Feel far from God?

I saw a sign outside a church recently: Feel far from God? Guess who moved? There's a popular teaching in Evangelical Christianity that basically says "If you feel far from God, it's you who moved."

This is not only a terrible guilt trip, it's also not always the case. Sometimes, yes, we do walk away from God. Sometimes this is intentional. We get mad at God or the church and decide it's not worth following Him anymore. We willingly, knowingly leave Him. Sometimes through inattention and laziness we simply slowly, quietly drift away from Him.

However, there are other cases.

First, I want to point out that just because we feel far from God, doesn't necessarily mean we are. Feelings are fickle and unreliable. When we feel far from God, we need to look to see if it's just a feeling or if it reflects reality. I'm reminded of the well known poem Footprints. The writer felt far from Jesus, but in fact He was carrying him in those very times he didn't feel His presence.

Next, When we continually, willfully sin He will draw away. This is to protect us. Just as light destroys dark, so will His holiness destroy us if we are dark with sin. In these cases, He will pull back so His glory does not undo our weak frames. He remembers we are dust and takes that into consideration in His dealings with us. There are some schools of thought that believe this is the true manifestation of Hell. The complete and utter lack of God's presence because He has completely withdrawn from a soul due to its repeated and continuous rejection of Him.

Finally, there are times where God pulls away, not due to our sin, but to increase our desire for His presence. This is typified in Song of Solomon 5:2-16 where the Bridegroom knocks on the door but leaves before the Bride has a chance to open the door. She immediately gets up to open the door. She wants and desires His presence with her, but He departs prior to her opening the door; just His scent is left behind on the latch. The purpose of this withdrawal is to increase her desire for Him and cause her to come follow Him. And it works. She leaves the comfort of her chamber and goes out searching for Him. Her search, driven by a deeper desire for Him, takes her to the very places that she refused to go earlier when He simply asked her to come with Him.

Black, White and Shades of Grey

I just read a rant (related to testing during software development) where the author presented two options. He then tore down one while building up the other. It was presented as two mutually exclusive positions. The problem with his argument is the situation is much more complex than two mutually exclusive situations. In this particular case, there are a whole range of positions not only between the two presented, but also on either side of them.

As I thought about this article, it occurred to me this is another angle related to what I tried to communicate in my previous ramblings about science and politics. In our society right now, we are so fond of using false dilemas in our arguments that we forget to investigate other methods of discussion. So often we get locked into a black and white discussion of option A or B and forget there are many other options to consider.

Just as an example, the recent debate that raged, and probably will again, over the USA's Federal budget. Everyone talked about raising taxes or lowering spending, as if these are the only two options available. One or the other. But just these two variables give nine combinations, not simply two.

Taxes	Spending
Raise	Leave
Raise	Lower	Mentioned a few times here and there
Raise	Raise	Popular among the more liberally minded
Lower	Leave
Lower	Lower	Popular among the more conservatively minded
Lower	Raise
Leave	Leave
Leave	Lower
Leave	Raise

Of course there are many, many other variables in the whole discussion regarding the economy, both from a national as well as international standpoint.

But the budget and economy is not the point of this article; it's just an example. Just as the software design issue I opened with is an example. I think it would do us well as a society to stop trying to pit one thing against the other in a dualistic, mutually exclusive type of way.

It's a logical fallacy. It gives the appearance of debate and argument, but it's really a means to try to manipulate your opponent. It's a dirty tactic and does not serve to promote dialog and resolution of issues.

It serves to divide us into various waring camps were we try to get our strategy to be the "winner." This simply causes all of us to lose. Rather, we must remember we have common problems, and we do best to focus on all the various ways available to fix them, not just two mutually exclusive possibilities out of the multitude of potential solutions. These different things we get so passionate about are the means to an end, not the end in and of itself.

Are Republicans Anti-Science?

I recently read an op-ed piece in the New York Times claiming good odds that the next Republican president will be anti-science and anti-knowledge. The author went on to prove his point by saying both Governor Perry and Mitt Romney, two front runners in the Republican race when this article was written, are both against evolution and the idea of man-caused global climate change. The author finds this "terrifying," a word he used multiple times. This is the latest example of a common meme popping up recently where disagreement on certain topics, particularly evolution and climate change, are anti-science. I want to address this claim.

