Justification By Faith - Alone?

T.B. Vick at Shadows of Divine Things has an interesting post about the Protestant doctrine of justification by faith alone. Read it here.

I Always Wondered Why Gas Stations Never Had Sales or Discounts on Gas

But now I know why.

Slow Holiday Blogging

I've noticed over the last year or so that blogging, or at least with the blogs I read, takes a nap at holidays. This being Memorial Day weekend in the US. I'm not sure why. Other projects? Out of town? Excessive barbequing? Too much to eat?

Maybe some of you could comment on what you did this weekend.

Taking Things for Granted

Quite often Christians are warned against taking things for granted, as if such a thing were a sin or at least a problem. But what about taking things for granted that have been granted to us? Occasionally, I hear warnings against taking our salvation for granted. But God has granted it to me. So, if I take it for granted, is it a problem or a sin? What, is God going to take it back from me? If I take it for granted, then I know that I don't have to toil in perfectionism in order to keep it, and this is good.

So, we should only refuse to take things for granted that haven't to our knowledge been granted to us.

A Dad Named Sue

The father of the St. Louis Cardinals pitcher, Josh Hancock, recently killed in a car crash is suing everybody in the phone book for being contributors to his son's death. Hancock was drunk, speeding, talking on his cell phone and not wearing a seat belt when he slammed into a tow truck that was helping a stalled car on the interstate. But it's everybody else's fault.

Named in the lawsuit, according to this Comcast article, are Cardinals radio announcer Mike Shannon's restaurant, Shannon's daughter and restaurant manager, the towing company, the tow truck driver and the driver of the stalled car. Apparently the stalled car and tow truck were not out of the way of oncoming traffic. The driver of the stalled car is being sued for being "negligent in allowing his vehicle to reach the point where it stalled on the highway, and for failing to move it out of the way of oncoming traffic." It's not clear whether the Cardinals or Major League Baseball will be added to the lawsuit. They probably won't, since they have enough money to squash this guy in a lawsuit of such high profile.

What's interesting about this is that using the father's own logic, a case could just as easily be made, and maybe more easy to win, that his own negligence as a father in raising somebody who would do such a thing contributed to the damage to the tow truck and to the now stained name of the driver of the stalled car. I can't wait to see if the name of the person Hancock was talking to on the cell phone is released and why that person wasn't named in the lawsuit. He or she probably could tell he was drunk and that he was driving a car. Now that would be a freaky thing, to be talking to somebody on the phone and have them die in an accident during your conversation.

Glove Romney

When it comes to baseball, I have a good understanding the difference between a mitt and a glove. When it comes to politics, I have no clue.

Zoning Laws (Part 9) McMansion Suburbia

Read entire series here.

SuperSize me. American suburbia has entered a phase where house sizes are continually increasing for the same (or smaller) size families that live in them. This is often criticized as consumerism run rampant, is looked upon as an increase in selfishness and materialism, and is preached against by both environmentalists and religious leaders. But a closer look reveals something different.

Since zoning laws dictate minimum lot sizes, and thus limits the availability of lots, an artificially high price of land results. This is true of land prices, but not of construction costs. So over time there is an increase of land value versus house value. The piece of dirt is the biggest factor in the price of a home. What this does is creates a false sense of value through building a larger house. If a buyer could buy a 1000 square foot house for $1.1 million and a 3000 square foot house for $1.2 million, most are likely to opt for the latter. Those marginalized people who can afford a $1.1M house, but not a $1.2M house will simply buy the 3000 square foot house in the next community level down. Living life in one's house is more important than living on the land that house is on, even though the land costs more. For only 10% more money, one can obtain three times the house on the same piece of land. So, for the value, the largest house makes the most sense. Developers know this very well. People want a house, but the land is the biggest cost.

This has led to the latest building fad here in the San Francisco area, known as the "knockdown." People are now buying houses, let's say a ranch house built in the 60's, and they don't like the ugly architecture or small size. They bulldoze the house, because it's value is so small compared to the land on it. They then build a new, larger house in its place. It sounds ridiculous, but it makes economic sense.

Now something about value. Buying the "family size" product at the store is of value because at a larger size, the cost per unit is lower. It is more valuable for a family to buy this size than twice the amount of the regular size. But there's a side to it that we tend not to think about. For the individual, actually buying the smaller size, even though it has a higher cost per unit, can have the most value. If the bulk size item is too large for me to consume and will go bad before I can use it, or if I don't have the space to store it, then the smaller size is the best value for me because I won't be wasting money on something I can't fully use.

But for many people, zoning laws actually prohibit them from gaining the best value in land because the smaller size land item is unavailable. Imagine that. Getting a good land value is against the law! So people simply do what is the next best thing. Value is transferred from the land to the house. McMansion suburbia has more to do with reacting to zoning laws than with greed and selfishness.

Part 8 . . . . . . . . Part 10

God and His People: Limiting the Use of Biblical Metaphors

The bible uses quite a number of metaphors to describe the relationship between God (and/or Christ) and His people. This is because the relationship is complex. Many metaphors are used, as analogies, simply because this relationship can't be described in its fullness. Every analogy fails at some point, so each metaphor has its limitations.

So when we restrict the number of metaphors used in describing this relationship, we do violence to this relationship. Off the top of my head, here are some metaphors describing our relationship to God:

God is our God, we are His people. God is a Father, we are His children. Christ is the vine, we are the branches. God/Christ is the Lord/King, we are His subjects. Jesus is the Master, we are His disciples. Jesus is Master, we are servants. Christ is the head, the church is the body, with individuals being members of the body. Christ is the bridegroom, the church is the bride. Christ is the heir, we are co-heirs. We are brethren, Christ is our elder brother. Christ is the temple, we are the stones. We are the temple, the apostles are the foundation, and Christ is the cornerstone. Christ is the shepherd, we are the sheep (individuality) and Christ is the shepherd, we are the flock (community).

Some, like the high-church types, limit our relationship to maybe a few of these metaphors. Others, to quote a pastor friend of mine, "like Rome, almost drop the metaphor completely and assume a genuine ontological reality - the most obvious example is what they do with the 'body of Christ.' It's a metaphor, not an ontological statement about the extension of Jesus' incarnation!" Much of what goes on in Protestant theology, as well, limits our existence to the confines of the church, and its few metaphors, when the greater applications of metaphors suggest that the kingdom, and our relationship to God in it, is far greater than the church.

How The Government Turns Potential Destruction Into Guaranteed Destruction

Have an ash tree in your yard? Even if you don't, read this over at the Anti-Positivist.

[UPDATE: Gene Redlin, who makes a living at horticulture, made a comment on the ash tree disease story I linked. Thank you, Gene, for the additional information.]

How Did The Devil Get Control Of The Earth? (Part 2)

And he led Him up and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time. And the devil said to Him, "I will give you all this domain and its glory; for it has been handed over to me, and I give it to whomever I wish. Therefore if You worship before me, it shall all be Yours." And Jesus answered and said to him, "It is written, 'You shall worship the LORD your God and serve Him only.'" Luke 4:5-8 NASB

Read Part 1 here.

My answer to my question in Part 1 is that the devil gained control of the earth through Adam's disobedience in the garden. God gave Adam and Eve control of the earth. Authority was delegated to them. God was still ultimately in control, but authority over the land, the animals and plants were given to them. The animals also had authority over the plants as food. It could be argued that within the marriage, there was a kind of authority structure between husband and wife, too.

Satan was left out of this chain of command, left out of the picture altogether, and was envious. The chain of authority went like this: God, then man (and Adam then Eve within the marriage), then animals, then plants including the forbidden fruit. Satan wanted to be God. So to get to be God, he turned the authority tree upside down. He presented the fruit to the woman. But to keep the authority relationships in order, he had to enter the scheme as an animal; he chose the serpent. So he used the fruit, as a serpent, to deceive the woman, who deceived the man, and both of them took Satan at his word, replacing God's word. Satan tricked them into listening to him now instead of God.

Since God delegated authority to Adam and Eve, Satan by tricking them gained that authority he wanted by having them substitute him for God. An analogy would be if a father entrusted the family inheritance, a coin collection let's say, to his son to pass on to future generations. The son had legitimate control over the inheritance. But, neglecting his father's will, he sold the coin collection to the pawn shop to use the money for his own, new ideas. The pawn shop, even though it now had control over something that was never intended to be theirs, now had some form of legitimate claim over the coins. The father, seeing the stupidity of his son, went to the pawn shop to buy back the coin collection. Buying back is known as redemption. Not at a cheap price, either.

That's how I think Satan gained control of the earth, and he offered it to Christ - if He would but worship him - as the final action of gaining authority over all, as God. More later.

