New post --> An Illustration of Creation
((posted @ http://jasonsdevos.wordpress.com/2009/11/04/an-illustration-of-creation/ ))

Rather than copy-and-paste it over and over in all the places I post such things, I figured I'd just give you all the link and let everyone just click to view it in one central location. If I feel it necessary, I might edit the text in later and still leave the link for those who want to follow things there.

Read and enjoy!

In His service, and yours,
jason†

On this, the 8th anniversary of the September 11th attacks, I came across this video from 45 years ago, which, with all that’s being stirred in our nation these past few weeks, felt oddly — if not surreally — appropriate. So with that, I’ll simply post it here for you to consider and comment on.


Ronald Reagan - 1964



This blog is also posted [here] on my wordpress blog.

A personal story I heard from one of my pastors:

(the pastor speaking) "I knew a guy in high school who was a Christian. Other than that fact, he seemed normal, he was smart and he was a fantastic athlete. One day I took a shot at him, saying "How could an otherwise intelligent guy like you use Jesus as a crutch?"

The guy grabbed me by my shirt collar and pulled me face to face with him, and said, "Jesus isn't a crutch -- He's my legs!", and let me go.

His meaning fell on me like bricks, and I started to re-evaluate what I thought Christianity was. Here was a great, nice, intelligent athletic guy, with seemingly everything in the world going for him, only he looked at it totally differently -- he saw it as God was the only thing "going for him", but everything else had no choice but to obey Him and fall in line."

In His service, and yours,
jason†

Imagine you have a 300-foot roll of gold leaf "tape". With another person helping, unroll the tape all the way until there's one long strand of straight tape...now you're standing 300 feet apart, with this length of tape between you.

Now, rip or cut a 1 millimeter long piece of tape off the roll and set it aside. You have 3 seconds to do whatever you like to that 1mm -- you can try and make it pretty, or fun, or ugly and destructive -- before you lose your grip on the remainder of the roll.

That 1mm is like our life here on earth. When you're trying to do something with it, it's easy to see so much detail and size to it, and after you're done "being creative" it might even be tempting to look at it as "really good" or "totally bad"; one thing's for certain, though, and that's that it doesn't matter what you do to your "1mm", it will never be as perfect as before you started fiddling with it.  But eventually you'll look up and realize that little sliver, no matter how "good" or "bad" you were able to make it, simply cannot compare with the remaining expanse of gold that is waiting for you.

Some will try and keep their "1mm" nice and ignore the rest; others realize that no matter how "good" they can make that "1mm", they'd rather have the rest of the 300-foot roll.  Just realizing "there's more on the roll" can really unlock all sorts of wonderful things in life; you're no longer running through life like a kid from Siberia at Disneyland -- trying to cram as much into the short time they have because they'll probably never get another shot.

So next time you find yourself overly focused on the here and now, be reminded that there's a whole lotta "tape" left after your 1mm is used up.  It helps keep things in the proper perspective. ;)

In His service, and yours,
j†

Today being named such as it is, I just wanted to speak briefly about what we usually don't think about today.

I mean, most people within the Christian Family will hear or attend some sort of "Good Friday" message or service, and will undoubtedly hear about what it is that's being observed today -- namely, the baseless trial, unjustified scourging and beating, and completely unwarranted crucifixion of Jesus.  So why is it that we call today "Good"?

This will (hopefully) also be answered for those who hear such messages today, though perhaps not prefaced with that exact question.  Pastors and preachers will be declaring that without the crucifixion, there could be no satisfaction of the law, and without the satisfaction of the law, there can be no forgiveness of sin.  Jesus' sacrificial death was necessary to give us life, and He showed that His sacrifice was accepted by the Father by raising Himself up from the tomb on "the first day of the week".

With both the observation of events and reasons for their importance squared away now, are we missing anything?  I can tell you this for certain: it is absolutely common for the "average" genuine Christian today to have heard the previous so many times that it begins to lose it's impact, so perhaps looking specifically at what exactly it was that really happened that day will remind us of the gravity of the situation.

Jesus -- God "with skin on", as the children appropriately have declared -- who had spent the previous ~33 years of His life on earth keeping Himself sin-free, *voluntarily* chose to be unfairly tried, unjustly beaten (remember, this is *God* we're talking about, not just "some guy"), ferociously whipped with the Cat O'Nine Tails, nailed to a tree that He Himself created and left to hang there until He died.

