The Lord and the Crockpot

by Jason Tsaddiq

Tsaddiq.jpg

          “Good morning, Lord; I’ll be right there.”

            After I showered and made myself somewhat presentable to other humans, I met the Lord in the kitchen as I poured the cure-all for all that ails mankind into my favorite mug and began to stroll back into the living room to “officially’’ begin my day with reading His word and having a full conversation with Him. However, He didn’t follow me into the living room.

            “Um, Lord?”

            “I think we’ll stay here in the kitchen this morning. Don’t you have supper to prepare?”

            “Oh, dear! I forgot to plan supper. And I’ve got to teach all day. Wonder what’s in the fridge?”

            “Well, let’s look. Oh, what in the world is this?”

            “Oh. Well, Lord…. It’s like this…..um.”

            “Yes, I see. It’s something that needs to be discarded into the trash immediately, isn’t it, My child?”

            “Yes, Lord; You’re right.”

            “Okay, now that the odor is out, let’s find something profitable to prepare for your family. Ahh, carrots and celery. Here, lay those on the counter. Prepare a cutting board and a knife and I’ll get out the crock pot.”

            “Carrots and celery? I was hoping for prime rib, Lord.”

            I thought I heard Him snicker. “You’re not on Bill Gates’ budget; you teach at a Christian school, remember?”

            As we worked side by side, we chatted – about my family and their needs and desires, about the neighbor lady who is struggling, and of course, the preacher and his family. 

            “Argh! I cut my finger with this knife! Great! Now I’m bleeding all over this carrot. Where’s a clean dish towel when ya need one?”

            “My child, be still. Does panic actually help the problem?”

            “No. You’re right, Lord. I’ll stand still and watch you heal this and then I’ll rinse off the carrot. Uh…hmmm….a bandaid?  Th..tha…that’s ..that’s all you’re going to do? Your Word tells that You healed a gazillon people; why aren’t you healing this cut? Lord, You’ve raised the dead, made the blind see, and the lame walk. Why can’t you heal this little ol’ cut?”

            “Not all my children have the same needs. You, Dear, need to be hindered today. You need to be aware of a particular fault in your humanness. If you waltz through your day with nary a care, you’ll forget Me; won’t you?”

            I nodded in agreement, head bowed, tears threatening.

            “Ok. Now for the onion. Please, My daughter, grab us an onion.”

            “Oh, no, Lord. My family doesn’t like onion. They’re pretty picky and all.”

            “But I know what is best for you and your family. Now we can stand here and argue, not getting My will accomplished or you can just find an onion for the pot. 

            “Yes, my Lord.”

“Let’s look through the cabinet and see what other items will be good for this soup. Ahh, yes. Just what I was looking for. Your face shows Me that you disapprove of this item too?”

            “Um, well. I don’t really see how that flavor is going to mix well with the others. I guess we’ll try it Your way.” I tried not to roll my eyes in front of the One Who sees all.

            “Now, the vegetables are in the crockpot. Where are your seasonings and spices?”

            “Uh, well, Lord, that cabinet’s rather messy and disorganized. Let’s just skip the seasonings and um, well, ya know, like they say on the Food Network, ‘let the flavors marry.’”

            “The spice cabinet, please.”

            “Yes, Lord,” as I cautiously, ever-so-slightly opened the door, knowing what would happen. 

            It did. Garlic, onion powder, parsley, basil, poppy seeds, mustard seeds – all tumbled out, spreading themselves on the counter and some even bouncing onto the floor.

            “Hmmm. Not all of your kitchen is in order, is it? Is there a reason?”

            I hesitated, full knowing that He knew my thoughts and intents.

            “Well, Lord, I just get busy sometimes and I let some things go; I can’t do everything, ya know, right? I’m only human.”

            “Who has asked you to do everything? Who has given you your to-do list?”

            “Well, I saw on Pinterest all these cute little things I could do to re-decorate the bathroom and I’ve been overwhelmed with all that and work and family stuff and church stuff.”

            “Didn’t I ask you to organize the kitchen the last time we met? I didn’t need your bathroom re-decorated. Why did you choose that chore instead of the chore I asked of you?”

            “Lord, I just thought….”

            “’You just thought’? Are your thoughts and plans better than mine?”

            Ashamed at my disobedience, I bowed my head.

            “Now, please add a little salt.”

            “Salt? But Lord, salt stings.”

            “Yes, I know. Now some pepper.”

            “Pepper? But my family doesn’t… Oh, never mind.”

            “Now the parsley.”

            “Lord, You know all things but parsley sticks in my teeth and I have to stand in front of students and it’s quite embarrassing to have little green flecks stuck in your teeth. Could we use something different?”

            “You’re embarrassed about little green flecks? Have you heard about My children who are being persecuted because they claim My name and you’re worried about little green flecks? Do you want to put it in or should I?”