First, I am not a die-hard Republican. There are many issues upon which I disagree with much of the Republican leadership I see and hear at the national level. I don't really like any of the front-runners. So, I am not trying to defend and support this party over any other. However, I am a technologist who uses the scientific method on a daily basis. I have interests in both the hard and soft sciences.

I find it somewhat interesting this conversation is occurring in the political arena this time. Typically when I see public argument over creation/evolution, it's presented as a battle between Christianity and Science. I'm going to attempt to explain what science is and how being either for or against evolution or human caused climate change, or any one of many other topics, has nothing to do with science. I suppose you could call it the philosophy of science.

Simply stated, science is about what we know about physical objects and processes. Science is what we can, using our five senses, establish facts about. Science is based on what we can see, hear, taste, smell and touch, either directly or through proxy using instrumentation. The scientific method is a means by which we can reason about things we can sense. It involves hypothesis and experiment. And it requires repeatability. If experiments cannot be repeated by different people in different places at different times with consistent results, then the hypothesis is called into question.

However, science is not the only way of knowing. It works really well to discover things about the natural universe: physics, biology, chemistry and other things that we can manipulate in the physical realm. Things that can be directly measured lend themselves to the scientific method. It starts to break down when it's applied to the fringes of our senses in hard sciences and to softer sciences such as sociology, anthropology and psychology. These work less with individual things and more with groups. Measurement is done at the statistical level, rather than directly. Because of this, there is more room for interpretation and bias to enter into the picture. There is at least one level of abstraction through which to obfuscate and introduce error. And typically, there are many more than one.

Finally, there are areas of knowing to which science cannot be applied. History. Literature. Language. Anything that cannot be experimented on. Things that cannot be reproduced. Things that cannot be measured. These are areas where science is agnostic. They are outside its domain. That's not to say they're not unknowable, just that science cannot be used to know them.

The entire argument over origins, whether you stand in the evolution or creation or some other camp, is not science. It falls, in its entirety, into the last category of things we can know. It's history. It's philosophy. It's faith. It might be an interesting thing to think about and debate, and it may turn out to be very critical to your future, but it is not science. There is one simple reason for this assertion: it happened in the past. You cannot create experiments about the past. You cannot see, hear, taste, smell or touch things in the past. All science tells you about is what we can observe in the present, now, today.

Yes, there are quite a few scientists who believe the evolution story. However, that does not make it science. And there are quite a few scientists who do not believe the story of evolution. But that does not make it non-science. What makes it non-science is that it is history. It cannot be repeated. And of course, the same is true of the creation story. Those who want to place creationism in the science curriculum are as misguided as those who want to put (or more accurately, keep) evolution there. Both belong in the humanities along with US History, World History and Philosophy.

Moving to the other topic of the op-ed author: man-made climate change. His assertion that any climate change we see is caused by humans is a statement of belief, not science. Again the reason is based on the problem with establishing repeatable experiments. Because it is a planetary phenomena, experiments also must be of a planetary scale over geologic time periods. In order to do any valid experimentation on this problem, one would need multiple, identical planets, some for controls and some on which to vary experimental parameters. One would also need to either be able to manipulate time or have a very long period over which to run the experiments. Further, there is very good evidence that the planet was much warmer in the past. Humans probably didn't cause it to cool to the present temperature. And we probably can't keep it from warming in the future.

What the author of this NYT editorial does is elevate science to a religion. He puts faith in things that have an air, but lack the substance, of science. He then wants to take action based on that belief. And then anyone who doesn't worship at the same altar he does, he disparages by calling them "anti-science" and "anti-knowledge." They terrify him.

Mr. Op-Ed Author, these people may not be anti-this or anti-that. Rather, perhaps they better grasp the limits of science and, knowing these limits, they are better equipped to evaluate the things science is capable of telling them, integrate the data with other knowledge, and have simply come to different conclusions. That should not make them terrifying. That should make them engaging and interesting.

I hope all those who equate evolution to science and anyone who disagrees with them as anti-science are simply ignorant regarding what science is about. Ignorance is easily dealt with through education. We can discuss and come to an agreement, or we may agree to disagree and still remain civil. However, if they are being disingenuous and intentionally framing the debate in a wrong and inflammatory manner, well, I'll let the reader apply their own description to that behavior.