But that's not nearly the worst part of the proceedings...that would come while He was hanging on the cross.

The Son, who had enjoyed perfect, unbroken fellowship with the Father since before the Creation of the universe, now voluntarily had the sins of the entire human race poured on His account, attributed to Him, the true "spotless lamb".  As a result the Father, who had to judge sin, had to turn His back on His own Son -- that perfect fellowship broken for the first (and only) time in Eternity -- and Jesus (instinctively) cried out "My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?"

That had to be, hands down, the most terrifying and horrific moment of the entire ordeal.

But Jesus, desiring to reconcile humanity back into fellowship with God, endured the shame of the cross, the pain of the execution, and even the momentary separation of His own fellowship from the Father, because He loves you and I that much.  What strong love that must be to endure so much for such a rebellious and sordid bunch of folks as us?

But this is precisely why today is so "Good":  because God showed humanity that His love was strong enough to willfully endure and personally suffer so that fellowship could once again be restored between man and God.  The bridge, burned long ago by Adam's choice to ignore God's simple command, had been rebuilt by the Master Carpenter, never to be destroyed again.

Jesus gave everything so that we could have access once again to the Father, that we would enjoy fellowship with Him again.  He endured what was most difficult so that we would have the way to God that was most easy -- "choose life, that you might live".  And that is His desire for you today, to choose life.

Jesus said "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life, and no one comes to the Father except through Me", and He has set in front of you two paths: the road you're already on, heading in whatever direction you've been going, and His road, not quite as smooth or easy-going, but heading straight towards the Father's house.  You can choose your own way, or you can choose His way, but do not be deceived: you must choose one or the other.

Choose life. :)

j†

How many times have you heard someone named a brother or sister (or, admit it, yourself) say "Well, that ___(insert sin/destructive lifestyle here)____ time of my life made me the person I am today, so how can I look down at it?"I've said it myself before, though it was a long long time ago, only once since naming the name of Christ, and I felt extremely weird about saying it after I said it.  And though I don't remember if I realized why it felt so awkward at the time, it was simply because that mindset isn't Scriptural.

Unfortunately for us in America, it *is* so much a part of our "cultural Christianity" that it "sounds" like it should be Scriptural, so many people just dismiss their initial unease about it and move on.  But in reality, taking on that kind of mindset can be very damaging to a person's walk.

Now before anyone swings the pendulum too far the other direction, I'm not suggesting that people walk around continuously beating themselves up about the kind of sinner they used to be -- after all, Jesus has paid the price for it, Glory to God!, and we are no longer under condemnation if we are in Christ Jesus.  I'm merely suggesting that taking the approach that "oh, that's ok, it made
me who I am today" is a bit deluded, a dash untrue, and a good measure of not too healthy.

You see, when a person starts looking at their (negative) past as though it somehow had a (positive) molding force that contributed to their (positive) present outcome, they're doing two things:

*First, they're failing to remember -- much as the children of Israel did -- that "Egypt" (as the Bible often refers to the flesh) was not merely a place filled with garlic, leeks and onions, but was most prominently a place filled with harsh labors and cruel taskmasters, a period of their history when their burden was tremendously heavy and their desire for deliverance was intense.

*Second, they're taking their positive resent outcome and attributing it (at least in part) to the negative things that in reality were actively destroying them.  Even the noblest of efforts to redeem that by saying "Yes, but without doing that ______, I never would have come to God, so it can't be looked at as totally
bad" fall short in that they still fail to attribute the glory to God and continue to look back at the bad as though it were really the good.

The thing that perhaps I really hate worst about this saying we so thoughtlessly slip from our lips is the effect it has upon those we're talking to.  When we're talking with other believers, the effect is bad enough -- sometimes un-comprehended confusion, sometimes an "ah, that makes sense" that leads to them saying the same thing, sometimes their own conscience being seared on certain matters -- but when we're talking with unbelievers, the effects can be completely catastrophic.