            “Oh, no, Lord; I’ll submit.”

            “Let’s turn on the pot and go about My business for the day.”

            “Are you sure this crock pot won’t catch the house on fire while I’m gone all day?”

            “Who made the metal that makes this crockpot? Who made the materials to build this house? Who made you healthy enough to earn money to purchase this house?”

            He paused. “And don’t you think it could catch on fire when you’re here? Does your presence protect this house or does Mine?”

            I was catching on. Somewhat. I should just do what He says to do.

            We drove to school, singing His praises to the radio. Well, I tried to sing and He just listened with a “That’s nice, little girl” look on His face. I was honored though; He could’ve been listening to Ray and Ann Gibbs or a Scovill or Dr. Beal or Mina Oglesby but He was listening to little ol’ me.

            I scurried to gather my briefcase and other supplies and rushed to my first hour class, still wondering about the crock pot. How was the soup going to taste, especially with that ingredient of which I didn’t approve?

            “Oh, no, Lord; we didn’t put in any meat. The kids need protein for their growing bodies. Oh, the whole meal is ruined!”

            “Meat? You want meat? ‘My meat is to do….’” He left the sentence undone. I knew what He was saying: “Do My business and your life will be just fine.”

            Teaching is exhilarating. Exhausting, but exhilarating. Except for that one student. He knows everything; at least, he thinks he knows everything. 

            Out loud, I said, “Now, a gerund is a verb-looking critter acting as a noun.” Inside, I said, “Lord, he’s raised his hand again. This is the fourth time just this hour. Will You protect me from a law suit if I don’t answer him every. single. time. he raises his hand?”

            “Don’t I answer you every. single. time. you raise your hand?”

            Out loud, I said, “Franklin, do you have a question? I’m ready to answer it now.”

            The day hastened by: busy, busy, busy – answering questions, helping with make-up work for previously absent students, a speech recital practice, a conversation with a colleague – all the while, I was thinking, “Vegetables and salt and pepper and low heat all day? Oh, and that parsley?! I might as well stop by Bojangles on the way home ‘cuz there’s no way that crockpot meal is going to be satisfying.”

            And the One Who knows my thoughts simply asked, “Are you trusting me?”

            The school day was over and my weary mind was glad! My hungry body was nervous: was supper coming from Bojangles or from the crockpot? Was I going to be fed from His recipe or from mine? Yes, the choice was mine. The power was His.

            As I walked into my house, the heavenly aroma of an already-prepared feast awaited me. Oh, the lessons I had learned: God doesn’t need to meet me at the couch to fulfill my needs; He can meet me anywhere, even in the kitchen.  My time with Him must begin with removing the moldy, old sin that’s been hiding in plain sight. He works with each of His children on their level to meet their individual needs. I must obey His commands for future projects to be accomplished smoothly. Embarrassment is nothing when compared to doing His will. And probably the most important lesson: “All things work together for good to them who love God.”

Health in a Drink, Part Four

by Jason Tsaddiq

Tsaddiq.jpg

The tea ceremony actually evolved from the act of war – Japan’s history is replete with violence and torturous events and atrocities. The samurai began using tea as a way to show superiority: who ever could properly identify the various teas was the better warrior. Eventually this tea contest of sorts was used to givereason to parley and to negotiate war strategy and armistices. The citizens, from the impecunious to the royal, relished the concept of having an event that momentarily gave way to peace and equanimity.[1]The emphasis on wabi(serenity) and sabi(simplicity), two concepts from Zen Buddhism, pervade the tea rituals.[2]Part of the serious reflection and meditation involved in a oriental tea ceremony comes from the concept ichigo ichiewhich means “one life, one meeting” to signify that this particular meeting, with this particular guest or guests, at this particular season will never happen again in this exact way. One must enjoy the meeting for it is ephemeral.[3]The host of a tearoom or teahouse usually studies under a tea school pedagogue for at least ten years so that he may portray another concept: that of gongfu which means “skill and care, to do things well.”[4]

            Each country has her own details delineating a tea ceremony, using specific utensils delegated for the tea ceremony or making tea in the daily life. Russians use a samovar[5] to heat the water while they usepodstakanniki(under the glass)[6]  from which to drink their tea. The Chinese use a kamato heat the water while they use a tenmokuor chawanfrom which to drink their tea.[7]The utensils used in Korea are often designed to show religious participants: the “Celadon or jade green, ‘punchong,’ or bronze-like weathered patinas for Buddhist tea rituals; the purest of white with faint designs in porcelain for Confucian tea rituals; and coarser porcelains and ash-stone glazes for animist tea rituals, or for export to Japan where they were known as ‘gohan chawan.’”[8]

            Though not considered a “specific utensil,” gunpowder green tea is almost exclusively used in Morocco.[9]“Gunpowder” referring to tea, refers to the tea leaves being rolled into small pellet-shaped balls which unfurl as the boiling water is passed over.