In summation, the problem comes when things are asserted as true, particularly under the guise of "science," that are not scientific facts but rather conjecture, opinion and untestable hypothesis. As a society, we need to be honest with the frames we use to present arguments or we are going to get more and more polarized and divided. Calling groups "anti-science" or "anti-knowledge" simply alienates and furthers the gap between people, ultimately pulling society apart rather than building it up.

Be Merry! (Why?)

I don't know if the occurrence is actually increasing, or if I'm just suddenly aware of it, but advertising seems to be exhorting me to Be merry! more and more this Christmas season. The message isn't the traditional Merry Christmas or even the vacuous Seasons Greetings, but simply Be Merry.

My initial, admittedly contrarian, response is Why?

There is no reason to be merry. Unemployment is high. Investments are down. There's turmoil within the United States between those who would steal the fruits of others worked hard and those who would not share the bounty they've been given. There's economic instability and social unrest in Europe. Groups are killing each other in Africa. The middle East seems to be getting more and more radicalized. Parts of Asia are aggressively attacking the computer resources of the West and oppressing their own while other parts of Asia are melting down from natural disasters. Chaos increases around the planet.

What reason is there for merriness? Gaiety? Cheerfulness?

The exhortation needs to come with a purpose. Without context, all that's left is to look around and see what's happening in the world and despair of any incentive. In fact, it would be pretty irrational in the context of the current circumstances. The simplistic Be Merry has no context for the exhortation and therefore lacks any moral imperative.

The original context needs to be restored. The context for this holiday is Christmas. The context is remembering that God wants to be with us. He originally created the earth as a place to meet with us. We are unique: the only part of creation made in His image. This enables us to have fellowship with Him. But, we rebelled and broke fellowship with Him.

However, in spite of our rejecting Him, He still wanted fellowship with us. So much so He became one of us. And that's what we celebrate this season.

We remember His first arrival as an infant. The message to Mary. The travel to Bethlehem. The full inn and the manger. The angels' announcement to the the shepherds. The star guiding wise men with their gifts. The incarnation. Emmanuel. God with us.

We remember how He walked among us, showing us the heart of God. He took upon Himself the debt we couldn't pay and paid it in full by dying on the cross. We celebrate Jesus. Savior. The perfect Lamb of God.

We remember how three days later He picked His life back up. Death could not keep Him down. He is the first of many who will overcome death by what He has done for us. We celebrate His resurrection. The Living One.

We remember that, as bad as things are on the earth now, they will get worse. But they won't stay that way. He will return a second time to bring justice to this planet. All things will be restored in perfect accordance with God's will. He will prevail. We celebrate His return. The King of kings.

God loves us and want's fellowship with us. He wants to walk with us. He wants everything to be made right and has done everything in His power to provide a way for us to be at peace with Him. We simply need to place our faith in Him and in what He's done for us.

When we look at the world from His perspective, we are able to see the beginning and the end and understand the reason for any chaos we have in our circumstances or in the events around the globe. And we understand it is only temporary.

It is only in the context of His story that it makes sense to be merry.

Merry Christmas!

Related articles:

Thoughts on the Incarnation
Why Celebrate Christmas?

Enough Excitement For This Week

The other night my darling wife had gone to bed as I sat next to her to catch up on e-mail. After about 5 minutes, out of the blue, she said "That's a pretty bad. Do you smell it?" A moment later the hair on the back of my neck raised as the acrid smell of burning electronics reached my nose. I raced downstairs headed to the basement, my first thought being I'd left the soldering iron on two nights before and it'd finally had too much. But almost as soon as I thought it, I remembered specifically turning it off and triple checking it.

I reached the bottom of the stairs, turned to head to the basement and flipped on the lights in the kitchen to illumine the way. I didn't make it any further: the kitchen was full of smoke. I quickly scanned everything and didn't see anything obviously pouring out smoke. Next scan was to check if anything was on: nothing. I felt everything that was plugged in. Nothing was hot. Just to be on the safe side, I unplugged each item when I got to it.

Since everything seemed to be in order, I headed to the basement to make sure it wasn't coming up from there. There wasn't any smoke in the stairs and by the time I got to the bottom, the air was clear and odorless. All clear there.

