Ask your politician

MAYBE YOU CAN USE THIS TODAY!

I ran across a writing by a man named Tyson Zahner. I don’t know him. However, he developed some questions to in order to “tell when a politician is using Scripture faithfully vs. using Jesus to sell you something.” I think the questions are useful. Some of this idea developed out of his hearing Texas candidate James Talarico on the Joe Rogan podcast turning “the incarnation of Christ into a campaign ad for abortion.” (If you have the stomach for it, you can listen to Talarico on Joe Rogan Experience on YouTube. He claimed Mary “gave consent” to God at the Annunciation and that becomes a model for bodily autonomy; i.e. choosing abortion. He also said Jesus never mentioned abortion or homosexuality.) Though this started with Talarico, you can apply the questions to any politician on any side of the aisle (and those straddling the middle). I share Zahner’s questions in my own words (I can understand and hopefully present them better than way) because I think they can be helpful to Christians trying to cut through the noise. Don’t just run with one question alone; all five together will help a pretty clear picture to emerge out of the fog.

1. Is this position consistent with what the Christians have generally held for centuries, or has it just conveniently appeared more recently?

2. Does the position take into account the full counsel of Scripture, or just cherry-pick a verse or two while ignoring the context in which it sits (and the broader context of the whole of inspired Scripture)?

3. Is Scripture used to arrive at a conclusion, or twisted to fit a conclusion already held?

4. Does the argument hold up when applied consistently? For example, someone says, “Jesus never mentioned abortion” as if that settles the issue. So then will he apply that principle and say, “Jesus never mentioned sex trafficking” – and that makes sex trafficking okay. (I think it is easy to see the supposed logic crumbles under its own weight.)

5. Does the presenter of the position invite honest debate, or rather merely throw up Jesus as a shield to shut down disagreement?

Apply those to James Talarico and the answers indicate he is biblically wrong on abortion and homosexuality. Apply those to the positions of John Cornyn, Ken Paxton, Wesley Hunt, and Jasmine Crockett to see what you get. Apply those to Paula White, the President’s leader of the White House Faith Office. Apply them to any and all claiming the Bible approves their brand of politics. Apply them to you and me. Tyson Zahner has created and asked some helpful questions that work across the board.

And...

Just to be clear on Talarico, he is a very liberal Christian who does not accept the inspiration, infallibility, and authority of the Bible. The biblical positions I have heard him present are biblical nonsense.

Whales are fish: Biblical taxonomy

The Bible does not follow modern “Linnaean taxonomy” (rooted in the formulations of Carl Linnaeus in the 1700s). In ancient thought, classifications of creatures were grouped by movement and habitat rather than biology (e.g., sea vs. air vs. land; cf., for example, Genesis 1:28; Hosea 4:3). Consider this in regard to the modern classification of the bat as a mammal, while the Bible classifies bats with fowls of the air in Leviticus 11:13-19. Due to flight in the air, the bat is classified among the fowl of the air; due to swimming in the sea, the whale is classified among the fish of the sea. This seems to bother some modern folk. However, there is no reason for Christians to run away like frightened children just because the Bible uses its own classification system rather than following what has been developed by modern scientists. Why accept what men have said over what God has said?

---

Note: “Linnaean taxonomy is a hierarchical system for classifying and naming organisms developed by Carl Linnaeus. It organizes biological diversity into categories like kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus, and species.” The fear of the difficult drives some commentators to affirm odd, unresearched, and false statements. For example, the Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges commentary states: “It is scarcely needful to note that there are no whales in the Mediterranean.” There are actually a number of whale species found in the Mediterranean Sea.

A Farmer’s Prayer

 

Origin of picture unknown

God leads us along

The hymn “God Lead Us Along” alludes to numerous places in scripture, beginning with Psalm 23:1. Led through the water and fire leads us to Isaiah 43:2 – as well as thinking of the children of Israel crossing the Red Sea, and the three Hebrew children cast into the fiery furnace. God leads us wherever we go. He is strong, he is sure, he is trustworthy. “All things work together for good to them that love God…”

1. In shady green pastures, so rich and so sweet,
God leads His dear children along;
Where the water’s cool flow bathes the weary one’s feet,
God leads His dear children along.