            The actual tea ceremonies practiced in various countries range from simplistic to elaborate though each ceremony is executed with planned attention to detail. The Chinese wedding tea ceremony begins on the wedding day to introduce formally the bride to the groom’s family. (The groom is introduced later to the bride’s family usually after the couple has had time to establish themselves in their new home.) The bride and groom will leave her home before daylight to hold the tea at his parents’ home. Because of the doctrine of respecting one’s elders, a particular order of serving tea is followed: the parents are served first, followed by the grandparents, grand-uncles and aunts, uncles and aunts, elder brothers and sisters, then elder cousins. While the bride is serving the tea, kneeling or standing, she must remember to serve her paternal lineage first, and then to serve her maternal relatives. The groom stands to her left while she greets each elder by using his official title and serves the tea.  If, for some reason, a living relative is not present at the wedding tea ceremony, she will pour a cup of tea in his honor, and the spouse will drink it on his behalf. A deceased spouse or family member has no tea poured for him though another ritual may be performed to show honor. When the participants are finished with their tea, they are expected to leave a gift on the serving tray, usually money (called laissee) or jewelry which is often placed on the bride at the moment of giving. Depending on the family, she may look like a decorated Christmas tree by the ending of the sometimes intimate ceremony. Sometimes here at the wedding tea or at the actual wedding, a gift of tea is appropriate for the symbolism involved: the giver wishes that the happy couple would have as many children as tea leaves in the gift.[10]

            The Moroccan tea ceremony may be simple or sophisticated as needed. The host’s making the tea in front of his guests included his rinsing of any grime from the two teapots and the leaves, adding sugar and tea leaves to the pots and allowing the leaves to steep. Then he will pour from both teapots simultaneously, filling the glasses half full. He will be preparing the next pot of tea while the guests are drinking this first strong tea – he will add more tea leaves, more sugar and mint leaves to the pots. Then more boiling water added to the pot begins the famed mint tea dainty.[11]

Oriental tea ceremonies are overflowing with symbolism thus the attention to detail in every action and decision. Usually the punctilious host will fill the teacup only halfway full to leave room for “friendship and affection.”[12]For a tea held in a private tea room, the host cleans the room and the stone path to it to symbolize that the participant should cleanse himself of all impermanent burdens. The gardens are arranged specifically: the outer garden “is pleasant, with a free and light atmosphere”[13]with flowering trees whereas the inner garden must avoid the flowering trees, facilitating only mosses, ferns and other small plants. Symbolism throughout both gardens reign: “Rocks represent mountains, a pond stands for a[n] ocean, trees symbolize a forest, and a running stream of water reminds people of a river.”[14]Because water is the most prized purifier, “. . . the presence of water, and the wetness of the garden and its structures, is a metaphor for freshness, naturalness and purity.”[15]Each item should portray “serene tranquility and harmony with nature.”[16]Before entering the tea room by bowing through the low doorway (to symbolize humility), the guest will rinse his mouth and wash his hands to symbolize cleanliness and respect for others, as some utensils will be shared during the ceremony.[17]Sometimes, the guests will even remove their shoes and/or change clothes to show their removing all vestiges of chaos and evil.[18]In the alcove of the tearoom, usually a piece of art is displayed to symbolize the unity with nature; the artwork will be very simplistic in design to draw attention to nature yet will be of excellent quality to symbolize respect for the artist. “The striking beauty of ukiyo-e[19]lies in its economy of line and simplicity.”[20]Accompanying the artwork will be a plant, sometimes a single flower in a vase, sometimes a bonzai or some such other plant.[21]

Even though the host may be wealthy enough to purchase the finest porcelain teacups or bowls, usually very crude, almost deformed utensils are used to demonstrate the humility as each participant drinks from the ugly side of the cup. (This bowl portraying “unpretentious beauty” allows the poor to enjoy the ceremonial production.[22]) Using a communal bowl in some ceremonies shows the forbearance and humility of each guest as he must wait for others to drink and then he must ascertain his allowance to save some tea for the others in the group.[23]

Proponents of tea promulgate a myriad of physical benefits: a healthy weight loss, clearer skin, efficient kidneys, among others. Those who follow the ritualistic efforts of preparing tea (even from its planting, harvesting, and processing) usually find a protracted time to be at peace. Though many religious groups declare that one can be in tune with nature during the process of taking tea, one must question the premise on which the goal is based: being one with an inanimate object seems fruitless to say the least. Nonetheless, much can be said for the stopping of the hurry-scurry lifestyle, the deliberate incorporating of healthy habits, the profuse giving of honor and respect, the cultivating of friendships, the negotiating of armistices with an indefatigable enemy, and pausing to reflect on one’s life. A word of caution must be heard: any habit, though considered to be a good one, may develop into a cultish fiend and diminish the original goal. Nothing is sacred, in and of itself, in a tea ceremony, but if one chooses to spend time doing so, he should be reflecting on the orderliness and simplistic beauty of creation’s God and His goodness to allow such beauty in His nature. Many philosophies found in the various tea ceremonies can be found, in part, in the Holy Scriptures; however, the emphasis of the tea ceremony originators has usually been on the individual parts and procedures, completely ignoring the omnipotent God Who gave such beauty, peace, and tranquility. Such an error is frightening and damning.