Vache Folle Isn't Quite Himself - Neither Am I

Vache Folle readily admits that his name is not really Vache Folle. To quote:

Why do I go by the moniker of Vache Folle instead of using my real name? I don’t want my employer to know all my opinions on things. I have a stuffy job and some unorthodox views, and these might not mix all that well. I also want to be able to report on the attitudes and opinions of my coworkers without their knowing that I am doing so. I also want to write about religious issues without my coreligionists’ being able to identify me and brand me a heretic. That’s the extent of it. Not too creepy, is it?

When I started blogging a few years ago, I wrangled over using my real name. Each reason that VF brings up has spun around in my mind. I've even blogged about my blogging anxiety. This Sunday I was talking to my pastor after church, and I told him I was doing a lot of thinking about zoning laws and other state activities that ruin our lives on a day to day basis. He said, "I know. I found your blog." Whew! One anxiety down. Mrs. Scott and I had a good laugh over that one on the way home.

There are many things, I guess, that I'd like to write about that stem from my real experiences in life, but my name being out there prevents me from doing so in a full way. That's really not that bad for me. Maybe my name being attached might help me to gain confidence in my internal believing function (or whatever you call it.) In any case, my blog is my blog. Love it or ostracize, excommunicate or jail me.

When Friends Don't Mix

Most of my friends are friends because I have more in common with them than not. Many I would say I agree with them on maybe 90% of what they believe and on 10% I disagree. But occasionally, there is occasion for certain friends of mine to mix with other friends. When one friend's 10% that I don't agree with runs into another friend's different 10%, it can be quite a clash.

Recently, a number of blogsite friends of mine have gone to war with other blogsite friends on their sites. I can count five different incidents, some of which are ongoing, just off the top of my head. Now, where to stand if I'm put on the spot?

Killing Jerry

I'm no fan of Jerry Falwell's politics. Or his fundamentalism. Or support of the GOP, or the war, or his foreign policy, or his dispensationalism. But the absolute venomous hatred spewing out from some of his opponents is beyond tasteless. Some of these people are absolutely sick. I don't know if it's the internet that makes it seem this way, but this is as bad, if not more so, than when Richard Nixon died.

Falwell Death A Hoax

The liberal news media have been reporting all day that the Rev. Jerry Falwell has died. Since you can't believe anything the liberal media says, the only conclusion is that his death is a hoax. Fabricated, no doubt, by liberals, gays and feminists.

But seriously, this shows us the value of Jesus' instructions in the sermon on the mount about judging others (not that we shouldn't) because the way in which we judge others will be meted out against us in return. I did a Google blog search and it's simply amazing the number of Falwell's quotes that are being used against him, rightly or wrongly. Especially those quotes that have to do with God's judgment.

Zoning Laws (Part 8) Israel as Community

Read entire series here.

The last time I read through the four gospels, I noticed something I hadn't seen before. Quite often, Jesus' dealing with the people came in settings where the social classes were integrated. In the account of the woman who wiped His feet with her tears, the Pharisee thought to himself that if Jesus knew what manner of woman she was, he wouldn't be associating with her. But the striking thing about this account is that she was in that very Pharisee's house. If he knew what manner of woman she was, why was she in his house to begin with? It seems that the poor had access to not only the neighborhoods the rich lived in, but sometimes to their property too.

Gleaning laws, and others, put the rich and poor together in the same community. Ruth, a Moabite woman, happened upon a prominent member of the community, Boaz. The rest is history as they say. When rich and poor live together in the same community, it is far easier for the rich to minister to the poor. God understands this well, but we moderns prefer zoning laws that prevent such mercy.

Part 7 . . . . . . . . Part 9

More Sermon Prep

A couple of posts ago I wrote concerning Gene Redlin's question about prepping for a sermon. In reviewing my own post, I seemed to continue a bit on my comments over there, and left with a possible misunderstanding of my view of preaching. I'm not suggesting that the pulpit is wrong, just that it is a tradition, mostly used for good, but sometimes abused. If it is placed above other essentials, to their neglect, then it can be idolatrous. I have a friend that told me he did 60 hours of prep to substitute for one Sunday school class. Things can be overdone.

Occasionally, I hear sermons with little prep, such as when the regular preacher has something come up at the last minute and can't do it. Prep can be helpful, but I think that a life in the Word, with preaching on something many times before, can help with a spontaneous sermon.

Masters of Imputation

We Protestants love our doctrine of imputation. Our sins are imputed to Christ and His righteousness is imputed to us. But doctrine without "practice" - or practical application to the real world - is meaningless. So we become masters at imputation.

What I mean by this is that we take the formal, official doctrines of a given church - no matter how minute or how old or outdated - and impute them, all of them, to every one who attends that church. We don't like what the medieval Roman church had to say about justification by faith, or what they said about those who hold to the Protestant view (Trent)? Well, then, every Roman Catholic living in 2007 implicitly believes the same thing, and none of them can be saved as a result. Read some comments here about Francis Beckwith's "conversion" to Catholicism. We drive by a playground full of Catholic schoolgirls in their plaid skirts playing teatherball and say, "Yup. There's the Council of Trent in action right there, you betcha."

If we applied some of these ways of thinking consistently, then we should conclude that Martin Luther, who didn't want to leave Rome, but simply reform some things, didn't become saved until he was excommunicated. We should also impute the hellish religious doctrine of the scribes and Pharisees to Jesus and His band of followers. Some of his closest followers (the bible calls them apostles) continued to attend synagogue on Saturdays, even with the same rulers in charge, well after Jesus was crucified.

Preparation for a Sermon?

Gene Redlin at Northern Gleaner questions the necessity of preparation for a sermon. I'm convinced that the Protestant doctrine of the pulpit is simply a tradition within Protestantism, and not mandated by the bible. Preaching is biblical and quite necessary, but how the pulpit is worked out isn't. Often, the pulpit takes precedence over other biblical necessities when we assemble, seen most when the preacher goes over his normal time and other things are squeezed out. Many pastors study all week as a "full time job" simply in preparation for their sermon, when the bible calls them to shepherding of the flock. Shepherding requires spending time with the sheep; time that sermon prep often cuts out.

Also, a high view of the pulpit can lead to other manufactured practices or twisted beliefs. Don't you dare get up to go to the potty during the sermon in some churches. Even if God gave you a small bladder. Sermons are often tailored to the length of a cassette tape, yet can go just far enough beyond the end of the tape as to render the tape less than ideal.

Saturday Night Potpourri

• I saw a fire engine a few hundred yards ahead of me on the freeway with its lights flashing. I saw another one passing on the other side of the freeway. If each had gone to each other's emergencies, wouldn't they have gotten there faster?
• I've seen thousands of women apply their makeup in the car mirror on their way to work in the morning. But I recently saw one at night. She was using the lighted compact mirror in the sun visor.
• I had an off-brand alarm clock that was driving me nuts. The snooze would occasionally work only once and I would wake up late. The buttons also made a very loud clicking noise that would wake up my wife if already asleep. Get what you pay for.

Zoning Laws (Part 7) Scarcity of Lots, Not Land

Read entire series here.

Because zoning laws have set minimum lot sizes within a jurisdiction, not only is a minimum wealth threshold set for living there, the number of lots available in that community is fixed. Land owners do not have the freedom to subdivide into lots small enough to accommodate market needs. Instead, the number of lots available is limited by law. An artificially low supply of lots is maintained, and with no decrease in demand, land costs are artificially higher than they would be with a free market. This further hinders the poor (or middle class) from being able to live in a desirable community.

Part 6 . . . . . . . . Part 8

Zoning Laws (Part 6) Separation of the Poor

Read entire series here.

Since zoning laws essentially set the threshold wealth level of each community, the poor have little choice but to live only in the communities that they can afford. This means that the poor are usually lumped all together in a given community. The rich can afford to live elsewhere, so they usually do.

When the poor are lumped into one community, and the rich and their businesses can afford to thrive in other communities, the poor have diminished access to good jobs, thus reinforcing their poverty.

Part 5 . . . . . . . . Part 7

Twice the Son of Hell - Legalism and Tyranny of the Conscience

Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you travel about on sea and land to make one proselyte; and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as yourselves. Matthew 23:15

It's been my experience that when legalism exists within the leadership of a church or Christian circle, even if to a small degree, that those legalisms are magnified greatly among the followers. Jesus sums this up in another place by saying that a little leaven leavens the whole lump. The first two churches I attended were what I would call greatly legalistic. Not as bad as some, but pretty bad.