Heading back upstairs I could tell it was definitely strongest in the kitchen. But I could also tell it was already dissipating; undoubtedly the smoke was less than when I first came down. A bit relieved, but still concerned, I started a slower, more methodical check of all the built-in appliances. The dishwasher. The garbage disposal. The stove. The refrigerator. I felt the walls for hot spots. Everything seemed in order.

As I scratched my head trying to figure out where the smell had come from, Diane opened the windows and started the fans. Of course, it was about 30F outside. I turned off the furnace. I realized that of the things plugged in, the only things with automatic switches that could have been on were the furnace and refrigerator. Since the furnace is under the kitchen and has a cold air return right next to it, I thought perhaps it had burned up and vented through the ducts. I went to the basement and found it to be in order.

Next I pulled the refrigerator out from the wall and unplugged it. I grabbed a nut driver and removed the cardboard dust cover on the back. I didn't see anything obviously wrong, but I couldn't see much either. Smelling the dust cover however immediately told me this was the source. It reeked of the magic smoke that makes electronics work.

Now, confident we'd found the source, it was now cold and the house wasn't going to burn down, Diane headed back to bed and I to my e-mail with the windows still open and fans still running to vent the obnoxious odors. When it was too cold to stand anymore, I closed everything up, turned the heater back on and went to bed.

Next day the appliance repair man came out. As he walked through the door, he said, "Ah, I smell a burned out relay."

Twenty minutes later he was done, the fridge was cooling again and we had this souvenir. (Click images for larger view.)





That was enough excitement for this week, and many more too.

Attributes of Jesus from Revelation 1 (4 of 4)

Today's article is the last in this series on the Attributes of Jesus from Revelation 1. So far, we've covered: Part 1 (verse 5): Jesus Christ, Faithful Witness, Firstborn from the dead, Ruler of the kings; Part 2 (verses 5-10): Lover, Free-er, Maker, Receiver, Coming on the clouds, Visible to all, Alpha and Omega, The Almighty, Voice like a trumpet; and Part 3 (verse 13-15): Among the lamp stands, Son of Man, Robe to feet, Golden sash on chest, Head like wool/Hair like snow, Eyes like blazing fire, Feet like burnished bronze, Voice like many waters. And now for the final verses 16 through 18.

Holds seven stars in His right hand

The right hand is the place of blessing and honor. The right hand wields power and strength. The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches (represented by the lamp stands in verse 13) of Asia Minor: Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia and Laodicea. Each of the letters in Revelation 2 and 3 are written to these angels. An open question about which there is much debate is: Are these angels in the heavenly sense, like Gabriel and Michael? Or is this word used in the "messenger" sense, as in the leader (e.g. pastor, teacher, prophet) over the church in the human sense? In either case, it's Jesus who holds them. Not an angel. Not a mere man. But Jesus. The Shepherd. The one who corrects and disciplines and serves and protects. He is the one who provides leadership to the church. Genesis 48:14,18,19; 1st Kings 2:19; Psalm 45:9, 60:5, 63:8, 108:6, 118:15-16, 110:1; Matthew 20:21,23, 22:44, 25:32-34; Revelation 1:11,20; Ephesians 4:15, 5:23

Out of his mouth comes a sharp, double-edged sword

Jesus is the living, active Word of God, sharper than a double-edged sword, able to divide between soul and spirit, joints and marrow, able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart. The Word of God is the sword the Spirit wields. It was by Jesus' word that everything came into being; He spoke and it was. That same power and authority will be released to kill all who would presume to war against Him. John 1:1-5; Ephesians 6:17; Colossians 1:16; Hebrews 4:12; Revelation 19:11-21

Face shining like the sun in its strength

This is the same description as used on the mount of transfiguration. Just as the sun comes up every day, so too will David's throne be established forever; David's kingdom endure. This is fulfilled in Jesus, the descendent of David, both in His everlasting kingdom and in His physical appearance. From the rising of the sun until its setting the name of the Lord is to be praised. Here, it will never set, so praise will rise continually. Nothing can hide from the sun's heat. In perfect beauty and holiness, God's fire shines forth as a consuming fire. God's shining face brings salvation to His people and destruction to their enemies. Matthew 17:2; Psalm 19:6, 50:2-3, 80:3,7,19, 94:1, 97:1-12, 113:3; Daniel 7:10