[1]Steve Green, http://ezinearticles.com/?Tea-Ceremony-Symbolism&id=5141881(accessed April 11, 2013).

[2]Emi Kazuko, Japanese Cooking: the Traditions, Techniques and Recipes(London: Hermes House, 2005), 17        

[3]Ibid.

[4]crazyfortea.com (accessed April 11, 2013).

[5]  “This unique appliance accomplishes its task, [heating of the water] thanks to a tube which is soldered to the body of the samovar and holds smoldering charcoal or wood. The heat from the charcoal boils the water and keeps it hot.”Linda Delaine, http://www.russianlife.com/blog/tea-time-in-russia/ (accessed April 10, 2013).

[6]Podstakannikiare silver heat tempered tea glasses similar to the Turkish coffee cups. Ibid.

[7]http://japanese-tea-ceremony.net/equipment.html (accessed April 10, 2013).

[8]http://dev.laptop.org/pub/content/wp/en/Tea.html (accessed April 10, 2013).

[9]Jon Stout, http://ezinearticles.com/?Moroccan-Mint-Iced-Tea&id=1243470(accessed April 11, 2013).

[10]http://www.chinabridal.com/etiquette/proposal.htm(accessed April 10, 2013).

[11]Christine Benlafquih, http://moroccanfood.about.com/od/moroccanfood101/a/Tea_

Ceremony.htm (accessed April 11, 2013).

[12]The United Kingdom Tea Council.

[13]Dorinne Kondo, Man, “The Way of Tea: A Symbolic Analysis,” vol 20, no 2, (np:Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland), 293.

[14]Bobbie Kalman, Japan, the Culture, (NY: Crabtree Publishing Co, 1989), 7.

[15]Kondo, 294.

[16]Ibid., 293.

[17]Sarah Page, http://stevechurchill.articlealley.com/symbolism-of-tea-ceremony-1783811.html(accessed April 11, 2013).

[18]http://www.english.iup.edu/eaware/overview_of_tea.htm (accessed April 11, 2013).

[19]Ukiyo-e is oriental art in which natural, almost seemingly mundane items are depicted.

[20]Kazuko, 6.

[21]Page, (accessed April 11, 2013). 

[22]http://www.english.iup.edu/eaware/japanese_tea_ceremony.htm (accessed April 11, 2013).

[23]http://www.english.iup.edu/eaware/symbolism_of_tea_bowl.htm (accessed April 11, 2013).

Health in a Drink, Part Three

by Jason Tsaddiq

Tsaddiq.jpg

The delivery of the tea varies according to the custom of the participant (or according to how much one pays for shipping). At one time, a guest in a Chinese home was always served a cup of tea, even during a financially strained time, though the tea served then was “white tea” – a cup of boiling water.[1]However, at a dinner, the guest must ask for tea for it is not, as a routine, served at a meal[2]though Moroccans always serve their tea with every meal.[3]Still today in some regions of China, going to the tea house is an activity eagerly anticipated by many. Men will deliberate about and solve the world’s problems; the elderly will often bring their caged birds and visit all day long; and even the women, when they can escape from chores, will stay and visit. “Going to the tea house” to some people means settling a rancorous dispute or argument. Even professional groups are hired to perform at teahouses. [4]

            Japanese tearooms are undemanding to the eyes and soul whereas western tearooms are cluttered – “…a Western interior permanently filled with a vast array of pictures, statuary, and bric-a-brac gives the impression of mere vulgar displays of wealth.”[5]Many Japanese wonder how westerners can dine in a room with pictures of dead people (family ancestors) for they believe that “the simplicity of the tea-room and its freedom from vulgarity make it truly a sanctuary from the vexations of the outer world.”[6]

            In the Canton region of China, some teahouse customers will rap their knuckles on the table to indicate thankfulness to the server. The tradition comes from the actions of an emperor’s servant, Zhou Riqing. The Emperor Qian Long (1735-1796) was touring his imperial domain disguised as a regular citizen. He even lowered himself to pour tea for his servant Zhou; this action, of course, was not the mean: the superior is always to be served by the inferior. Zhou, extremely uncomfortable with his master’s serving him, knew that he must honor his master’s wish of not being known to the locals, so he began hitting his knuckles on the table to show his submission and thankfulness to his master. Since the Qing dynasty, this method of showing thanks has permeated South China.[7]