In the first church, the prominent teacher also had a nationally broadcast nightly call-in radio program. Listening every night was common among his followers. I listened to him for years. Among his simplest legalisms were the beliefs that partaking of alcohol, tobacco, dancing and going to the movies were sins in and of themselves. All kinds of Scripture-twisting gymnastics were involved in backing up these beliefs. But this had a monstrous affect on the consciences of his listeners (and church attenders), most of whom only knew him from his radio show. I heard untold hundreds of callers ask the question, "Is it a sin to [fill in the blank]." Some would call-in and ask, "I'm a clerk at a grocery store, and I know it's a sin to use alcohol and tobacco. But my job requires me to ring up items and place them in shopping bags, and this sometimes includes alcohol and tobacco. I can't help but feel that I'm contributing to the sins of others. Is it a sin to be a grocery store clerk?"

Guilt by association is one of the errors of legalism. It also causes people to question God's creation and dealing with other people in good faith. Legalism also causes people to seek black and white answers to all of life's minutae, instead of the building up of personal convictions within the gray areas as a result of life's experiences. Legalism is the lazy man's shortcut to the leading of the Spirit.

But far worse than my example above where somebody asks the question is the one where the answer is already decided as, "Yes it is a sin" and then goes through life condemning all others who dare be attached, even if remotely, to the sins of others. A little leaven leavens the whole lump, and those affected are twice the sons of hell. Woe to you, Pharisees.

Too Late, Too Tired

This week I've been up/out too late with having to get up too early to have much time to blog. And any time I've had to blog has been met with blogger's cramp, brain clog or whatever you want to call it. Time to go to sleep

Role Reversal and Losing the War in Iraq

James Leroy Wilson has about the best take on the war in Iraq as I've seen. Read his short blog post here. American conservatives, religious ones included, are the biggest supporters of this war. And who are these conservatives?

Well, ideologically they are the ones who believe in small, de-centralized government, low taxes, individual freedom and the personal responsibility that goes along with it. They warn us of the world threatening dangers of Islamofascism, and urge an all-out fight against Islamofascists in the Middle East. And who are these Islamofascists?

Well, ideologically they are the ones who believe in centralized government, controlled by their religion, who decry individual freedom as the Western evil.

Yet, the conservatives want the war to be fought by the military of the centralized, US government, with the cost paid by the American taxpayers. Individual freedom to oppose this war is an act of treason and an aid to the enemy, while personal responsibility is viewed by them as a duty to support such war, and is the definition of patriotism. Not only this but the tool of war, the US military, is one of the most centralized, top-down entities there is. There is no personal freedom for its soldiers, as they are taught to obey their superiors at all costs. All for a salary of about $20k per year.

The biggest irony of all is that the war strategies of each side are a reversal of roles from the ideologies of their respective societies. The US is using a top-down, centralized, micro-managed standing army, while the insurgents are de-centralized, hide-behind-the-bushes, know-your-own-neighborhood bands of renegades. A complete reversal of the role we had in our own Revolutionary War. We took Iraq's standing army no sweat, because our standing army was superior. Bush declared victory. But then, as if it were some kind of surprise, the real war started. Is it any wonder our butts are getting handed to us? Those who refuse to listen to history are bound to repeat it.

To the supporters of this war I say: If this war is so important to the future of both Christianity and Western Civilization, why aren't you acting on your individual freedom and taking personal responsibility to make sure victory is secured? Go fight yourself, or pay for somebody else to do so. Or are you like the social liberals that you hate so much who think they've done their fair share by simply going to the polls and pulling their party's lever?

Zoning Laws (Part 5) Bad Traffic

Read entire series here.

Zoning laws effectively establish a minimum wealth level to live in a given community. But jobs within those communities do not all pay at a level that allows the worker to live there. Most must live elsewhere. The only way for them to get to work is to commute from an affordable community where they live to a community that will offer jobs that pay well enough.

This creates bad traffic. Each community I've worked in has been way beyond my means to live there. The last few have been very wealthy suburban bedroom communities that have also had huge corporate business parks, stretching for miles, that offer tens of thousands of jobs at all pay levels. The freeways are parking lots at commute hour.

Part 4 . . . . . . . . Part 6

Zoning Laws (Entire Series In A Single Post)

I've decided to put all the parts to this series in one post, in consecutive order, and update this post each time I add another part and link to it. So, here it is, in its entirety so far:

Zoning Laws (Part 1) - State Control Over Life

My grandfather had as one of his rules of life, this: he would never live (or work) anywhere that would not allow him to walk to work. Such can only be a dream for me. I've never been able to even come close to living close to where I work, or working close to where I live. This is true for many Americans.

Modern zoning laws have among the highest negative impact, and least acknowledged affect, of any legislations of civil government. They are foundational to the American way of life itself, yet are instrumental in causing or enhancing many of our social ills. They dictate where people can live, work, shop, recreate - every aspect of life is governed by zoning laws. Not only this, but they essentially create segregation by class, and are responsible for creating many of the problems with homelessness we see. Low job availability, long commutes, traffic jams, urban sprawl, racism and contempt for the poor are planted, watered and harvested by zoning laws. Yet most people don't have a clue that this is true.

I'll be looking at zoning laws and their affects in this new series.

Zoning Laws (Part 2) Segregation by Class

One of my blogging friends recently wrote that he lived in a well-to-do community and that the churches in communities like his needed to be creative in carrying out God's commands to help the poor. Wealthy communities have very few or no visible poor at all. Another blogging friend wrote that he grew up in a very poor community and that the poverty he experienced gave him some reservations about capitalism as an economic system.

One thing these two had in common, and this is true in news stories of every nature, is that entire communities have a class status. They are wealthy, or poor, or lower-middle class, or the 'hood, or upper-middle class or blue collar, etc. We live in communities with a fairly consistent level of wealth of those who live there. We simply accept this as part of the landscape of life and never give it a second thought, or even a first one.

Starting with residential housing, zoning laws establish minimum lot sizes on which a house can be built. The simple law of supply and demand establishes "market value" for that community. Because there is a minimum lot size, and a corresponding market value for that size lot, zoning laws effectively establish the minimum level of wealth required to live in that community. Communities that are more desirable to live in have higher wealth thresholds. This effectively eliminates the ability of the poor to live in those communities.

In part 1, I mentioned that I've never been able to live in a community where I worked. If I were allowed to buy smaller lots, even to build a smaller house, than what zoning laws currently allow, I could live close to work. But I'm not allowed to do that, so I can't live in the community where I work.

Zoning Laws (Part 3) Segregation by Class

Zoning laws also limit the number of dwellings and/or families that can live within a piece of property. "Single family" residential is just that. One family must bear the burden of the minimum "market value" price of the minimum lot size combined with maximum numbers of families allowed to live there.

Only recently did my county allow secondary "in-law" units to be built on a piece of property. They're starting to notice the immense problems their zoning laws have created. The sad part is that they fail to realize their laws created the problems to begin with.

Zoning Laws (Part 4) Segregation by Class

I live in the fourth largest, and the most expensive housing market in the US - the San Francisco Bay Area. Since zoning laws essentially mandate a minimum level of wealth necessary to live in any given community, each community has its own threshold. Generally, the closer to the financial center of the area, the more expensive the housing because that's where the best jobs are.

But since zoning laws create an artificial threshold for living in any given community, job holders in the wealthier communities must live further away in outlying communities. Back in the 90's, the Bay Area's more upscale suburban cities began to discover that most of their "essential" city employees (i.e. police, fire, parks maintenance, etc.) weren't residents of those cities. They lived elsewhere. That's because it was impossible for these people to live in those cities on the salaries they received - the artificially imposed housing prices were too high. And since the only candidates for these positions had to live far away in less expensive communities, it became much more difficult to fill these positions.

Imagine passing a law that mandates the segregation of people according to class. A huge uproar among the people would occur. Such a thing would be unthinkable in America today. Although completely unintended, this is exactly what zoning laws accomplish.

Zoning Laws (Part 5) Bad Traffic

Zoning laws effectively establish a minimum wealth level to live in a given community. But jobs within those communities do not all pay at a level that allows the worker to live there. Most must live elsewhere. The only way for them to get to work is to commute from an affordable community where they live to a community that will offer jobs that pay well enough.

This creates bad traffic. Each community I've worked in has been way beyond my means to live there. The last few have been very wealthy suburban bedroom communities that have also had huge corporate business parks, stretching for miles, that offer tens of thousands of jobs at all pay levels. The freeways are parking lots at commute hour.

Zoning Laws (Part 6) Separation of the Poor

Since zoning laws essentially set the threshold wealth level of each community, the poor have little choice but to live only in the communities that they can afford. This means that the poor are usually lumped all together in a given community. The rich can afford to live elsewhere, so they usually do.

When the poor are lumped into one community, and the rich and their businesses can afford to thrive in other communities, the poor have diminished access to good jobs, thus reinforcing their poverty.