A person who has yet to come to Christ who comes to believe that Christians believe that way will start to look at their own past the same way (because it's easily digestible by the conscience), yet when a Christian then tries to discuss the need for a Savior with them, they often don't see the need -- after all, they've adopted the same "moral worldview" (i.e. "do these things, don't do those things, etc.") that the Christian people they've talked to have, and since they've been prepped by the previous Christians to not look at their past sins as "sins", there's really no need in their mind for someone to save them from their sins, at least not actively.  And that's downright tragic.

So instead, the next time the topic of your past comes up, be honest -- tell people straight up "I didn't think my sin was that bad at the time, but it was an offense to God and I needed a Savior just as much as anyone else did, and but for the Grace of God those things I was involved in would have destroyed me long before now".  This way, not only are *YOU* keeping proper perspective of what your past sins really look like, you're giving a very accurate picture to the other person of where you would be had God not intervened, and that can *only* have good outcomes. ;)

[[reposted from a thread in "Jesus Freaks"]]

Keep in mind that, like is the case with most things, we are careful
not to swing the pendulum too far to *either* extreme, but seek to find
the Biblical balance here.

It takes more than just a "word study" to figure out what the Bible is
conveying about several issues -- if a word study was all that was
necessary, Jesus would have given us a dictionary rather than doctrine.

There are some who contend that Biblical "fear" (as it relates to God)
means to tremble and quake at the mighty power of the Lord, and they
(fairly) cite their supporting verses. There are others who swing the
complete other way, contending that Biblical "fear" in relation to God
means that we are simply to respect and admire the Lord, the way we do
a kind grandfather, and they (fairly) cite their supporting verses.

Both groups are correct, but neither is correct exclusively.

Jesus makes a statement that is very "un-Jesuslike" -- that is, unlike
what most people make Jesus out to be. He says (Matt. 10:28): "Fear not
those who can kill your body, but afterwards have nothing more they can
do to you; rather, fear God who can destroy both body and soul in hell."

To many, they have trouble reconciling this verse with their ideas of
the warm, cuddly "Grandfather God". That isn’t to say that the Lord is
not tender, loving and desiring to comfort you; it’s just saying that’s
not *ALL* the Lord is. Recognizing that the Lord is not in existence
merely to be (to the girls) like the girlfriend who is always there for
you but never blabs your secrets or (to the guys) like "Mom" for you is
essential in staying in fellowship with the God who really IS, rather
than a God of our own invention.

God loves people, and extends mercy and grace to people every minute of
every day. He is tender, kind, patient, comforting and gracious to us
constantly. But He is also acutely aware of the spiritual battles that
are raging all around us, and He is desiring that those in the battle
actually stand up and fight. It’s not that He’s got multiple
personalities, by any stretch, He simply shows the facets of His
personality* that are appropriate to the situation.

 - forgive the inaccurate wording, as God cannot really have a
"personality", which is defined as the attributes of a person’s
character or behaviors -- we simply don’t have a category-word for
those attributes because we center our thinking around "how things are
like us".

A good example: a battle scene. You have soldiers advancing against a
town, with rifles going off all over the place. The commanders are
issuing their orders -- Alpha company, break right; Bravo, wedge and
split, etc. -- and there are wounded soldiers going down and being
dragged out by field medics to the triage area outside the battle zone.
Now, there are several different types of things going on just in this
one simple scene: there are people attacking, people defending, people
reloading weapons, people giving orders, people ensuring that their
group is following orders, people who are coming to the immediate aid
of others, and people who are treating the needs of others.

Each different type of person in the example is going to have a
slightly different mindset about their situation, and will approach
that differently than the other groups. The commander giving orders
will not approach things exactly the same as the field medic would, nor
would the triage approach things the way the front-line soldier would.
Why? Because their circumstances dictate the personality traits that
they’ll display in their respective situations.

You wouldn’t want a commander approaching a battle with "Aw, we would
hate to trample over those pretty blue flowers, that would be a
shame!", nor would you want the triage doctors looking at your
lacerated finger and saying "Well, no room for sympathy here, we’re
gonna amputate that whole arm!" Different times call for different
responses, and different ways to interact with people. Someone
suffering in a triage tent needs compassion and mercy; someone being
dragged off the hostile battlefield needs more "rough love" forsaking
some immediate comfort for the more important need of survival; someone
being ordered to charge a stronghold doesn’t need a motivational tape
series, they need a "Get your butt up there!" firm command; someone
trying to ward off would-be attackers needs to try and instill fear in
the enemy that advancing further will in fact cost them their lives.