            These teahouses must put a premium on the skill of their servers for attending to the many interminable demands of the tea service is not uncomplicated. Kit Chow explains an event he witnessed: 

I was impressed by the way a young waiter, kettle in one hand and his other balancing a pile of six or seven cups with lids and saucers, shuttled adroitly among the crowded tables with great ease. When pouring, he kept the spout at just the right height so that not a drop of water was spilled and the leaves in the cup turned over the proper number of times.[8]He knew just how much water to put in so that the tea would be the right strength. Experience is required to make every cup of tea look attractive, smell inviting, and taste fresh – even a refill where the leaves have already been brewed once or twice.[9]

            Samuel Johnson, quite the proponent of tea drinking, “for twenty years diluted his meals with only the infusion of the fascinating plant; who with tea amused the evening, with tea solaced the midnight, and with tea welcomed the morning.”[10]  

Though history does not include details about Mr. Johnson’s diurnal rituals concerning his tea, some general features are present at every tea ceremony. “The steps to the ceremony are quite simple:  clean the serving bowls, boil a pot of [limpid] water, serve a sweet treat to guests before the tea, mix powdered bitter green tea (Matcha)and water to make a frothy tea, serve the tea to guests.”[11]During certain tea ceremonies, the guest shows thanks by rapping the table three times with his fingers or knuckles after enjoying the various notes of the aroma of the proffered tea. Then he pours the tea into a drinking cup and smells the empty cup. Etiquette dictates that the tea be finished in three swallows.[12]The three main components of a tea ceremony involve the social aspect (usually a repast is served); the aesthetic aspect (the equipment used, the décor and the dress chosen are specifically chosen); and the religious aspect (though originally Zen Buddhism, other religions encourage many of the same beliefs).[13]One can see cleanliness, respect and peace represented by these three components: the social aspect dictates cleanliness; part of the beauty of a ceremony is the honoring of the most superior or the eldest guest; and the peace come to religious adherents who seek to accept the lessons from the tea to enhance their lives and to those who forsake all evil and chaos for a particular portion of time.


[1]Kit Chow and Ione Kramer, All the Tea in China, http://books.google.com/books/about/

All_Teas_in_China.html?id=NT8J5qDjABIC, 1990, 37.

[2]Ibid, 38.

[3]Jon Stout, http://ezinearticles.com/?Moroccan-Mint-Iced-Tea&id=1243470, (accessed April 11, 2013).

[4]  Chow, 43.

[5]Kakuzo Okakura, The Book of Tea, Serenity Publishers: Rockville, MD, 2009, 48.

[6]Ibid, 50.

[7]Chow, 45.

[8]The turning over of the leaves is called “the agony of the leaves” and is very crucial to the flavor development of the flavor.

[9]Chow, 47.

[10]Okakura, 13-14.

[11]http://www.chinatownconnection.com/japanese-tea-ceremony.htm (accessed April 5, 2013).

[12]The United Kingdom Tea Council, Ltd. http://www.tea.co.uk/page.php?id=142(accessed April 10, 2013).

[13]Ibid.  

Health in a Drink, Part One

By Jason Tsaddiq

Tsaddiq.jpg

            Everyone does it - drink tea, that is. From the Asian wedding tea ceremony to the Moroccan shopkeepers greeting their guests to the Oriental apology ceremony to the southern US sweet iced tea with lemon to the northern US unsweet tea, this drink holds a mysterious grip on its cosmopolitan participants. "A Chinese classical pharmaceutical book called the Bencao Shiyi (The Compendium of Materia Medica) mentions clearly about the benefits of tea, 'Drinking tea for a long time soothes the mind, uplifts the spirit, and prevents obesity and aging.' "[1]  Proponents claim that this tea will "increase metabolism . . . decrease appetite . . . [and] help stabilize blood sugar."[2]Opponents declare that the added sugar and naturally occurring caffeine may actually negate the effects of the tea. Searching for the answers to the questions concerning tea can be enlightening and delicious.

            A diligent tea connoisseur revels in discovering the variances between the diverse teas - their preparation, their flavor and their benefits. True tea leaves must come from the plant Camellia sinensiswhich can grow up to thirty feet or more, usually in a mountainous region. "An experienced tea leaf plucker - usually a woman - can pick enough shoots in one day to produce nine pounds of finished tea, equal to 1800 cups of tea, or the annual consumption of a thirsty Englishman."[3]

             The leaves are harvested then processed according to the desired end result which then classifies the tea as to the type.  Black tea,[4]the most common and therefore the cheapest, gives the participant a delicious drink with only 20% of the caffeine normally in coffee.[5]  Most American tea drinkers (87%) usually choose this type which accounts for 75% of the world's tea production. When picked, the leaves are a blue-green hue and must be fermented[6]until black. A hot wok is used as a stop to the fermentation and as a flavor enhancer.[7]