Zoning Laws (Part 7) Scarcity of Lots, Not Land

Because zoning laws have set minimum lot sizes within a jurisdiction, not only is a minimum wealth threshold set for living there, the number of lots available in that community is fixed. Land owners do not have the freedom to subdivide into lots small enough to accommodate market needs. Instead, the number of lots available is limited by law. An artificially low supply of lots is maintained, and with no decrease in demand, land costs are artificially higher than they would be with a free market. This further hinders the poor (or middle class) from being able to live in a desirable community.

Zoning Laws (Part 8) Israel as Community

The last time I read through the four gospels, I noticed something I hadn't seen before. Quite often, Jesus' dealing with the people came in settings where the social classes were integrated. In the account of the woman who wiped His feet with her tears, the Pharisee thought to himself that if Jesus knew what manner of woman she was, he wouldn't be associating with her. But the striking thing about this account is that she was in that very Pharisee's house. If he knew what manner of woman she was, why was she in his house to begin with? It seems that the poor had access to not only the neighborhoods the rich lived in, but sometimes to their property too.

Gleaning laws, and others, put the rich and poor together in the same community. Ruth, a Moabite woman, happened upon a prominent member of the community, Boaz. The rest is history as they say. When rich and poor live together in the same community, it is far easier for the rich to minister to the poor. God understands this well, but we moderns prefer zoning laws that prevent such mercy.

Zoning Laws (Part 9) McMansion Suburbia

SuperSize me. American suburbia has entered a phase where house sizes are continually increasing for the same (or smaller) size families that live in them. This is often criticized as consumerism run rampant, is looked upon as an increase in selfishness and materialism, and is preached against by both environmentalists and religious leaders. But a closer look reveals something different.

Since zoning laws dictate minimum lot sizes, and thus limits the availability of lots, an artificially high price of land results. This is true of land prices, but not of construction costs. So over time there is an increase of land value versus house value. The piece of dirt is the biggest factor in the price of a home. What this does is creates a false sense of value through building a larger house. If a buyer could buy a 1000 square foot house for $1.1 million and a 3000 square foot house for $1.2 million, most are likely to opt for the latter. Those marginalized people who can afford a $1.1M house, but not a $1.2M house will simply buy the 3000 square foot house in the next community level down. Living life in one's house is more important than living on the land that house is on, even though the land costs more. For only 10% more money, one can obtain three times the house on the same piece of land. So, for the value, the largest house makes the most sense. Developers know this very well. People want a house, but the land is the biggest cost.

This has led to the latest building fad here in the San Francisco area, known as the "knockdown." People are now buying houses, let's say a ranch house built in the 60's, and they don't like the ugly architecture or small size. They bulldoze the house, because it's value is so small compared to the land on it. They then build a new, larger house in its place. It sounds ridiculous, but it makes economic sense.

Now something about value. Buying the "family size" product at the store is of value because at a larger size, the cost per unit is lower. It is more valuable for a family to buy this size than twice the amount of the regular size. But there's a side to it that we tend not to think about. For the individual, actually buying the smaller size, even though it has a higher cost per unit, can have the most value. If the bulk size item is too large for me to consume and will go bad before I can use it, or if I don't have the space to store it, then the smaller size is the best value for me because I won't be wasting money on something I can't fully use.

But for many people, zoning laws actually prohibit them from gaining the best value in land because the smaller size land item is unavailable. Imagine that. Getting a good land value is against the law! So people simply do what is the next best thing. Value is transferred from the land to the house. McMansion suburbia has more to do with reacting to zoning laws than with greed and selfishness.

Zoning Laws (Part 10) Combined With Other Laws

Zoning laws are combined with other laws to create some more road blocks to freedom. Tax laws are frequently used along with zoning laws to create excessive incomes for governments to play with. Property is re-zoned according to the amount of tax money that is projected for governments to receive. Property taxes are often used to fund public schools. Sales taxes also act as an incentive for governments to re-zone property as commercial. Eminent domain laws are used to confiscate private property in the re-zoning process without regard to private property rights.

Zoning Laws (Part 11) Combined With Other Laws (2)

Zoning laws can also have a combined effect with other laws such as strict building codes, local building ordinances and building permit processes. Building codes and ordinances make construction more expensive, and the permit process not only adds more cost, but sets a time limit for completion of construction. This adds hidden expense in that a greater amount of money is needed up-front for a project.

The overall effect of all these laws is a higher minimum standard of living. But this standard of living is mandated by law without allowing for the means to attain this standard. People who cannot meet this minimum level created by law sometimes end up homeless. Homelessness is often mandated by law without people knowing that this is the case.

Zoning Laws (Part 12) Zoning As Theft

Jim Fedako at Anti-Positivist carries one of his own articles on zoning laws. He suggests that zoning laws constitute theft of private property, and those who support zoning laws are the thieves. Read it here.

To see all the posts in this series in reverse consecutive order, click here.

How Did The Devil Get Control of The Earth?

And he led Him up and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time. And the devil said to Him, "I will give you all this domain and its glory; for it has been handed over to me, and I give it to whomever I wish. Therefore if You worship before me, it shall all be Yours." And Jesus answered and said to him, "It is written, 'You shall worship the LORD your God and serve Him only.'" Luke 4:5-8 NASB

Several things are striking in this passage about the temptation of Jesus. The devil claimed control over all the kingdoms of the earth. Additionally, Jesus neither corrected him nor rebuked him for this statement. He did, however, correct and rebuke for the idea that He should worship the devil. The devil said that domain over the kingdoms had "been handed over" to him.

Question: who handed the domain over to him and how did it happen? I'm thinking about this and I think I have an answer. It is certain to impact my view of kingdom history, and I think it sheds some light on other very important theological questions that have direct bearing on us Christians living today and how we should view our lives. Lord willing, I'll be writing about this soon.

Cheapskating Ourselves To Death

Gene Redlin has this over at Northern Gleaner on being cheap. Some people idolize frugality, and it will return to them. Sow the wind, reap the whirlwind, I s'pose.

Zoning Laws (Part 4) Segregation by Class

Read entire series here.

I live in the fourth largest, and the most expensive housing market in the US - the San Francisco Bay Area. Since zoning laws essentially mandate a minimum level of wealth necessary to live in any given community, each community has its own threshold. Generally, the closer to the financial center of the area, the more expensive the housing because that's where the best jobs are.

But since zoning laws create an artificial threshold for living in any given community, job holders in the wealthier communities must live further away in outlying communities. Back in the 90's, the Bay Area's more upscale suburban cities began to discover that most of their "essential" city employees (i.e. police, fire, parks maintenance, etc.) weren't residents of those cities. They lived elsewhere. That's because it was impossible for these people to live in those cities on the salaries they received - the artificially imposed housing prices were too high. And since the only candidates for these positions had to live far away in less expensive communities, it became much more difficult to fill these positions.

Imagine passing a law that mandates the segregation of people according to class. A huge uproar among the people would occur. Such a thing would be unthinkable in America today. Although completely unintended, this is exactly what zoning laws accomplish.

Part 3 . . . . . . . . Part 5

Saving the Planet

It is no longer because of what you said that we believe, for we have heard for ourselves and know that this One is indeed the Savior of the world. John 4:42. NASB

Jesus is the savior of the world. Saving the planet, then, is an inescapably religious concept. But Jesus is also Lord of the world, and as such, He determines the means by which the planet will be saved. Any other architect of saving the planet than Jesus is a false savior, and any other means of saving the planet than by His Word is false religion - idolatry.

The planet will be saved when more and more people are converted to Christ, and they start living as God-delegated rulers of this world, and do so by His word. Environmentalists, who want to save the planet without Christ, and misguided Christians who don't care about God's creation because they think it will all be burned up some day real soon, both need to heed God's word.

Zoning Laws (Part 3) Segregation by Class

Read entire series here.

Zoning laws also limit the number of dwellings and/or families that can live within a piece of property. "Single family" residential is just that. One family must bear the burden of the minimum "market value" price of the minimum lot size combined with maximum numbers of families allowed to live there.

Only recently did my county allow secondary "in-law" units to be built on a piece of property. They're starting to notice the immense problems their zoning laws have created. The sad part is that they fail to realize their laws created the problems to begin with.

Part 2 . . . . . . . . Part 4

Zoning Laws (Part 2) Segregation by Class

Read entire series here.

One of my blogging friends recently wrote that he lived in a well-to-do community and that the churches in communities like his needed to be creative in carrying out God's commands to help the poor. Wealthy communities have very few or no visible poor at all. Another blogging friend wrote that he grew up in a very poor community and that the poverty he experienced gave him some reservations about capitalism as an economic system.

One thing these two had in common, and this is true in news stories of every nature, is that entire communities have a class status. They are wealthy, or poor, or lower-middle class, or the 'hood, or upper-middle class or blue collar, etc. We live in communities with a fairly consistent level of wealth of those who live there. We simply accept this as part of the landscape of life and never give it a second thought, or even a first one.

