lefties, out for the season with Tommy John surgeries, Walden and Martinez on the DL with shoulder problems and Luis Ayala on the DL for acute anxiety disorder which is typically extremely dangerous. Despite that we still have a top 5 bullpen in the NL with top Closer Craig Kimbrel, effective southpaw Luis Avilan and young but talented righties Cory Gearrin and Anthony Vavarro (David Carpenter and Cory Rasmus, both right handed rookies, fill out the last spots).

Being a Braves fan rocks the socks.

Demons Part I: A Biblical Framework

     I am not an expert in Demonology or any Theological field for that matter. I have a 40 hour "minor" in Bible from a small college and a 24 year life of trying to figure things out. Neither of these things make me an authority on anything. However, I do fancy myself a thinker, mainly because other people have referred to me as such, and have endeavored to apply said thinking to the events and characters which comprise Demonology. Unfortunately, in my opinion, I must say that striking out on your own to discover the secrets of the Demonic world is not a good idea. This is fairly obvious. If you have any inkling in a belief in God you are immediately aware something similar to Him is in opposition to His will and actions. By similar I am referring to spiritual beings. Beings which do not posses corporeal states continuously (it is documented they can assume them at times) and do not age or die in the natural meanings of the words. If we believe God is good, and I hope you do, we can assume something opposed to God is bad. We can follow this assumption with the revealed Biblical evidence of Satan and his cohorts, demons, which are always portrayed negatively and in opposition to both God's overarching designs and to Jesus and other Christians in person.

Some Biblical cases of Demonic (and Satanic) activity include:

• King Saul - the evil spirit that God sent to torment him 1 Sam 16:14
• King Saul - the witch at Endor (always reminded me of Star Wars...not the witch the place) 1 Sam 28:7-8
• Elijah - the maniacal actions of the false priests of Baal at Mt Carmel 1 Kings 18:27-29
• Christ - the temptations in the wilderness Matt 4:1-11; Mark 1:12; Luke 4:1-13
• Christ - the Gadarene demoniac(s) Matt 8:23-32; Mark 5:1-13; Luke 8:26-33
• Judas Iscariot - possessed before the betrayal of Christ Luke 22:3; John 13:2,27
• Paul - Elymas the sorcerer Acts 13:8-11
• Paul - the healing of the Demon possessed girl Acts 16:16
• Judgment - fallen angels awaiting the end in chains II Peter 2:4
• End Times - Revelation (all over the book)

     This is by no means an exhaustive list, however these are highlights and as noted before the demons are always on the wrong side of things. But I doubt you need me to convince you demons are bad, I just wanted to make sure we were on the same page.

      We can draw a few other conclusions from these events. First of all, God is in complete control of the demonic world. He allows (it says sends in the KJV) a demon to torment Saul. He has an nondescript number of them chained in darkness awaiting the end. He releases them to wreak havoc on the earth in the Tribulation. At no point are we to think God is in a fight (or any other type of contest) with Satan and his forces. God is orchestrating His perfect designs while Satan and his forces try (and fail) to muck things up. Second, humans are definitely subject to a demon's influence and this is never a good thing. The Gadarene men, the prophets of Baal, Judas all suffer much at the hands of their possessors. However, thirdly, we learn that demons cannot be blamed for our wrongdoings. Judas is still guilty of betrayal whether Satan possessed him or not. Saul rejected God before Samuel says God rejected Saul. The Gadarenes had to have their sins forgiven not the demons. As it says in Matthew, if a man cleans his house (his soul) and kicks out a demon, he needs to fill it with something (Christ) or the original and seven more will move in and he'll be worse off then when he started (Matt 12:43-45).

     I read a lot, see my Goodreads account, and some of what I've read addresses demons, both fictionally and non-fictionally. Some titles that I'd consider references on this topic are: The Screwtape Letters (fiction) by CS Lewis. This Present Darkness (fiction), Piercing the Darkness (fiction), The Oath (fiction), The Wounded Spirit (non), The Visitation (fiction) all by Frank Peretti. Spirit of the Rainforest (non) by Mark Ritchie. Peace Child (non) and Lords of the Earth (non) by Don Richardson. The Witches Bible (non) by JS Farrar. I also have several books on my shelf I haven't read (I haven't read all of the above in their entirety, still working on Lords and merely flipped thru Witches but I own both). I plan on at least looking through them. Why? Two reasons and then part one is finished.

          1. God spends time on them so I think we should too. Not an inordinate amount of time, not in a fascination, but in order to understand them. God seems to think we should know about them, so I think we should know about them.