Chorus:
Some through the waters, some through the flood,
Some through the fire, but all through the blood;
Some through great sorrow, but God gives a song,
In the night season and all the day long.

2. Sometimes on the mount where the sun shines so bright,
God leads His dear children along;
Sometimes in the valley, in darkest of night,
God leads His dear children along.

3. Though sorrows befall us and Satan oppose,
God leads His dear children along;
Through grace we can conquer, defeat all our foes,
God leads His dear children along.

4. Away from the mire, and away from the clay,
God leads His dear children along;
Away up in glory, eternity’s day,
God leads His dear children along.

The above song (words and music) – most often titled God Leads Us Along – is credited to George A. Young or G. A. Young, 1903. Other than a name, this author is unknown. The song is some books is recorded as “Copyright 1903, Purity Publishing Company, C. F. Weigle, Owner.” (although some later books, such as Tabernacle Hymns, give the copyright in 1903 by G. A. Young). The 1904 Catalogue of Title Entries of Books and Other Articles seems to clear this up as one of a group of 26 songs copyrighted December 30, 1903 by Purity Publishing Company, Austin, Illinois (Catalogue of Title Entries of Books and Other Articles Entered in the Office of the Register of Copyrights, Volume 40, No. 4 Library of Congress, at Washington, D.C., First Quarter, 1904, Whole No. 661. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1904, pp. 72-73).[i]

Purity Publishing Company was incorporated in 1904 in Chicago, Illinois, by S. Henry Bolton, Charles F. Weigle, and Clayton E. Ford. These men all seem to have been involved in the Holiness movement. In 1902, S. Henry Bolton was pastor of Austin Holiness Church, Austin, Illinois (being an area of Chicago Illinois). That same year, he was involved in incorporating the International Apostolic Holiness Union, based in Chicago. Clayton E. Ford is probably Clayton Ellsworth Ford, a building contractor and layman in the holiness movement. In 1907, his daughter Ida E. married Rev. James William Chaney at the Austin Full Gospel Tabernacle, Austin, Chicago, Illinois.

Charles Frederick Weigle (1871-1966) is the better-known of the three men. He was an evangelist and the author of the song, No One Ever Cared For Me Like Jesus. Weigle Avenue in Sebring, Florida is named in his honor. This hymn was supposedly written when his first wife left him. She was from a wealthy family; he became an itinerant evangelist.[ii] She did not want to live that way. He died at age 95 and is buried at the Pinecrest Cemetery in Sebring, Highlands County, Florida beside his second wife Carrie Hight Weigle. It appears that he was converted as a Methodist, then participated in the Holiness movement, and finally at some point became a Baptist.

The little bit of information we have about the author of God Leads Us Along (which is very little) has been passed on by Haldor Lillenas (1885-1959), the founder of the Lillenas Publishing Company. In the 1940s, Lillenas was able to locate the widow of George A. Young. According to his report of the story, George Young was a struggling carpenter and preacher. After many years of saving, around the beginning of the 20th-century he built a small home for his family. The joy and rest was short-lived. While he and his family were away from home at church services, rowdy hoodlums burned their home. The hymn “God Leads Us Along” was written with this event in on his mind.

---

[i] Austin, Illinois is an area on the west side of Chicago, and the company later designated as being in Chicago.
[ii] The fact that the song was not published until 1932 – after Weigle was already married to Carrie Hight – calls in question the “when” part of this story.