Starting with residential housing, zoning laws establish minimum lot sizes on which a house can be built. The simple law of supply and demand establishes "market value" for that community. Because there is a minimum lot size, and a corresponding market value for that size lot, zoning laws effectively establish the minimum level of wealth required to live in that community. Communities that are more desirable to live in have higher wealth thresholds. This effectively eliminates the ability of the poor to live in those communities.

In part 1, I mentioned that I've never been able to live in a community where I worked. If I were allowed to buy smaller lots, even to build a smaller house, than what zoning laws currently allow, I could live close to work. But I'm not allowed to do that, so I can't live in the community where I work.

Part 1 . . . . . . . . Part 3

Zoning Laws (Part 1) - State Control Over Life

Read entire series here.

My grandfather had as one of his rules of life, this: he would never live (or work) anywhere that would not allow him to walk to work. Such can only be a dream for me. I've never been able to even come close to living close to where I work, or working close to where I live. This is true for many Americans.

Modern zoning laws have among the highest negative impact, and least acknowledged affect, of any legislations of civil government. They are foundational to the American way of life itself, yet are instrumental in causing or enhancing many of our social ills. They dictate where people can live, work, shop, recreate - every aspect of life is governed by zoning laws. Not only this, but they essentially create segregation by class, and are responsible for creating many of the problems with homelessness we see. Low job availability, long commutes, traffic jams, urban sprawl, racism and contempt for the poor are planted, watered and harvested by zoning laws. Yet most people don't have a clue that this is true.

I'll be looking at zoning laws and their affects in this new series.

Part 2 .

Free Market Reactionism

No human activity, I suppose, invites rebellion more than a moral, legal or religious requirement placed on others that God Himself didn't place. This might be true, to a smaller degree, of requirements placed on us from our economic and social environments. We react to the pressures placed on us from all around us. If the government increases my taxes to pay for its programs, I will not suddenly become a believer in those programs. In fact, I will despise them all the more. Laws forced upon me will not change my heart. External laws never do. Salvation by law cannot work.

It is in this sense that we are free to react against those things that would place unwelcome or unwarranted restraints upon us. If my county raises sales taxes, I can do my shopping in the next county if it benefits me. If I were looking for a wife, and my church had a low level of good prospects, I could look elsewhere. If something I usually buy becomes illegal, I can resort to the underground or black markets. I am also free to disbelieve what others tell me, and can act accordingly. We can also put off doing good things until there is a better environment in which these things can be done.

It is good, then, for those who would force their false morality upon others via coercion (or even passively through taking joy in cultural norms that would have the same desired result), that their targets can react in a way to combat or avoid the desired results. Even though these people may never understand this, I'm optimistic that in due time, they will all fail and be regarded as failures.

Hey, I'm an Illegalist!

If adding to God's word is legalism, and disobeying a law of the state is illegal, then since all state laws are additions to God's word to begin with, any belief that opposes legalism is illegalism, and since I oppose legalism I also out of necessity oppose the state; which would make me an illegalist!

Double Header the Hard Way

Wednesday saw me go to what I call a "double header the hard way." That's two baseball games in one day, but in two different ballparks. Read about it over at my baseball blog.

Seek Ye First The Kingdom of God

But seek first His kingdom and His righteousness; and all these things shall be added to you. Matthew 6:33.

All these things shall be added to us? What things?

Do not be anxious then, saying, "What shall we eat?" or "What shall we drink?" or "With what shall we clothe ourselves?" For all these things the Gentiles eagerly seek; for your heavenly Father knows that you need all these things. Matthew 6:31-32.

Truly I say to you, there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or farms, for My sake and for the gospel's sake, but that he shall receive a hundred times as much now in the present age, houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and farms... Mark 10:29-30

Why would God add these things to us?

Then God said, "Let us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." Genesis 1:26

Because He wants us to rule over the earth and its things. But in seeking His kingdom, we need righteousness. Man's rule over the earth in righteousness is God's kingdom.

Here We Go Again

I first heard of the Virginia Tech murders while listening to the radio in my car. I had almost no reaction whatsoever. No shock. No surprise. No sympathy for yet-unknown families of victims. No horror, no outrage, nothing. Just another top-of-the-hour news story.

I think all of those potential reactions were nullified by the realization of what was about to occur. Something much more painful. The endless media spin, analysis and regurgitation of this event for many years to come in every media outlet there is. It only took a few hours for the usual suspects to start babbling their predictable slop. Gun control, armies of therapists sent to help, how could this possibly happen here?. Next will be psychological profiles, irate politicians, and hours of children crying. No, I don't think ill of children crying over a tragedy at all. Just the way that it will be packaged and marketed to us by the media.

As an added note, James Leroy Wilson has some interesting comments over at Independent Country.

Our Reward In Full (annual tax day post)

(This is a re-posting of every year's tax day post:)

This being April 15, or tax day, I'll raise a question regarding alms giving. In Matthew 6, Jesus warns about practicing our alms giving to be noticed by men. Those who do have as their full reward just that: the notice by men. He warns that we are to give in secret, with only our heavenly Father knowing. Of course, necessity might require the one receiving the help knowing too.

If we are to give in secret, then why are we telling our accountants, our states and the IRS? Not only that, but any other agency or organization that requires a peek at our tax returns. "Hey, IRS, look at how righteous I am! I gave this much to the poor! Now, gimme my deduction!" Might this pittance be our reward in full? The subtlety of hypocrisy.... built right into the system.

Taxes Suck

My wife and I spent the whole weekend doing taxes. I want to kill anybody who ever thinks it a good idea to force people to pay taxes. Of course, that wouldn't be the best option, as vengeance belongs to the Lord, so I'll settle for God casting all these people into hell to burn for an eternity. Well, he can save a few, of course, or maybe many, which would be a great show of His mercy. I'll be first in line for restitution when repentance bears its fruit, though.

Illegal Is a Sick Bird - Clarification

Ron McKenzie brings up a good question in the comment section of my last post. Better clarify. I'm using these terms in context of personal experience of usage. I see "legal" used more in context of the American legal system, a body of man's rules, and "lawful" more in terms of God's law. I admit there is some cross over. But men who add to God's word are considered "legalists" and not "lawfulists." I hear Christians use "legal" in terms of civil government law, and "lawful" in terms of God's law.

Additionally, I see American sports' use of "legal" for context of their rules, as they are man made. Illegal formations, illegal defenses, illegal procedure, illegal pitches, etc. I guess I should consult a dictionary and a cultural sociologist before assuming definitions for terms. Maybe my terms are too subtle, like Ron suggests. Oops. If all this confuses you - nevermind.

Illegal Is a Sick Bird

My dad was a career California Highway Patrol officer. So growing up we had many goofy questions for him regarding driving and the law. "Dad, is it illegal to ___ (fill in the blank)?" His reply was usually, "Illegal is a sick bird," trying to impress upon us a distinction between legality and lawfulness, "do you mean lawful?"

I think I know what he meant, but this distinction needs to be impressed upon American Christians today. Most of the Christian faith has been made "illegal" by politicians, and from my experience, most Christians view "legal" as the same as "lawful," because of their false interpretation of Romans 13. So when good is outlawed, doing good is often not even viewed as good by many people. Just like Jesus and the apostles when they did good but were roundly condemned by legalists for disobeying false authorities.

Legalism vs. Illegalism

Is the opposite of a "legalist" an "illegalist?" I dare to say most legalists, and all statists, would think so.

I'm Repeating Myself

My last post is almost identical to a post from last year.

Kingdom vs. Church

Jesus spoke a great deal about the kingdom, but very little about the church. We have reversed this. At what cost?

Another 9/11 Oddity

One type of eyewitness testimony, that I would figure would be widespread in the news, that I've never heard is from somebody in the twin towers seeing the planes come at them while looking out a window.

The reporter covering firemen who caught the first plane hitting the first tower on film is famous. Millions saw the second plane hit, whether in person or on TV. Many people had stories of passing firemen in the stairwells. But were no people witness to the planes as they came at them? If 3000 died, there were tens of thousands at work already. Nobody was looking out the window? Maybe I missed it, but it's odd that I can't recall a single story.