First and Last

He is unique. There is no God before Him, nor will there be one after Him. This is our comfort; we don't have to be afraid of changes in rulership. Regardless of what we go through, He has been there and is there and will be there. He is all sufficient. He was the agent of creation, the originator of all things. In the end, al things will be subject to Him. Evil will be abolished and the righteousness of His kingdom will reign. As Savior, He is the one who starts our life of faith and He is the one wo brings it to completion. Isaiah 41:4, 43:10, 44:6, 46:4, 48:12; John 1:3; 1st Corinthians 15:24-26; Colossians 1:16, 2:9-12; 2nd Peter 3:7; Hebrews 1:2, 2:10, 12:2; Revelation 1:8, 1:17

Living One

This is the title of Jesus used by the angels at the tomb on the first resurrection Sunday. "The" Living One. Not "A" living One. The definite article is used. He is unique, specific. The "Living" One. He's alive by His own life force. Death could not keep Him down. He is the Life-giver. Life flows from His very being. The Living "One". In conjunction with the definite article, emphasizing the uniqueness of His singularity. There is only one source of Life. This echos Jesus' own statement about Himself: I am the Way, the Truth and the Life. The fulfillment of the Feast of First Fruits. He's the source of all life. The one in whom we live and move and have our being. This title is in contrast to all else. All other idols and gods and things people worship are not living, but only exist because He created them whether spiritual beings or physical objects. And as created beings, they are not worthy of worship, even though they may claim and demand worship. Luke 24:5; John 14:6; Acts 2:24, 17:24-29; Romans 6:4,9; 2nd Corinthians 13:4; Revelation 13:2-8

Was dead

How can the Living One become dead? It truly is a mystery. The Infinite becoming a finite human is easier to understand than the Living One dying. But scriptures says it happened. What it means or how it was accomplished I don't know. But here Jesus declares it about Himself, so it must be. Paul also mentions it. I suspect it's related somehow to Jesus becoming master over death. Perhaps it is related to Jesus being baptized. It wasn't because He was in need of repentance, but rather so that we, as part of the bundle of the living wrapped up in Him, might experience baptism with Him. In a similar way to His baptism, He had to die so we, bundled with Him, might die with Him so we could be raised with Him. In His humanity, as a prototype for all human-kind, He died. It's bending. My brain explodes. It's mush trying to wrap itself around this mystery. Romans 6:8-10

Now alive forevermore

The Living One, who was dead, is now alive forever and ever and ever. The Living One could not be held by death; it was impossible. Like darkness has no choice but to flee before light, death had no choice but to flee before the Living One. He did not have to die over and over again but rather His sacrifice is sufficient, once for all people for all time. It is appointed for all to die once and after that face judgement. Since He has now died once, He's now alive forever to bring salvation to those who place their trust in His atoning death. Acts 2:24; Romans 5:6-19, 6:10; Colossians 1:21-23; 1st Peter 3:18; Hebrews 9:21-28, 10:10-12

Hold keys of death and Hades

The one holding the keys is free to enter and leave at will. He has authority over that place. This is what He did. He entered and spent three days in Hell. Then He left of His own accord. He has authority over even death. The last enemy. He is the one who has freed us and we no longer have to live in fear. Death has no substance anymore. It is merely a powerless shadow. Hell and the place of destruction are naked before Him. The gates of death are revealed to Him and He sees the gates of darkness. He will abolish death. There will no longer be any death. Matthew 12:4; Psalm 23:4; Job 26:6, 38:17; 1st Corinthians 15:26; 2nd Timothy 1:10; Hebrews 2:15; Revelation 21:4

And that's it for this series. I hope you were blessed by it. If you have any thoughts, please leave them in the comments below.

Attributes of Jesus from Revelation 1 (3 of 4)

This is the third installment in my series on the Attributes of Jesus taken from Revelation 1. (Here are part 1 and part 2.) Today's items are found in verses 13 through 15.

