Nature whispers the words of God

The Spirit of God speaks to us in many ways.

It is in the forest that I see god most clearly. There I find a cathedral made not with human hands, but by the word of God.

Twigs crumble beneath my feet. Leaves scatter as I walk. A squirrel shaking a limb, looking for acorns, or a rodent under the leaves scrounging for what others have left. Birds sound the alarm of an intruder in their midst.

Hearing my own breathing. My heart pounds with excitement of being with the earth again.

Looking in silent desperation for that secret spot. The clearing. A small space in the woods where I can be one with the earth. Away from the trappings of modern times. It is here my soul can find peace. The most glorious cathedral. It is not made my human hands, but by the word of God.

The clearing has been the same for 50 years. The location has changed many times. The song is the same, its just a different verse.

The small animals look for bits of food to survive. They dont know, or care, that I am equally as dependent on the woods for survival. If I am quiet enough, their fears will calm, and they will carry on with their struggle for survival.

I try to be quiet, not disrupting the holiness of the moment. The air is still. Wind is blocked by the ancient trees who stand guard over the holy ground. The wind whispers mysteries. I strain to make out what it says.

My spirit does understand the words even if my mind does not. There is a peace beyond understanding among the ancient trees. A heavy sigh and the cares of the world disappear.

Yet the dissonance remains. A low level nervousness looks for distractions. Like Adam and Eve with their fig leaves, I fear the nakedness of being with the earth.

Tempted to run and hide as they did.

I envy the animals. They have an advantage. They are closer to mother earth, to our heavenly mother who loves us more than we can know. They accept the love as easily as they breathe. They are not burdened by the chains of memory, emotion and even guilt.

Pine needles, leaves, and maybe some moss, provide a comfortable place. God provides for her creatures, whether its an acorn for the squirrel or a place for me to meet with her.

It is here I see the holiest of scriptures written on the breezes that manage to get past the ancient trees.

The Word of God is sharper than a two edges sword, dividing light and dark, flesh and bone. The holy writ I see here is the same even if they are messages that cannot be made into words.

Still a fear makes me tremble, I want to run and hide as the animals do. I am but flesh.

I am of earth and speak of earthly things. There is nothing good in me. I am guilty of eating Eve's apple pie.

Yet mother earth bids me come.

She accepts even me, along with the residents of the forest. Squirrels and small animals know this. Why is it so hard for me to know?

NIV vs. NASB: Understanding theory of translation

The NIV vs the NASB.
It is important to understand the different types of translations, and that defines what “accurate” means. Which is more accurate - word for word perfect, or something that better communicates the meaning?
There are two ways to translate. one is word for word. This is very “accurate” but it is often hard to read. There are differences in language that make translation difficult. Word for word can actually obscure the intended meaning as seen in the context.
The second option is Dynamic equivalence, which seeks to translate thought for thought, instead of word for word. This is easier to read and conveys the meaning more clearly in the language it is translated into.
The NIV uses the thought for thought theory, while the NASB is more word for word. Both are about the same as far as my definition of accuracy goes, but the NASB is more technically accurate from a word for word standpoint.
But even when you pick one theory or the other, there is still some overlap.
There are also paraphrases, like the Living Bible or The Message. These are not true translations at all, but just a retelling of it in another language. The
se are good for reading large segments at a time, but there is not as much regard for literal word for word accuracy.

How the bible is translated

Translating from one language to another can get complicated. It is not a simple matter of a word for word translation, because there are shades of meaning of words, and at times it can be hard to find the right word in another language.

The bible was originally written in Greek and Hebrew. We have very ancient texts from which to translate. There are not many real problems in translation, but there is a sentence here and there that is hard to translate.

There are a few different theories of translation, or perhaps I should say methods. One is to attempt a word for word translation. This can be hard to read, and from Greek you can get close but it is very hard. In Greek word order is not important at all. Or .. In Greek word order no difference makes.  If you did an actual word for word translation in the same order, most sentences would make no sense. But still it is possible to get pretty close to a word for word type translation. The NASB does this, and some other translations do
as well.

Another theory is that the meaning is what matters more than the literal words. In this case translators try to translate thought for thought, instead of word for word. This may not be as technically accurate, but it does make the meaning more clear at times. It is often easier to read as well. The NIV is a good example of this type of translation.

A third way is the paraphrase, which is not really a translation at all. A paraphrase just puts it in other words. There is little thought given to technical accuracy and the attempt is to just put the meaning into words the reader can understand. The Living Bible and the Message are good examples of this type of work.

Even in saying this, there is a little bit of all three in any translation.  Now technical accuracy is important, but keep in mind, that the important thing is that the reader understand what is written.. If you are technically accurate, but no one can understand it, it is not worth much.

Support the site. Click here to get 30 percent off on wall calendars, and other theme related calendars.

Christmas has always been controversial

Some say there is a war on Christmas, but really, there has always been controversy surrounding this holiday. It has its roots deep in paganism, and has always had a secular aspect.