Trinitarian Theology and From The Pew

The following is an excerpt from a letter I wrote to somebody starting a blog ministry that explains part of the reasoning behind my blog, From The Pew:

Now for the thing I mentioned to you about one of my basic ideas. It's a bit long, but please bear with me. I am an unashamed Trinitarian, and believe the doctrine of the Trinity can be practically applied to how the church operates, and how we as individuals fit into both the church and the kingdom. The basic premise is this: God is both One God, and three persons simultaneously. Neither is more important than the other. God as One is no more important than God as Three, and vice versa. We see this philosophy of the One and Many in many areas of life. The whole and its parts, unity and diversity, community and individuality, a team and its players, the body of Christ and its members. When Paul said to be imitators of God, I think he meant more than our personal attention to Christlikeness. I believe there is much value in structuring our churches, our organizations, and many other areas of life after the pattern of the Trinity. While the Scriptures don't explicitly demand this, God's structures for these things that are revealed in Scripture do follow this pattern. Paul asserts that the body, for example, is made up of diverse members, each with unique functions, and that we should all exercise our gifts, individually, for the sake of the body. No one member or type of member is more important than the other members. The body isn't an eye, for how would it hear? Etc.

Human history has been full of attempts to make either the whole or its parts most important. Communism on the one hand versus radical anarchy on the other. An authoritarian heirarchy in the church on the one hand, where the rulers are in control (community is most important), versus radical individualism seen in the American evangelical church on the other (individuals are most important). When the One is stressed above the Many, individuals aren't important, and can be easily dismissed. Think Roman Catholicism's church structure. Or many legalistic churches where the narrow official church doctrine governs all, and you can just leave, or we'll kick you out, if you don't agree with us. When the Many is stressed, unity is lost in favor of doing what you feel is right. Many constructs in history also stress both the One and Many, but they are held in tension with one another. "Nobody better tell me what to do, but I think everybody else should be forced to believe what I do." With God's structure, both the One and Many are held together in harmony, not in tension.

This is one of the foundational ideas of my blog, From the Pew. I state as my subtitle, "Because for too long it has been coming from the pulpits, seminaries and denominations." Little room has been left in many of our modern churches for individual thought and development of doctrine. They control the beliefs, and the believers have no choice but to be swept along with the tide. This is where I think the blogoshpere is and will continue to be used by God in the future for obtaining the proper balance of church and its members. A community of believers has been created that is not controlled by the "learned." Church leaders could stand a little instruction from those in the pews, because we have been gifted by both the Scriptures and the Holy Spirit. In the story of the blind man in John 9, the blind man witnessed to the Pharisees about Jesus' healing powers. When they refused to believe him, he answered, "Well, here is an amazing thing, that you do not know where He is from, and yet he opened my eyes." (John 9:30) The Pharisees replied in v. 34, "'You were born entirely in your sins, and are you teaching us?' And they put him out." They were unwilling to learn.

This is where I think your idea of using a blog to spread the truth about the state can be valuable. Many pastors and other church leaders are out there blogging, too, and quite frankly, a number of them are listening. There are also many lay people coming to truth and doubting some of the beliefs of their churches in regards to the state. I am optimistic regarding the future of the doctrine of the state as it relates to both the church and individual believers.

I hope this helps you in seeing what I'm wrangling with on a daily basis as I live my life in the presence of other believers and an unbelieving world. It does no good as a witness to the lost to tell them they have to obey the state no matter what. They merely see the chruch in bed with the state. Some abundant life! If you have any other questions, feel free to ask. Keep in touch regarding the progress of your project.

Happy Anniversary Two Pew

Today marks the second anniversary of my first post at From the Pew. I still believe what I wrote in that first post, although it doesn't seem like two years ago. Looking forward to the next year.

How Income Tax Works

Read this from Jim Fedako, the Anti-Positivist, on how our income tax system works, using a real life analogy.

Pet Peeves

Literally. The last few months have seen me shovel nice, neat little piles of dog crap off my front lawn, and cat crap out of my back yard. I know from whence the feline feces come from, but the canine poopies are a mystery. Near as I can tell, they're probably the product of a pre-dawn dog walk. I hate scumbags that let their dogs do this to other people's property. I've witnessed this so many times in my life (I'm an every day morning jogger) I could write a book. When I was a kid, somebody did that in our front yard while my mom was looking out the window. She ran outside and confronted the loser, who made it clear that it was unthinkable that somebody could be upset about it. Man.

I want to put up a vulgar sign in my front yard about shooting dogs and their owners, even though I wouldn't follow through. Would it be less than Christian of me to find out whose dog it is and return the package to their front porch? At least it would be more visible than on the grass.

Polling the Pollsters

Okay, I took the Presidential Candidate Selector poll that James Leroy Wilson and Vache Folle took. My results came out like this: Joseph Biden 100%, Duncan Hunter 94%, Mike Huckabee 88%, Ron Paul 86% and Condoleezza Rice 83%. When I clicked through again to post the results (only a few hours later), the poll changed and had additional questions.

As usual on polls of this type, I can't help but question the reasons for each question. I had no more than 3 selections that were not answered "neither," so without the pollster having a clue as to what I do believe about each issue, how is it even possible to match me with a candidate? Some of the questions are impossible to answer anyway because the question is either the wrong one or disqualifies itself by its contradictions. Question 3 about balancing civil rights and security creates a false dichotomy, because these two items go together, and are not on opposite sides of a balance. Civil rights ensures individuals with the rights and responsibilities of defending themselves with arms, even numerous arms, creating security. The false dichotomy is based on the reality that enabling one to defend himself is itself viewed as an act of terrorism because of the strong emphasis on so-called security.

The updated poll had more specific questions about health care, marijuana and taxes. Here are my new results: Theoretical Ideal Candidate 100%, Kent McManigal 94%, Ron Paul 81%, Chuck Hagel 71%, then a bunch lumped together. The first poll had McCain, Giuliani and Clinton way down about 10%-20%, yet the updated one had Clinton the same, but McCain and Giuliani at 67% and 47% respectively.

He Is Risen!

Even so consider yourselves to be dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus. Romans 6:11

In Romans 6, the apostle Paul shows how the death and resurrection of Jesus relate to our own lives. His death frees us from the slavery to sin and from its penalty. But His resurrection allows us to live life. Reformed Protestants are so busy focusing on His death, and the cross that caused it, that we miss the better event, His resurrection. Our justification comes at a point - a starting point; our entire life follows.

Imagine being in prison because you can't pay your debt. Now imagine somebody paying it off for you and you become free. While this is wonderful in its own right, now what do you do? Let's say you are freed from prison, but this occurs at 5:30am in January in Northern Minnesota, and you are released with only the t-shirt and shorts you came with. You sit huddled on the sidewalk outside the prison, shivering, trying to rejoice in your new freedom, all the while not noticing that the limo parked at the curb is waiting to take you away to a vacation in Hawaii. That is the resurrection!

He is Risen! Live, ye dry bones!

New Blog Links

I've added a new section to my margin titled "other links." These are frequent reads of mine. Gene Redlin at Northern Gleaner brings a charismaticesque slant to things. I added Gene because I read his blog, he reads mine, and we have conversations. I'll keep him here in my links - until he says something that I disagree with (inside joke). Not much goes on at Andrew Sandlin's CCL site that also doesn't happen on his blog, so I bumped it down a few notches. Dr. Lenny is a scientist and baseball fan, while his alter ego writes poetry. He's over at The Zone. The group of guys over at Reformed Catholicism talk about the unity of the church and the history of the Reformation. Society Vs hosts Losing My Religion from way up in Canada. He grew up amongst many of the Aboriginal peoples of Saskatchewan. Abu Daoub is a Christian living in the Middle East and has much insight into Islam and how it relates to Christianity at Islam and Christianity. We in the West rarely hear about the types of things he has to say.

The Misunderstanding of Wealth

Many, if not most, people misunderstand the proper concept of wealth. Sadly, this includes a great number of Christians. Most people interpret wealth as luxury, whereas the bible interprets it as responsibility. Luxury can be viewed as the absence of responsibility.

Since the world lusts after wealth in the form of luxury, many Christians' reactionary tendencies take the form of viewing wealth itself in terms of the world's lust. Wealth is therefore often avoided, sometimes at all costs. "New houses, new cars, who needs that? It's all going to burn up anyway" is a common sentiment I hear from Christians. Many Christians wrongly judge other Christians for the wealth they possess. I often wondered why, in the parable of the talents, Jesus took the talent from the one who buried it in a napkin and gave it to the one with ten talents instead of the one with five. Now I understand it's because the one with ten talents is the most responsible one.

Also, eating from the fruits of one's own labor, even if the harvest is overflowing, is perfectly biblical. I always hear Christians slander wealthy athletes for their large houses, large paychecks and material things, as if those things were evil in and of themselves. "That money could have been used for better things." These people are ignorant in that they don't understand the (God created) laws of economics. If a millionaire athlete builds a huge house, many poor and middle-class people are fed through the wages paid to them for their labor in building and maintaining his house. Carpenters, electricians, all kinds of trades are involved. There are common laborers that shovel up the crud at the end of the job who get to eat and feed their loved ones. If that isn't mercy, I don't know what is. I suppose the ignorant Christians would rather these people go hungry than see an athlete (especially a Christian one) enjoy the fruits of his labor.