            With very little caffeine, white tea brews to a light color since it is the least processed[8]- the harvested leaves are cleaned and dried without any fermentation. Named for the hao(the little white hair on the bud or baby leaf), this "tea of royals" is the most delicate, though its antioxidant level is high and its heart strengthening powers are well-documented.[9]The amount of the little white or silver hairs or fuzz in the tea dictates the taste and thus the cost. Silver Needles, a white tea made almost completely from the fuzzy buds, is picked during a two-day picking season in the spring. The quality flavor does come at a cost – usually twenty-five dollars for forty to fifty cups (fifty cents per cup)[10]whereas other white teas can cost as little as fourteen cents per cup.[11]Bursting with polyphenols (antioxidants that purportedly fight cancer cells), this delicate tea also carries fluoride as well as other nutrients that boost the body's immunity.[12]

            Green tea, the most popular tea in Asia, helps maintain cholesterol levels and can help in a weight loss program. [13]One doctor is so convinced of green tea's benefits that he avers it  "can block absorption of bad fats by 30%."[14]The leaves of the Camellia sinensisplant are "picked and quickly steamed to preserve their color and fresh character" then dried.[15]Applying the steam shortly after the tea is picked gives a slight grassy flavor and aroma. The dried leaves being ground into a powder produces matcha, the basis for the Japanese tea ceremony.  "AJapanese study found that people who drank at least five cups of green tea per day had stress levels that were 20 percent lower than those who drank less than one cup daily."[16]


[1]http://www.oolongtea.org/e/welcome/index.html (accessed February 1, 2013).

[2]Mark Ukra, The Ultimate Tea Diet, NY:HarperCollins, 2008, xi.

[3]Sara Perry The Tea Book, Chronicle Books: San Francisco, 1993, 13.

[4]What is normally called black teain the western hemisphere is usually referred to as red teain China since the black tea leaves brew into a red color. Ibid., 19.

[5]http://www.teavana.com. (accessed February 1, 2013).

[6]Fermentation in the discipline of tea processing refers to oxidation - exposure to air not the fermentation by yeast or bacteria as in alcoholic beverages. Tea fermentation occurs by rolling the leaves and adding heat and or steam.  Alissa White, http://matchasource.wordpress.com/2009/11/02/what-is-fermentation-in-tea/ (accessed February 1, 2013).

[7]Ukra, 19

[8]teavana.com (accessed February 1, 2013).

[9]Ukra, 16.

[10]Rhonda Parkinson, http://chinesefood.about.com/od/chineseteaandliquor/a/whitetea.htm (accessed February 1, 2013).

[11]http://www.amazon.com/Numi-Spring-White-Full-oose/dp/B000FFIL6K/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8

&qid=1359765027&sr=8-4&keywords=loose+white+tea (accessed February 1, 2013).

[12]Parkinson. 

[13]http://teavana.com (accessed February 1, 2013).

[14]Ukra, 176.

[15]Ukra, 27.

[16]Cynthia Sass, http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/01/30/secret-reason-youre-pigging-out/ (accessed February 1, 2013).

Soulforce Article Critique, Part 4

By Jordan Tsaddiq

Soulforce Article Critique, Part 4

Tsaddiq.jpg

In this section, he attempts to convince the reader that Leviticus is not “laws” but only a “holiness code.” He even uses the word abominationas a spring board for his squirming around truth by claiming that abominations at this time are “behaviors that people in a certain time and place consider tasteless or offensive.” However, Strongs’ concordance gives this definition of the word abominationas used in Leviticus 18:22: “properly something disgusting(morally), that is, (as noun) an abhorrence; especially idolatryor (concretely) an idol: - abominable (custom, thing), abomination.” The diligent Bible student would call any sin an abomination – morally disgusting, an abhorrence, idolatry. To use Mr. White’s words “tasteless or offensive” would include such actions as belching at the table or passing gas in public. To say that homosexual activity is only “tasteless or offensive” is a pitiful stretch of logic for God did not create human sexuality for that reason. Mr. White says, “To the Jews an abomination was not a law. . .” Strongs, a very often validated Greek and Hebrew source, claims that idolatry fits in the category of abomination. One should note here that any sin, including homosexuality, is idolatry since when choosing to sin, one is claiming that the particular sin is more important that God.

He claims that “Jesus and Paul both said the holiness code in Leviticus does not pertain to Christian believers.” However, a New Testament writer taught that other Scripture was written as an example so a complete dismissal of the Old Testament teachings may not be wise.

On page fourteen, Mr. White says, “. . .let’s talk together about setting sexual standards that please God – standards appropriate. . . based on loving concern, health, and wholeness for ourselves and others.” God did not write His Word for His child to set standards “based on loving concern.” He gave His Word so that His child would “Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man. For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.”[1]

One must question the “loving concern” of an action that is well-known to cause terminal illnesses and raise the risk of suicide.