Among the lamp stands

The lamp stands represent the church. He walks among His people. He is in our midst. He doesn't leave us. By the Holy Spirit, we burn in love and joy and praise before God with faith and character that have been refined through trials as if by fire. There were lamps in the tabernacle and temple the priests were responsible to tend. They trimmed the wicks and filled the oil to provide a constant, pure light. Jesus too is the final High Priest giving us the oil of His Spirit to burn for Him. Revelation 1:20; Matthew 18:20, 28:20; Hebrews 13:5; Job 23:10; Zechariah 13:9; 1st Peter 1:6-9; Matthew 3:11

Son of Man

In Jesus, God became man so He knows what we are going through and can come to our aid. We don't have a priest who cannot relate to us, but one who knows what we go through. He has, once for all, obtained redemption for us and, because of His sacrifice, as a man, He will rule and reign forever. Hebrews 2:17-18, 4:15, 9:11-12; Revelation 5:9; Daniel 7:13-14; Matthew 24:30, 26:64; Mark 13:26, 14:62; Luke 21:27

Robe to feet

The robe, in conjunction with the sash, are priestly garments, again showing His role as one who mediates between God and mankind. The robe represents the salvation and righteousness by which He rules and which He confers upon His people. Exodus 28:4; Leviticus 8:7; Hebrews 7:25-28; 2nd Chronicles 6:31; Isaiah 61:10; Psalm 132:9,16; Romans 3:21-26, 5:14-21; 1st Corinthians 1:30-31; Philippians 1:9-11

Golden sash on His chest

Like the robe above, the sash indicates His position as priest. This evokes the image Paul gives regarding the armor of God: the robe of truth and breastplate of righteousness. Jesus is the Truth. He is our righteousness. Exodus 28:4; Leviticus 8:7; Isaiah 22:21; Ephesians 6:14; John 14:6; 1st Corinthians 1:30

Head and hair like wool and snow

This passage directly links Jesus of John's vision to the Ancient of Days of Daniel's vision. White hair symbolizes the wisdom of age. There is no one who has more wisdom than Him. This direct link also confirms Jesus' devine nature. He is God just as the Father is God. Daniel 7:9; Job 12:12-13

Eyes like blazing fire

Fire symbolizes judgement. Judgement can bring one of two results. It can condemn or it can reward. It can destroy and purify. Like light destroys darkness, God's presence destroys those who are against Him. But for those who join themselves to Him, it purifies and protects. It provides light and guidance and brings glory to God. Jesus is the light of heaven. Genesis 19:24; Exodus 13:21; Psalm 11:6; Isaiah 43:2, 64:1-2, 66:15; Zechariah 13:9; Malachi 3:2-6; Matthew 5:14-16, 6:22; Luke 3:9, 8:16-17, 11:36; Acts 2:3; 1st Corinthians 3:12-15; Revelation 19:11-12, 21:23, 22:5

Feet like burnished bronze, glowing from a furnace

Feet are the place of subjection. Enemies are trampled underfoot. Bowing at the feet shows respect and submission. Bronze represents judgement. The altar in the tabernacle and temple was of bronze as were all the utensils accompanying it. The altar is where sin was judged and atoned for by sacrifice. Moses lifted up the bronze serpent to bring healing to the people being judged for their sins. In the same way, Jesus was lifted up on the cross to provide healing to all who would look to Him for their salvation. Glowing from a furnace represents purity. Combining these concepts, all judgement is subject to Jesus, or in other words, He is the supreme judge because He was the perfect Lamb of God, sacrificed for the sins of the world. His judgement is correct. There is no impurity in it. Feet: 2nd Samuel 22:38-39; Esther 8:3; Mark 7:25, 22:5; 1st Corinthians 15:27; Hebrews 2:8; Bronze: Exodus 27:1-8; Numbers 21:5-9; John 3:14-15; Furnace: Proverbs 17:3; Isaiah 48:10; Zechariah 13:9; 1st Corinthians 3:11-13; 1st Peter 1:6-8

Voice like many waters

These are the same words that were used to describes the Father's voice. He speaks and things come into existence. It has to be obeyed. Like a tsunami, His voice is irresistible, loud, cleansing, powerful and majestic. It judges and sweeps away impurity. Like rain, it is life giving. Without it nothing would exist. Genesis 1; Exodus 15:26; Deuteronomy 13:4,18; Ezekiel 43:2; Psalm 29:3-9; John 1:1-5; Revelation 16:1-12, 21:1-8

That's it for today. We'll finish the rest next time. As always, if you have any thoughts, please leave them in the comments below.