Even in the enjoyment of that fruit there exists godly, biblical responsibility to the glory of God. I sometimes shudder at the possibility that "Christians" who misinterpret godly responsibility as greed, and shun responsibility for themselves as a result, will be the ones who will hear Jesus say, "I never knew you."

Why I Support the War in Iraq

I support the war in Iraq because I am forced to support it. Taxes, in one form or another, are extorted from me by the federal government against my will and used for something I don't agree with. If I were to come out against the war, I could carry a sign or write against it on my blog. But if I really did something about it, like withhold those taxes, I'd have a new roommate named Bubba. Live-in boyfriend, kind of, with a habit of anal rape.

America has become a place where one can believe anything at all, just as long as one doesn't act on his beliefs.

The Opening Day From Hell

As a big baseball fan, we waited all winter for yesterday, Opening Day for the San Francisco Giants. They signed Barry Zito, and he was starting. Usually, Mrs. Scott and I sit with each of our best friends, who buy most of our tickets, on Opening Day.

Mrs. Scott's difficult pregnancy kept her home, so I took our 5 year old. Our 2 year old gets sick, and she takes him to the doctor just after we leave, instead of to my mom's for babysitting. We always take the BART train on Opening Day, but for some reason, I had to drive to four different train stations to find a parking space! Unbelievable. In the mean time, my kid barfs in the back seat and becomes ill. After station number two, I met Mrs. Scott at the doctors' a few minutes before their appointment, eliminating her plans for a day off.

With all this, it might seem the best thing to do is to just go home. But my friend couldn't pick up his tickets a couple weeks ago, so I had them, including that game's. He couldn't get in without me. I also had about $5000 worth of his tickets that I carried on my person. I finally got a parking space an hour and a half after we left. But a police search of our train delayed us even more, and a horrible connection to the SF Muni train, another 20 min delay, made things worse. My friend said he'd watch the game from the free knothole area behind the right field fence until I showed up. I hadn't pee'd all day, so I had to hit the marina restroom before heading behind the park. My friend couldn't get to see after all because the line to get into the free space was so long.

I finally made it to my seat in the top of the 4th inning, with all the Opening Day calendar freebees gone. The Giants got killed by the Padres 7-0. My sausage's bun burst open, creating a mess I had to eat with my fingers. I also forgot napkins. Thanks be to socks. My kids were diagnosed with walking pneumonia and a double ear infection, respectively. Can't wait for the All-Star Game.

Biblical Anarchy

Go to the ant, O sluggard, observe her ways and be wise, which, having no chief, officer or ruler, prepares her food in the summer, and gathers her provision in the harvest. Proverbs 6:6-8

Four things are small on the earth, but they are exceedingly wise:...The locusts have no king, yet all of them go out in ranks. Proverbs 30:24, 27

The Curse of Inflation

Read James Leroy Wilson's latest post at Partial Observer through a link here at his blog Independent Country. The government has the inverse Midas touch when it comes to, oh, well, anything it does. Here Wilson tackles a job of barely scratching the surface of how government screws our lives by even the smallest of good intentions.

Big Brother, George Orwell and Blaming God

Whenever government spies on its citizens, desires too much information about them or tends to be too controlling of them, we use the term "Big Brother" to describe that government. This is in reference, of course, to the "government" character in George Orwell's book 1984. There's even a reality TV show where cameras are everywhere.

People fairly often blame God for things, and this seems to intensify when the ideas of sovereignty, election and predestination are in view. It's funny, because George Orwell had sovereign control over his characters and nobody ever blamed him for Big Brother's actions.

Finding Life in a Theology of Death

We religious folks have a long history of conveying ourselves as morbid and lifeless. We seem to ooze an aura of preoccupation with death. Abundant life? Hardly.

For centuries, the Roman Catholic church dominated culture in the West. At the center of their focus is the body on the cross - or crucifix - which is a corpse. The mass is essentially a re-crucifixion of Christ every week. Catholic assembly, music, monastic life and theology are basically morbid. So are its most ardent adherents. Monty Python satirized this well in The Holy Grail, showing the hooded monks engaged in Gregorian chants while smacking themselves in the head with wooden slabs.

Reformed Protestants, being a reactionary group against Roman Catholic doctrine, found the most disagreements in the areas of doctrine that have to do with Christ's death. Penal substitution, justification, atonement, propitiation, all have to do with death. These were emphasized most - and still are for some reason - because they were the chief differences. The Protestant cry of "He is risen" focuses not on the power of the new life, but serves mostly in removing the corpse from the crucifix. What's left as the central focus is the tool of crucifixion, the cross, an instrument of death. As a result, the Reformed are also morbid.

Arminians and other pietists play the reductionism of justification to a formulaic prayer. Repeat after me and you have eternal life. They don't understand the transformation. But like a mortician, they can apply some makeup and a nice suit to the corpse, via man made rules, and it can look like a Christian. Legalism and self-righteousness decimate the abundant life, resulting in the morbid.

This brings me to the Charismatics. Wow, what a difference. They place the focus on the resurrection and power of the Spirit. Their appearance is much different. Far from morbidity, they portray life. But their great blind spot is in the true doctrines of death from which life springs. Mired too much in Arminian and holiness theology of atonement, they tend to focus most on the appearance of signs of life, as opposed to the reality behind them. Like Simon the sorcerer in the book of Acts, too many try to buy the fruit of the Spirit, and without the discernment of the apostle who rebuked him, the Charismatics tend to let anybody in, as long as they can babble like an idiot or make a good claim. This is why so many of the fallen evangelical leaders in public scandal are Charismatics. The dressed up Arminian stiff simply has puppeteer's strings attached, and it can dance. But it, too, is morbid.

At some point in the future (as a postmillenialist I believe the church is still in its infancy) I'm hoping we'll see a church that borrows the strengths of each of these groups. Unity from the Catholics, strong doctrine of Christ from the Reformed, holiness from the pietists and resurrection power from the Charismatics. We may see real life after all.

Religion, Politics and Life in America

My motivation to write about this comes from posts at The World According To Bruce regarding his definition of Red-Letter Christianity, the intolerance of the Left and Right, and the relation of religion to politics. I'm not necessarily disagreeing with Bruce, but I will give the following with different definitions and viewpoint.

Because God is creator of all things, every thought and action of man is a reaction to God, whether for or against, and therefore inherently religious. Secularism leaves the God of the bible out of the equation, but must fill that void with something else, therefore it is a religion itself, contrary to its own claim.

Because Jesus is the King of kings, every thought and action of man is a reaction to His kingship, whether for or against, and therefore inherently political. So, every thought and act of man is both religious and political at the same time.

For a Christian to desire to be ruled by something other than God is idolatry. So the Christian has no other option in the realm of politics than to promote a theocracy.

Now, to avoid misinformed, knee-jerk gag seizures, strokes or heart attacks to what I just said, a definition of theocracy is in order. Theocracy is simply defined as "rule by God." Well, duh! So the question is not whether God rules, but how that rule is carried out in this earthly world. Starting at the beginning, God rules in this world by delegating that rule to man according to God's word. Genesis 1:26-28. But in giving that rule to man, God maximizes man's rule over his own person and property, and extremely and vehemently minimizes man's rule over other men and their property.

Satan desired to rule this world and all men in it by tricking Adam in the garden, so for man to desire to rule over other men's lives to a greater degree than God allows is satanic, and is the essence of politics. (See my definition of politics.) Both the religious Left and Right (and the secularists too!) would do well to learn this.

Blogroll Addition: McIntyre's Tavern

A while back I stumbled on to a blogsite hosted by Andrew McIntyre, called McIntyre's Tavern. I've added it to my blogroll in my margin. He opened for business with this: "There was a time when men were men, beer was beer, and people actually discussed important issues with their neighbors over a pint at the local public house. I have established this site to provide, at least in a virtual sense, a place to debate issues of Theology, Philosophy, Politics, and just about anything else that involves the mind. Most blogs include articles of pontification from the blogger which may or may not spark debate in the form of comments by readers. In other words, the format of most blogs is centered on the blogger. I have reversed that format on this site. The commenter himself is the focus. As the proprietor, I will provide the topic for discussion, with, perhaps, a brief introduction, and open the floor. All are welcome to post their opinions, participate in debate, and otherwise have at it..."

I have found this very interesting and contribute my comments from time to time. I am enriched by the various points of view, and if they don't contribute to my changing my mind, at least I learn what other people believe. Topic so far include creeds, natural revelation, death penalty, the presence of Christ in the sacraments, paedocommunion, ash Wednesday, sola fide, women in the ministry, Ayn Rand, political revolution and birth control. Andrew invites any and all to pull up a bar stool, pour a pint and talk away.