Mr. White, on page fourteen, uses a red herring – a logical fallacy in which an observation is used to draw attention away from the main issue: he discusses a verse “that was used for centuries to condemn masturbation.” This article is not about masturbation; it is about what the Bible says and doesn’t say about homosexuality. 

In the context of this statement, he uses the expression “For Jewish writers of Scripture. . .” Research shows that these examples he gives (masturbation, interrupting coitus) were not necessarily laws of God written in Scripture – they were Jewish laws. There is a difference between Jewish law and Scripture! 

In passage four, Mr. White commits another incident of stacking the deck – simply ignoring the evidence. He brings up Romans 1:26-27. He then says, “This verse appears to be clear: Paul sees women having sex with women and men having sex with men, and he condemns that practice. But let’s go back 2,000 years and try to understand why.” Knowing the reason for an action that Paul condemns does not justify the sin. It is still sin. Mr. White is ignoring his own statement – “and he condemns that practice.”

On page sixteen, he quotes four paragraphs of Louis B. Smedes’ writings. In three of those paragraphs, Mr. Smedes uses the words “homosexuals I know” twice and the words “homosexual people I know” once. He also says, “Getting to know a lesbian, gay, or bisexual person of faith will help you realize…” Anecdotal episodes do not constitute truth nor does it confirm or deny God’s Word. One’s getting to know a homosexual does not change truth. This practice of a red herring negates his point.

Passages five and six are combined – I Corinthians 6:9 and I Timothy 1:10 – “because they are so similar.” However, this is quite incorrect. I Timothy 1:10 is speaking of the law being appropriate for certain people.[2]I Corinthians 6:9 teaches quite a different truth.[3]

Mr. White also plays the stacking the deck card again: he ignores verse 11: “And such weresome of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.”(The emphasis was added.) This verse in and of itself should negate any belief that someone choosing to be actively pursuing the activities listed in the passage is not living the life of “such weresome of you…[being] washed. . .justified…”

            In the explanation of Mr. White’s sixth premise, he contradicts himself. On page eighteen, he claims, “Homosexual orientation wasn’t even known until the 19thcentury.” Yet on page nineteen, he states, “Ulrichs recognized that homosexuals had been around from the beginning of recorded time, . . .” Either this activity was not known until the nineteenth century or it has been around since the beginning of recorded time; it cannot be both.

            Mr. White lowers God to fit his little box when he says, “The authors of the Bible are authorities in matters of faith. They can be trusted when they talk about God. But they should not be considered the final authorities on sexual orientation any more than they are the final authorities on space travel, gravity, or the internet.” If the authors were led by the Holy Spirit (the same one that Mr. White says Christians are to follow), then whatever they wrote was approved by the Holy Spirit. God absolutely would not allow a man to write Scripture incorrectly. How absurd!

            His seventh premise argues that Christians should love one another. Bible-obeying Christians can agree with that statement whole-heartedly. 

            On page twenty-one, he states “Because Christians refused to let their understanding of God’s Word be informed by science, . . .” He again contradicts himself for on several pages, he insisted that believers follow the Bible or the Holy Spirit: p. 3: “. . .I take the Bible seriously!”; he spent “more than 50 years reading, studying, memorizing, preaching, and teaching from the sacred texts”; “I’m convinced the Bible has a powerful message. . .”; p 4: “Often people. . .have never given careful and prayerful attention to what the Bible does or doesn’t say. . .”; “They haven’t read them [verses that reference same-sex behavior], let alone studied them carefully.” 

p. 6: He uses examples from Scripture (Paul, Peter) to prove his point; p. 7: “That’s why we study the Bible prayerfully, seeking the Spirit of Truth. . .” More examples could be given to raise the question: If he wants believers to study the Bible prayerfully, then why does a Christian need science to interpret what God the almighty omniscient Creator has written to mankind?! Mr. White needs to decide if he’ll study Scripture or study science.

            In his eighth premise, Mr. White says, “I love the Bible. I read God’s Word in it and hear God’s Word through it.” Many thesauruses claim that a synonym for the Bibleis “God’s Word.” He cannot read something in the same something. 

            Mr. White is correct in his belief that many Christians have been unkind to people with whom they disagree. Scripture does not give license to be unkind even though it demands that believers maintain Godly standards. 

            Mr. White has broken almost every debate technique in addition to promoting his literary dishonesty in this article. Research has shown that his writings have permeated the internet and as such, he has literally destroyed any educated, intelligent conversation on this topic. The wise person will not even consider what he has to say about individual verses and their meanings because he has twisted every premise in this article and thus he cannot be trusted on anything he claims about God’s holy Word.


Missed Part 3? Get it here: http://baptistwriters.com/blog/2019/4/26/soulforce-article-critique-part-3

[1]Ecclesiastes 12:13b-14.

[2]“Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine.”