God manifests all these attributes at different times. He will comfort
and heal where there are wounds and brokenness. He will sometimes grab
you by your shirt-collar and throw you out of a situation that (in His
wisdom He knows) will harm you further. He will give you a stern "Go
and do it!" order when you’re hesitating to do what you know you should
do. And He will "watch your back" in defense against attackers.

So how do the above words from Jesus tie in?

Simple: He’s giving one of those stern orders to people who are
resisting doing what they know they’re supposed to be doing. Every
Christian knows they’re supposed to do what God says, not because He’s
a cruel and domineering figure but because they recognize He has their
own welfare at heart. But there are times when we talk ourselves into
compromising situations, or look at people with fear because we’re
still thinking about how much comfort they can take away from us
physically.

To those people, God incarnate speaks for saying (paraphrase) "You’re
going to disobey the King of Kings who has power over not only your
body but also your soul just so you can try and avoid those people who
can only try and harm your body?" It’s about priorities, and making
sure that we’re mentally keeping the true King’s commands as highest on
the list, far above the threatenings of mere mortals.

Is it bad to recognize that God is absolutely mighty and could -- if He
so chose -- snuff you out like a candle-wick? If it is, then David was
pretty bad. But reading the whole counsel of Scripture and recognizing
that "a smoldering flax He will not extinguish" should bring comfort in
knowing that because He has already paid the price (which you’ve
accepted) to save you, He’s not going to then snuff you out just for
kicks. You have His Word on it, literally.

Is it bad then to recognize that God is also a God of comfort? Not at
all, as long as you recognize that His comfort is given to those who
*need* comfort at that moment, and that He’s not just a big warm pillow
you can jump on everytime you think you have an "owie". Sometimes you
need a "Mom" to wash your scraped knee, put an Elmo band-aid on it, and
give it kiss to feel better, and sometimes what you really need is for
"Dad" to brush the dirt off your jeans, give you and encouraging pat on
the back and send you right back into the game. ;)

In the week or so after the elections, I remain a bit confused.

For those who had an eye on Californian proposition issues, there are two that stood out from the rest in the eyes of most Christians: prop 4, and prop 8.  Prop 4 was basically proposing parental notification before an underage child could get an abortion, and prop 8 was the internationally-famous proposal to restore the definition of marriage that Californian voters reinforced in the 2000 prop 22.

I have to be completely honest...I was expecting the exact opposite of what happened.  Perhaps it was because of the amount of money spent on each, or perhaps people got so focused on one they forgot about the other.  Whatever the case though, I was expecting that Californians -- 8 years after our year 2000 prop 22 vote -- were going to NOT pass Prop 8, but would pass prop 4.

November 4th comes up, and what happens?  Prop 8 passes, and prop 4 falls through the cracks.  And in a way, I'm kinda disappointed.

I'll try to be brief.  If given the honest choice between the two, I'd rather have prop 4 pass than prop 8.  Why?  Well, prop 8 pretty much deals with legal adults, people who are going to do what they're going to do regardless of what I believe about it.  Whether I think they're wrong or right in their beliefs, and regardless of the fact that homosexual couples already were able to access the same rights and privileges as "traditional" married couples, they're of legal age and the consequences of their decisions falls solely on their own heads.

Prop 4, on the other hand, affects the parents of minor children who are considering abortion.  The trip of the whole issue -- and the driving force in getting the proposition on the ballot in the first place -- is the fact that parents can be held accountable for the negative health effects resulting after an abortion, even though they had no knowledge beforehand that the abortion was even being considered!  The girl who inspired the proposition -- "Megan" -- actually died of complications after getting an abortion that her parents knew nothing about until after she died.  Imagine the horror those parents had to go through, the 1-2 punch stemming from not only finding out your child has died mysteriously but then also finding out that it happened because she tried to secretly kill her unborn baby.  Tragic, to put it mildly.

The data is overwhelmingly clear that states that have implemented laws of the same type as "Megan's Law" show a dramatic decrease not only in the number of abortions that these minor girls have, but also a ripple-effect decrease in the post-abortion tragedies that Planned Parenthood never tells girls about, including severe health issues up to and including death.

So yeah, confusion. :/