Friday Night Potpourri

• Finally, a Bud Light commercial is funny. Not funny enough to remember what it was about, though.
• Mrs. Scott and I watched the Miss USA pageant. I made fun of everything I could. My initial pick ended up as 3rd runner up out of 51 chickies. I visited the reading room during the personal interviews in the last round, as I can't stand to see beauty queens pontificate.
• My deskmate's father-in-law had a stroke. He has some speech problems, but seems to be improving at a rapid rate. Good news.
• I made a personal long distance call to somebody 3000 miles away. It's been a long time since that's happened.
• Mrs. Scott asked me to stop off at the store tonight after work and buy a few items. Ten gallons of drinking water, ice cream, M&M's, and a People magazine. I asked the checker (who was a guy in his 20's) if he couldn't tell that I was shopping for my pregnant wife. He had the perfect comeback, as I'm sure he's seen it all. He said, "It's okay if it's for you."

Belated St. Patty's Day Joke

Oops, forgot to post this. I'm part Irish so I can get away with it.

Q: How many Irishmen does it take to screw in a light bulb?

A: Five. One to hold the light bulb and four to drink until the room starts spinning.

Dada's Baba

Our two year old has come to call his bottle, "baba." The other day, Mrs. Scott was in the garage taking stock on all of our bulk items, when she noticed I had one beer left. She picked it up to put it in the fridge, and our two year old said, "Dada baba."

The Chapter Division Heresy and Colossians 3

"Therefore if you have been raised up with Christ, keep seeking the things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God. Set your mind on the things above, not on the things that are on earth." - Colossians 3:1-2 (NASB)

I've heard it numerous times during preaching or teaching that chapter and verse divisions in the Bible were not in the original text, but put there by men as a way to help us in various ways, such as an address system for easy reference, or for dividing long passages into ideas. These artificial divisions could be a problem and we should look out for taking things out of context as a result of using these divisions. I can't think of a chapter division changing the meaning of the text more than Colossians 3.

"If you have died with Christ to the elementary principles of the world, why, as if you were living in the world, do you submit yourself to decrees, such as, 'Do not handle, do not taste, do not touch!' (which all refer to things destined to perish with use) - in accordance with the commandments and teachings of men? These are matters which have, to be sure, the appearance of wisdom in self-made religion and self-abasement and severe treatment of the body, but are of no value against fleshly indulgence." - Colossians 2:20-23 (NASB)

Colossians 3 taken out of the context of the end of chapter 2 is used by many people to say the exact opposite of the meaning of the text. The hyper-spiritual among us will see other Christians engaging in certain activities, eating or drinking certain things, and mis-apply chapter 3. "Hey, if you're a Christian, why are you watching sports? Or why are you eating at a nice restaurant or drinking alcoholic beverages? Why are you so involved in growing things in your garden or raising animals? You should be setting your mind on things above, not on things on the earth. So we shouldn't be involved with these things."

But to the one who partakes of something - and gives thanks - is setting his mind on things above. Christ is Lord of all things, and that's where the thanksgiving is directed. The hyper-spiritual Christian, on the other hand, is very consumed with the activities that his brother is involved in - sports, leisure, alcohol, physical things - the things of the earth. His hyper-spirituality leads him to conclude that Christians shouldn't handle, taste or touch these "earthly" things, which is the very conclusion that chapter 2 forbids! So he plods along in life, convinced of his spiritual superiority, but only maintains an appearance of wisdom in his self-made religion and misjudges where others' minds are set.

Fools For Jesus

Mrs. Scott and I were watching a reality TV show where the one "voted off the show" was a Christian. She was shown reading her bible when others thought she should have been doing something productive, disobeying superiors out of conscience and like things. In the post-termination interview, she claimed hopefulness in drawing other players closer to God because she was there. I don't want to judge her faith or motives because in such a highly (over)produced reality TV show, much of the truth is probably lying on the editing room floor. But she was made to look like what I perceive as the stereotypical evangelical. And this stereotype is self-made within evangelicalism.

Much of the evangelical mindset is not so much in you being a Christian as it is in letting others know that you are a Christian. Via external, superficial, visible things. Even if it means acting like a fool to do so. I pointed this out to my wife, and she replied that her best friend, who is a staunch unbeliever, has this very thing as her number one complaint about Christianity. We seem to talk the talk, but can't walk the walk. I've heard this also from some of my non-Christian friends. They point to blatant dishonesty in Christian's motives. Things like bait-and-switch. Christians inviting them over to dinner or to their church choir's Christmas performance, only to find out it was a sleazy sales pitch style crusade aimed at evangelizing the heathen that just walked in the door - them. Or the recent flaps about Southern Baptist conventions where attendees fail to tip waitresses at nearby restaurants, or use billfold gospel tracts with a phony $20 bill printed on the front. You know, "the gospel is more valuable to your eternity than my tip is to feeding your kids."

A few years ago we attended a bible study full of otherwise strong, mature, intelligent Christians. One evening, the topic broke out about "witnessing" at work. It went around the room, and everybody chimed in about their witnessing. I was shocked (but not really surprised, because that's how I learned Christianity too) at some of the methods. Some people created passwords for accounts that were bible verse addresses, to witness to the computer geeks or managers or other workers who had access to those accounts, because they were forced to type the password! Login: AcmeCorp. Password: john316. Whoa! What a witness for Christ! Some wore jewelry shaped like a cross. Some pasted bible verses on their monitors, just so everybody would know. One guy, who worked on a construction site, boasted that his ministry was to crank the Christian radio station at full blast so everybody could hear the gospel every day all day long. "We got two lesbians who live next door, and I make sure they can hear Pastor Joe at 10am!"

When the apostle Paul said we are "fools for Christ", he meant that our living life with the hope of the resurrection to eternal life would seem foolish to the world. He didn't mean that we should act like fools.

Happy St. Patrick's Day

I'm part Irish, I'm wearing green, my favorite beer is Guinness Stout and I am a Christian. With St. Patrick using the shamrock, according to tradition, to explain the Trinity to the king of Ireland, all these things go together for a good holiday to celebrate. Happy St. Patrick's Day!

Did Jesus Go To Hell?

"He descended into hell. The third day He arose again from the dead." Apostle's Creed

I've always had a problem with this line in the Apostle's Creed, the one that claims Jesus descended into hell. I added the resurrection line to the above quote just to put it into context. I have no problem with that line.

My problem has always been with being able to prove from Scripture that Jesus went to hell. It is further complicated by several alternate versions of the creed that say, "He descended into hades," and "He descended to the dead." It's not that I disagree with the statement, because I can't disprove it, it's just that I can't prove it. I've never heard an adequate argument for what it does actually mean or why it's in the creed. After all, doesn't Jesus tell the thief on the cross that "Today, I will be with you in paradise"? Since the next day started at dusk he would have had only a few hours at most to go to hell.

What did he accomplish there? Some say that he went to preach the gospel to those Old Testament saints, who were in hell because Christ hadn't died on the cross yet to pay for their sins (a proof-text verse is the one about preaching to the spirits in prison). But then He was the Lamb slain from before the foundations of the world.

About ten years ago, I went to a Christian bookstore (maybe this was my error) to look for books on the creed. I found several written by popular authors, but this line was completely avoided by all who wrote about it. I've read some comments by Calvin on this, and it doesn't seem he's even sure why it's there or what it means. I read one commentary that said it was a kind of spiritual meaning that was aimed at debunking a certain heresy at the time the creed was written.

Even so, I recite the line along with the rest of the creed every time my church does. Any ideas?

Christian Conferences and Retreats

I was inspired to write this by Bruce's link to Dan Edelen at Cerulean Sanctum. I have much experience with Christian conferences and retreats. I'll focus on retreats. Our church has many retreats during the year. The family retreat, men's retreat, women's retreat, leadership retreat, college retreat, youth group retreat, etc. When I was single, these retreats were automatic to me. Now that I have a family, not so. We decided this year to not go to any of the retreats. Finances and a baby on the way were the main villains. Yet I still received a number of reactions bordering on shock.

For me, retreats have always been a "hope" for some kind of spiritual experience. That's because it's promised. What I get instead is sharing a "cabin" with ten snoring elephants. There are always some slobs who I need to share a toilet with while somebody else is in the shower using the last of the hot water. I have stage fright, so my body shuts down and I get constipated for the entire time. Motel 6 is roughing it for me, and I need porcelain and four sound-proof walls. The food is always tragic, and it sits in my gut for days. The food doesn't say much for Christians loving one another. I can't sleep. I'm up all night in a funk. All I can think about is when the next time I'll take a regular crap. There's always six two-hour teaching sessions from some pastor or seminarian from somewhere. Not much time for relaxing and enjoying time with others. It takes all week back at work to recover. So how far do we have to push personal sacrifice again?