          2. While God is not in a war against Satan and the demons, we are. The first rule of combat is to know your enemy. When I've finished this set, thinking 3 parts right now, I'll hopefully have connected demons to everything from pop culture to ancient world religions. They are relevant, prevalent and malicious.

Next Time: Demons and Spirituality.

Braves dropped the last two at Arizona. Huddy looks more and more like a candidate for retirement when he has outings like yesterday. On a bright note, back home for 6 against the Dodgers and Twins so here's to catching fire for a double sweep! #GoBraves

At the Movies: Life of Pi *Spoilers*

     Had a wonderful Mother's Day Sunday, grilled out with my mother and then took my wife (for her 1st Mom's Day) out shopping. Then yesterday she and I went out to eat as well (and of course more shopping).

     Sunday night my 'rents grabbed a couple flicks from the box de la Red and we sat down to multiple award winning "Life of Pi." My sister tried to convince us it was actually pronounced Life of Pea but we made fun of her and looked it up online, confirming its actually Life of Pie.

     Fascinating movie which I probably won't watch again if I have the choice mainly because it was grounded on not knowing what was going to happen, knowing the ending makes the rest of it rather superfluous and not very exciting. There were several deep philosophical and religious questions addressed to which I will commit a few words.

     While I'm sure militant atheists had a explanation for the film, in most cases it assumed God. Not only did it assume God but the writer doing the interview is under the impression the story will make him believe in God. Something the story-teller is dubious about and gives the quote "I can only tell you the story, you must decide what to believe in." (Saxon's revised version.) Their conclusion, essentially the climax of the movie, is that God, or a belief in a god (faith), makes the world and the suffering therein endurable. That the story with the Tiger is better than the story without it. Truth is better served with a dose of the supernatural.

     The religious pluralism was anything but subtle in the film. Your main character is a Catholic Hindu who preforms Salah (the Muslim prayers) and teaches a course on Jewish culture or the law I don't remember precisely which. You could suggest the author was endeavoring to make him relatable to a person of any faith. However, it was the faith of pluralism, something I think inherent in the Hindu religion, which was preached by our hero. The are many roads to God and Pi happened to take most of them. I half expected him to have a pagan-tribal experience and "find God" there too.

     The way nature led Pi to God was a theme throughout. The 2nd storm which nearly killed them both reminded me of the book of Job in which God is asked "what else do I need to do to alleviate this suffering?" The answer was similar in the movie as in the Book, silence. God tells Job, not what to do, but who He is, teaching him and us that God's will is best because of who He is not what He does (we draw the conclusion from the end of the story that God's will ends up good for Job too, but that's not the validation of God's argument just a reassuring caveat). Pi, I think, was to understand God is the power of that storm and the life given to him is a gift easily taken. This lesson is evidently learned when he reaches the island. Which in the symbolic story is carnivorous but in reality I believe was where he knew he'd die alone. The island may not actually eat him, but it would take any chance he'd have of a life worth living; the life God had miraculously given him. Still haven't figured out the meaning of the tooth. Again connecting to Job, at the end of the movie you see Pi's family and the life he's enjoying now, seemingly better than anything he'd had before. God had brought him through the storm, tested his faith, and rewarded him with a blessed life.

     Along with that, the inner tiger was a theme. Each of us, according to this film, in my opinion, have a young man and a tiger within us. The young man is innocent and trusting; the tiger is violent and resourceful. Without the tiger Pi would've been eaten by the cook. Without the young man, Pi would be disconnected from the world, a killer driven only to survive and not to live. Interestingly, the young man trusts the carnivorous island while his survival instinct (the tiger) runs and hides on the boat. Same response to the storm, Pi rips open the boat cover and stares full on into the storm (God) while his instincts run and hide. His inner killer is afraid of God. While these may be coincidences from the writer's standpoint, I like them and think they are great symbols. Possibly a dichotomy of Soul (Pi) and Mind (Tiger) one driven by the supernatural the other by logic/rationality/instinct. Remember, Pi admits Richard Parker didn't have a soul but pleads with the viewer (and the writer) to believe there's more than just natural machinery to animals and by extension human beings.

     Being afraid of water and lacking any ability to swim beyond a doggy paddle for a few feet, I would've died about 5 minutes into the movie. Trapped on a raft in the ocean is virtually the most terrifying thing possible, I'd have taken my chances with Richard Parker in the boat and gotten eaten.

Next time, if something doesn't pop up, I'll write about some of my observations regarding Demonology.