In other words, b to threnody

• threnody, noun. A poem or song of mourning or lamentation.
• solipsism, noun. The view that the self is the only reality.
• sforzando, noun. (Music) A tempo mark directing to play a note with sudden, strong emphasis.
• Satanist, noun. a person who engages in any of a highly diverse group of religious, philosophical, or countercultural practices centered around Satan.
• quoz, noun. An odd, absurd, or ridiculous person or thing.
• pogonotrophy, noun. The act of cultivating, or growing and grooming, a mustache, beard, sideburns or other facial hair.
• plenipotentiary, noun. A person (especially a diplomat) Invested with full power to act on behalf of another.
• maladroit, adjective. Marked by a lack of adroitness; clumsy; inept; awkward in movement or unskilled in behavior.
• magister, noun. A master or teacher in ancient Rome; a male member/priest of the Fourth Degree in the Church of Satan (female, magistra); the possessor of a master’s degree.
• maga, noun. A female member/priestess of the Fifth Degree in the Church of Satan (male, magus).
• lucubration, noun. Laborious study or thought; the product of such laborious effort or study.
• lubrication, noun. Minimizing the friction force between surfaces sliding on each other, by lubricant (by a fluid, such as oil).
• lex talionis, noun. The principle or law of equal retaliation (i.e., a punishment inflicted should correspond in degree and kind to the offense of the wrongdoer, as “an eye for an eye”). Latin “law of talion” (i.e., retribution).
• grotto, noun. A cave or cavern; an artificial cavernlike recess or structure.
• Disneyfication, noun. The process of transforming real places, events, cultures, or ideas into simplified, sanitized, and commercially appealing entertainment.
• cosplay, noun. The practice of dressing up as a character from a movie, book, or video game (portmanteau of costume and play).
• Church of Satan, proper noun. A religious organization dedicated to the religion of Satanism as defined by Anton Szandor LaVey.
• cabal, noun. A secret political clique or faction; a small group of secret plotters; a mystical local group of Satanists.
• bicinium, noun. An unaccompanied composition for only two parts, especially one for the purpose of teaching counterpoint.

Maybe they’ll take up an offering

The following story told by a preacher that I heard in a chapel service over forty years ago. I have long since forgotten the name of the preacher who told it, but I well remember the story. It is a good illustration of one of the problems of the so-called “universal invisible church.” 

A member of a singing group contacted this pastor by telephone. The singing group was trying to schedule visits to sing at the various churches in his area. The pastor was not familiar with the group. The man who called explained that were not charging for coming; they only asked that the church take up an offering for them. In the process of the conversation, the pastor asked the singer what church they were members of. The man answered, “Oh, we’re part of the universal invisible church.” The pastor replied, “Well, why don’t you just sing for them, and maybe they will take up an offering for you.”

So ended the conversation.

Acts 28:7-10

Publius and his sick father, 28:7-10

Verse 7: The chief man of the island of Melita, Publius, had possessions in this section. As with the kind initial reception of the common people, so this leader “received us, and lodged us three days courteously.”

Verse 8: While they were lodging there, the father of Publius was or became sick “of a fever and of a bloody flux.” This afforded Paul another opportunity to confirm his faith by signs following (Mark 16:18 “they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.”). Paul went in to the sick father of Publius. Paul prayed, laid his hands on him, and by the power of God healed him. Additionally, he repaid kindness with kindness. “to whom Paul entered in” suggests that this was neither asked nor expected by Publius, but that Paul saw the man’s condition and spontaneously rendered aid.

“There is a poignant thing here. Paul could exercise the gift of healing; and yet he himself had always to bear about with him the thorn in the flesh. Many a man has brought to others a gift which was denied to him.”[1]

Verse 9: Hearing of this, now the Melitans know the power of healing in Paul. Other diseased folk on the island came, and they were also healed. In the Greek language, verse 8 uses the word ἰαομαι for healed; verse 9 uses the word θεραπευω for healed.[2] For this reason, coupled with Luke writing “they honoured us, some have suggested that verse 8 refers to miraculous healing (by Paul) and verse 9 refers to medical healing (by Luke). Barcly writes, “…in verse 9 there is a very interesting possibility. That verse says that the rest of the people who had aliments came and were healed. The word used is the word for receiving medical attention; and there are scholars who think that this can well mean, not only that they came to Paul, but that they came to Luke who gave them of his medical skill.”[3] While this is within the realm of linguistic and practical possibility,[4] since Luke was a physician, this is a case of looking in the Bible for something that is not actually mentioned. The context does not suggest it. The two words are synonyms. The word θεραπευω simply means “to cure or heal,” is not limited to “therapeutic” or medical healing, and is used in reference to other miraculous healings recorded in the Bible (Cf. Matthew 4:23-24; 8:16; Mark 3:15).[5]

Verse 10: “honoured us with many honours” At times “honour” can mean some kind payment or honorarium,[6] but should not be considered so here, as if the Melitans paid Paul for working miracles. To receive payment for exercising the gift of healing would violate the apostolic commission: “he gave them power…to heal all manner of sickness and all manner of disease…freely ye have received, freely give” (Matthew 10:1, 8). “when we departed” In chronological order, the last statement of the sentence happens simultaneously with verse 11.