It is the celebration of the birth of Christ for Christians today, but even the idea of celebrating a birthday of any kind is a pagan – or secular – idea. In ancient times only rulers and the very wealthy celebrated birthdays, and it was seen as a very self glorifying thing, not something a modest religious person would do. It has been banned at various times in Christian circles because of its worldly beginnings and secular aspects.

In the Americas it was flatly rejected and condemned by the Puritans because of its pagan origin, and because it was often associated with drunken parties.

It did finally catch on, but I think its history is part of the reason it is controversial. It has gained acceptance in religious circles, and that may be why some people see the secular aspects as an attack on Christmas.

Even today there are religious people who object to the idea of celebrating Christmas, usually because of its pagan origins. But I do not want to be making any kind of judgments. I still say people should do what they want and be tolerant of those that do differently, which is more biblical attitude to have.

The bible makes no mention of when Jesus was born, but it does give us a couple of clues. It says shepherds were watching their flocks by night, which means it was a time of year when there was plenty of grass and light. Certainly not the middle of winter, and more likely late spring when days are longer.

Dec. 25 was chosen, not because anyone thought that was the real day, but because it was a time of celebration already in place. The Romans celebrated their Gods in a mid-winter feast in late December. The Pagans (religions in Europe before Christianity arrived) also celebrated a mid-winter holiday in late December. The idea of co-opting that into celebrating the Birth of Christ first came about in the fourth century and was more related to the Roman celebrations.

There was not a lot of interest in Christmas in the “dark ages” but it did catch on again later in Europe, and that is where the pagan holiday was adopted.

In the middle ages people went to church on Christmas morning, and in the afternoon had a big party with lots of carousing and partying. Even then people decried the commercialization of the holiday.

Nothing new under the sun.

Click here for Christmas gifts

Rambling thoughts on the election

Political polls show that few people really like either of the two main candidates. Nearly 40 percent of the people on both sides are voting for their choice just to stop the other one from getting in. The majority of voters on both sides are voting against someone rather than for someone. The two main candidates have not gathered admiration or even respect in most quarters. Ive not actually heard anyone say "I like him," or "I like her."

It is also true that they rarely talk about actual ideas or plans to improve things. There are people who try to make one seem to be the "Christian" choice. You have to ignore a whole lot of baggage to make that claim. You basically have to say my candidate's sins don't matter but the other side's sins do matter. Jesus had some choice words for this type attitude - and hypocrisy and den of thieves comes to mind.

There are also those that say Republicans are against abortion, and therefore a vote for them is a vote against abortion - which generally is a "christian" position to take. The only problem with that, is when the Republicans were in power, they did nothing about abortion. In 2000 Republicans held the Presidency, Congress, the Senate, and a majority of the Supreme Court justices were conservative. It was a perfect storm. The issue never even came up. Why should we believe them now, especially when it has not been very significant in the campaign rhetoric?

There are other issues, or should be. Things that are Biblical, like social justice and taking care of poor people. Healthcare is another issue that should matter, as well as the economy in that there are policies that are more fair than others.

There are I suppose reasons to vote for either candidate, and you really are voting for a political party more than in individual. That isn't such a good thing either, but that is where we find ourselves.

But realize, no political party will "save" us. No political party will bring about the Kingdom of God, nor will any political party actually be righteous.  God is not sitting up in Heaven worrying about who we are going to elect. God already knows, and it will fit perfectly into his overall plan for the universe.

I think a more pertinent question would be to consider what is God telling us. Certainly God can raise up leaders, and we see our choices. But these are choices we have chosen as well. Is it not a comment on our culture that we have two candidates that basically no one likes?

     Proverbs 19: 21      Many are the plans in a man’s heart,
         but it is the LORD’s purpose that prevails.

Do you take the Bible literally?

Sometimes people ask if I take the bible literally. My answer is, “what do you mean by literal?” Do I take the question literally?

What does the word literally even mean?

Some would say, it means that the text literally means what it says. That is reasonable. But there is also the intent of the writer that must be taken into consideration. Taking words at their face value and ignoring what the intent of the writer was trying to communicate, is not taking it literally from my viewpoint.

When someone writes about a sunset, we know what they are talking about. Most of us know the sun does not really set in the evening. The sun pretty much stays still and the Earth rotates on its axis. This means light from the sun changes on the planet as it revolves. But we still know what is meant when someone says “sunset.”

So if we take it literally in the strictest sense, we would have to dismiss the word sunset as ignorance, because we know the sun does not set. Yet we do know what the intent is, and take the intent literally.

Or to take another example from the natural world. When it is cloudy we say the sun is not shining. What??? The sun is still shining, but is above the clouds and we cannot see it. Yet we know the intent, or literal meaning, when someone says the sun isn't shining because it is cloudy.

So if someone wrote .. “It was cloudy at sunrise, but the sun came out around noon and it was a clear day.” We all know what that means in English, but in the strictest literal interpretation, it is total nonsense. The sun didn't rise, the sun didn't just appear at noon and so forth.

We understand the basics of language, and understand the meaning the writer is communicating based on a variety of things. All of those things combine to give us a “literal meaning.”

So why is it, when we come to the scriptures, that we lose sight of this very common sense way of understanding language?