     My Braves broke out of a slump (lost 5 of 6)  in a big way yesterday pounding the D-Backs. The offense has settled into a bit of an inconsistent up-and-down pattern. Getting JHey back healthy will help, Mac has been raking. JUpton and CJ2.0 for MVPrado, Delgado and a minor-leaguer will go down in Braves trade lore history. What a move Frank! One of these posts, when I can't think of anything philosophical, I'll lay out my novel ideas regarding baseball and why I should be a GM. As was once said, "There are three things every man thinks he can do better than anyone else: drive, run a hotel and manage a baseball team."

Eine Kleine Theologie

I haven't written much regarding my specific Theological bent. Here goes somethings.

God.

     I believe God is.
     I believe God was.
     I believe God will be.
     I believe God is independent of anything.
     I believe God occupies space-time but also exists outside of it.
     I believe God created space-time.
     I believe God created space-time out of nothing.
     I believe God has complete control over space-time and everything in it.
     I believe God is perfect.
     I believe God is always right.
     I believe God will never change.
     I believe God is the standard for everything good.
     I believe God cares.
     I believe God has a purpose.
     I believe God won.
    
     I do not believe God created evil.
     I do not believe God needs anything.
     I do not believe God is obligated to do anything.
     I do not believe God vainly promises.
     I do not believe God is conceivable.
     I do not believe God had to compete.
     I do not believe God is alone. (In that, He is 3-in-1 a Being of relationship)
     I do not believe God is a sociological concept derived from natural occurrences meant to entrench the higher class.
     I do not believe God can be used to obtain peace, wealth, fame or power.
     I do not believe God can be used.
     I do not believe God is me.
     I do not believe God is nature.
     I do not believe God is all things but instead all is from and as a result of Him.
     I do not believe God is unfair.
     I do not believe God is a dualistic necessity representing the good against the bad.

I want to know which of these y'all want more on instead of doing a talk on each. Hit me back. And Shane, can't you hear Trip-Lee doing this list?

Off With His Head!

     Capital Punishment. A popular topic for banner-waving, cat-calling, pistol-waving hicks in Texas but something I think we should look at more seriously as Christians. This will be an argument from the viewpoint of a believer, so bear in mind it will be a moral argument not a purely logical one.

                                Romans 13

                                    (KJV)

13 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.

² Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
³ For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:
⁴ For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
⁵ Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.
⁶ For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.
⁷ Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.
⁸ Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.
⁹ For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
¹⁰ Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.
¹¹ And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed.
¹² The night is far spent, the day is at hand: let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armour of light.
¹³ Let us walk honestly, as in the day; not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and wantonness, not in strife and envying.
¹⁴ But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof.

     I know, that's almost as much reading as one of my posts, but its the de facto passage to defend Capitol Punishment, particularly verse 4: "for he beareth not the sword in vain." 

     Before I address that, let me present my position. I believe that the Law, or Government, is designed to do two things. 1 - defend the nation from foreign threats and 2 - protect the citizens from domestic threats. Therefore, when someone attempts to kill, both me (my just war theory) and the government have the right/duty to kill that person. BUT if that person has been arrested, placed in a prison and given no option of escape or return to society, why kill them? Why end a God-given life? Is murder unforgivable? Is it impossible for a murdered to be saved? It is once they've been executed. This is entirely from the perspective of a voter decided whether or not to support a candidate. Can God saved someone who the government is planning on executing? Of course. But as soon as death comes, salvation is not an option. At least, that's what my Bible seems to say. So why support the elimination of the possibility of salvation? Once again, I understand possibilities and God's Will are not congruent. But I do not know God's Will. Why support something that demonstrates such finality, even allowing the government to act as God and condemn not just a body but also a soul? I agree, God is executing mortal judgment through the government, but does it not make sense to allow for the most amount of time/opportunities as possible? Why are Pro-Life advocates in favor of electrocuting people? So, you answer with Romans 13:4. Consider this option. The verse says, he (government), "execute(s) wrath upon him that doeth evil." It doesn't say, "slices off evil's head" or "destroys evil's body" or anything else implicitly violent. The sword, in this case, could be a symbol of military might and suggest the right of a government to suppress revolts. 

     The other argument I've heard is this. God loves Justice, therefore He approves when justice is served. When someone kills they deserve to die. Really? When someone lies they deserve to die. When someone ignores God's leading in their life and chooses to disobey they deserve to die. God loves Justice, but its His love of Mercy that keeps us from being fried on the spot every single day. Why can't we exemplify God's love of Mercy in the way we vote?

What do you think?

Braves LOST, 12-2 but we are still perfect when we actually score a run. 1-0 against the Royals and former Brave Jeff Francoeur both drove in the winning run and threw out a runner at the plate to preserve it. If I hadn't loved him in Atlanta I'd be really ticked at him.