---

[1] Barclay, The Acts of the Apostles, p. 189.
[2] θεραπευω from which Greek word, mediated through Latin, we get our English words such as “therapy” and “therapeutic.”
[3] Barclay, The Acts of the Apostles, p. 189.
[4] That is, in the meaning of words, and in relation to Luke’s profession.
[5] Even interchangeably in an immediate context, that is, using both words for the same miraculous healing, such as Matthew 8:7 (θεραπευω, I will come and heal him) and Matthew 8:8 (ἰαομαι, speak the word only, and my servant shall be healed). Luke himself uses θεραπευω for both miraculous healing and medical healing (Cf. for examples, Luke 4:23; 6:7; 8:43; 9:6; 13:14).
[6] Honorarium: a fee paid for a nominally free service; a payment in recognition of acts or services for which custom or propriety forbids a price to be set.

Criticizing criticizing

“We’ve stopped worshipping Christ and started worshipping ‘Nice’.” Charity Nicholson

It is certainly true that we can develop a hard and consistently critical spirit. However, try to combine criticizing and edifying. Criticism is most often viewed negatively in modern society – very negatively. But it isn’t inherently so (Galatians 2:11). Paul criticized Peter because he was “to be blamed.” Criticism is not mutually exclusive from encouraging, edifying, or helping. Sometimes we are in a place where we need to recognize what is wrong in order to do right!

Ironically, criticism is often criticized! The critics of criticism do not seem to see their critocrisy (critical hypocrisy). Nevertheless, criticism definitely serves a purpose. Over the years many criticisms I have received drove me to check my thoughts and beliefs. If taken seriously, the results will usually be that it causes you to confirm and strengthen your beliefs, or it causes you to modify and correct them. If we are the ones criticizing, we should consider to what end and to be careful to do it for the right reasons and in the right spirit. When we are receiving criticism, we should receive it in the right spirit (in order to benefit from it), whether or not it was given in the right spirit.

We must guard against developing a critical spirit. It is easy (perhaps natural) to develop one, and hard to guard against it. In many things in life and faith, I am and have been on the opposite end of the up side. In that position I have often found myself giving “the minority report,” so to speak. It can be a dangerous position to be in; one can develop a critical spirit, or just be perceived as having one. It was popular in our area in the 1960s-1980s (may still be, but I have relieved myself of the connection) to criticize folks who did not acquiesce to the prevailing new notions of how to do things. We were criticized as being “aginners” or “agin everything.” Certainly, there was some truth in the “against” part, even though we were the ones who had not changed, but it was not true in the “everything” part. (That charge was a carefully designed attack mechanism.) Sometimes it may be that diagnosing a critical spirit is in the eye of the beholder. All of us folks are often found being critical of being critical.

A person with a critical spirit delights in exposing the flaws of others, with an attitude of of fault-finding that seeks to tear others down rather than build them up. However, the popular secular definition of nice often does not align with the Christian worldview. Let us worship Christ, not nice. Let our criticisms proceed from the goal of building up, edifying one another.

...we speak before God in Christ: but we do all things, dearly beloved, for your edifying... 2 Corinthians 12:19.

The Succession of Believers Baptism

“By all which you see by plentiful Evidence, that Christ hath not been without his Witnesses in every Age, not only to defend and assert the true, but to impugn, and to reject (yea even to death it self) the false Baptism. Insomuch that we are not left without good Testimony of a Series of Succession, that by God’s Providence hath been kept afoot, of this Great Ordinance of Believers Baptism even since the first times.”

The Succession of Believers Baptism, Henry D’Anvers, A Treatise of Baptism, London: Fran. Smith, 1674, pp. 321-322.