To say a certain story is meant to be allegorical, is taking it literally, because that is the intent of the writer. We know this by the context and by the type of literature involved.

When Jesus told the parable of the farmer out sowing seeds, we know he was not talking about farming practices, or giving advice on planting. It is clear there is something else in mind there from the writer. Parables are told to make a point, as a teaching tool. To take them as otherwise is to misinterpret the intent of the writer.

The scriptures are inspired by God, and are intended to give us some insight into the spiritual world. It is God's method of communicating truth to us.

God uses language. It is not some mystical thing that only a few can see or understand.

We should try to understand them the same way we understand any piece of written material.

Understand the words used, their meanings, then the context, and the intent of the writer as much as possible from that context.

To me that is what literal means.

<a target="_blank" href="http://shareasale.com/r.cfm?b=896417&amp;u=1334164&amp;m=17483&amp;urllink=&amp;afftrack="><img src="http://static.shareasale.com/image/17483/Mobile-640x100.jpg" border="0" alt="Shop Calendars.com Now!" /></a>

A cover up exposed

The word:
If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.
1 John 1:8-9
The meaning:

By Peter Paul Ruebens. Fall of Man Wikipedia commons

Five times in this passage, verses 6-10, the writer makes a “if we say– then that” type statement, and they all expose a basic human tendency. That tendency is to try to make our selves look good, justifying ourselves to others, or even to our own selves.
If we say we have fellowship with God, but don’t act like it, we are not living out the truth, which is that God is light. If we say we are without sin, we are just deceiving ourselves, or if we say we have not sinned, we are contradicting the truth or lying.
Way back in the beginning of the bible, Adam and Eve were deceived into sinning. They were perhaps deceived, but they still had a choice. When God questioned them, Adam blamed Eve, and Eve blamed the snake.
So our tendency is to sin, and then our tendency is to try to cover it up, blame someone else, or justify it in some way. We can deceive others, and even deceive ourselves.
But there is good news.
Instead of trying to hide the truth – or our sin – we should let it be exposed in the light. God is light and God wants to share it with us.
Verse 10 says, if we confess – or agree with God that we have sinned – then he will forgive us. Notice it says nothing about whether we deserve to be forgiven or not. He is “faithful and just” which means, he will keep his word, and since he is God, he also has the authority to do so.
And this is what God wants to do. God wants to forgive us.
The question:
Why do we try to hide our sins? What would happen if we freely confessed our sins?

Entering God's Rest: Part 1

This is a series of short articles I wrote awhile back.  I am updating them. Hopefully Ill post this series every day or two until its done. It is an interesting part of the book of Hebrews that talks about entering God's Rest. It's interesting that the path to righteousness, peace, and a lot of good things, lies not in trying harder, but in trying less and just being. Faith is the key.

Hebrews 3:18-19
18 And to whom did God swear that they would never enter his rest if not to those who disobeyed ? 19 So we see that they were not able to enter, because of their unbelief.

There are many promises for Christians, for God's children, in the Bible. Love, joy and peace being among them. So why do many Christian's not experience this? Why do many not experience victory over sin, which is another promise. The answer can be found at the end of Hebrews 3, where it talks about people who never entered God's rest because of unbelief. We have many promises in scripture, but we have to believe them, or to believe God and act upon that belief.
God's rest is a state of being in God's blessing and living in fellowship with God. But if we do not believe in the promises, they won't do us any good.
Fortunately there is an answer, and the invitation is extended in Hebrews 4, to enter God's rest. This series will examine that journey into God's rest.
The Children of Israel were led out of Egypt and sent towards the Promised Land. There were many great miracles along the way, proving that God was with them. They were told that they were given the land, that they would be given victory over every enemy, and that they would have prosperity in the new land that God was giving them. They were to be a nation of God’s own people.
They got to the banks of the Jordan river, and because most of the people in the scouting party were afraid, they refused to enter the land. God condemned them to 40 years of wandering in the wilderness, and the next generation did enter the land.
The picture of being led out of Egypt is seen as a picture story of our being saved out of our lives of enslavement to sin. – The word “Salvation” means deliverance.
But what of the wandering in the wilderness?

Often people see the period of wandering in the wilderness as the period between the time we are saved and the time we get to heaven.

This (Canaan) is the “rest” referred to in Hebrews, which God invites us to enter. It is worth noting that the invitation is to believers, those that are already children of God. The “rest” is not an invitation to salvation, but to receive by faith all the spiritual blessings God has promised his children.

The ancient Israelites did not have to wander in the wilderness for 40 years. They did so because of their unbelief.

The writer of Hebrews makes it clear that the ancient promise of entering God’s rest still stands. We too then, do not have to wander in the wilderness.

As the ancient story says, we must be delivered out of Egypt and into Canaan, our promised land is where we have all of God’s blessings and protection as we have close fellowship with Him. The only thing that can hold us back is unbelief. The writer of Hebrews encourages us to not be like the people of ancient Israel, but to have faith and enter into God’s rest instead of saying out in the wilderness.

And what are these blessings? We are not promised wealth or even health. Jesus talked about storing treasure in heaven. The rest is a sense of peace and or contentment.