[3]“Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.”

 

Soulforce Article Critique, Part 3

By Jason Tsaddiq

Soulforce Article Critique, Part 3

Tsaddiq.jpg

On page eight, the last sentence in the first paragraph states, “. . .we must fervently seek the Holy Spirit’s guidance, or we risk being misled by our own prejudices.” Those two actions (seeking Holy Spirit’s guidance and being misled by prejudices) are incompatible – they cannot occur at the same time. If one is seeking guidance, then he is not being led by prejudices.

Mr. White’s fourth premise also commits several fallacies, the first being the fallacy of false dilemma which is basically an oversimplification, a propounding an either/or situation of the issue. His premise claims “The Bible is a book about God – not a book about human sexuality.” His either/or claim is that the Bible cannot be about human sexuality because it is a book about God. Logic demands that he recognize that God made human sexuality and if the Bible is a book about God, then it probably explains what God has given concerning human sexuality. Just as a child peering into her mother’s purse will discover aspects of her mother (her favorite gum, her bank card number, her every day lipstick), a reader of the Bible will discover aspects of God which include the sexuality of His creation. Holding to Mr. White’s premise would dictate that the Bible is a book about God – not a book about creation, the fall of man, the flood, the tower at Babel, Esther, Solomon, prophets, and the disciples.

His second logical fallacy within his fourth premise is dishonesty concerning Leviticus 18:19 which states “Also,thou shalt not approach unto a womanto uncoverher nakedness, as long as she is put apart for her uncleanness.” Mr. White states, “The Bible forbids a married couple from having sexual intercourse during a woman’s period. If they disobey, both shall be executed.” However, this verse does not make that claim nor does any other verse in the Bible. Mr. White must not twist Scripture to fit his own prejudices - just as he accused others of doing in the aforementioned paragraph.

Mr. White exercises dishonesty when he lists Mark 12:18-27 with these words: “If a man dies childless, his widow is ordered by Biblical law to have intercourse with each of his brothers in turn until she bears her deceased husband a male heir.” As is noted in the endnotes, these verses do not teach this action neither does any other passage.[1]

At the very bottom of page eight, Mr. White says, “I’m certain you don’t agree with these teachings from the Bible about sex.” Here, again, he contradicts himself for earlier in his document, he claims that the Bible is not about human sexuality and yet he says, “teachings from the Bible about sex.” Either the Bible talks about sex or it does not. It cannot do both. 

One must consider another aspect concerning his statement about agreeing with the teachings from the Bible: God does not call upon His child to agree with the teachings; He calls on His child to obey. Obedience will bring understanding and agreement.[2]

Mr. White continues his dishonesty on the next page when he claims all sorts of sexual activity are acceptable. But he fails to give the exact Scripture to prove his point. However, possibly he is correct in one aspect: he list sexual activities that “are all accepted practices in the Scriptures.” This statement is true if one considers the enemies of God and their practices. Scripture does explain some of the customs of nations not pleasing to God so maybe Mr. White is leading his reader to believe that God approved of these practices when in reality, Scripture was delineating evil nations’ customs. Telling half a truth is telling a whole lie.

Mr. White, in his fifth premise, lists six Scripture passages that may or may not discuss human sexuality, the first of which is Genesis 1 and 2. He claims, 

Because the text says it is ‘natural’ that a man and a woman come together to create a new life, some people think this means gay or lesbian couples are ‘unnatural.’ They read this interpretation into the text, even though the text is silent about all kinds of relationships that don’t lead to having children: couples who are unable to have children, couples who are too old to have children, couples who choose not to have children, people who are single. Are these relationships (or lack of relationships) ‘unnatural’? There’s nothing said here that condemns or approves the love that people of the same sex have for each other, including the love I have for my partner, Gary.

 

In using this claim, Mr. White is guilty of the logical fallacy of non-sequitur, a term that means the conclusion does not follow logically from what preceded it.  This passage is about God creating man and woman and their coming together as one flesh. God is not discussing men and women who are unable or choose not to have children or any of the other circumstances that Mr. White alleged. God is not discussing the love that people have for the same sex – He is discussing man and woman coming to together as one flesh to reproduce. 

Based on Mr. White’s premise, one could complain that “there’s nothing said here that condemns or approves” the drinking of hot chocolate. This passage is not about God approving or condemning homosexual sin. It is about God creating the first home, just like He wanted it.

In his second passage, Genesis 19:1-14, Mr. White commits the logical fallacy of a straw man – a debate technique used to overstate the opponent’s argument in order to be more easily attacked. Mr. White claims that Sodom was not judged by God because the city was engulfed in homosexual activity. It is true that Ezekiel 16:48-49 says what Mr. White says it says.[3]However, Mr. White exaggerates the concepts presented in verses 48 and 49 - the arrogance, the selfishness of the people but he ignores verse 50 which clearly uses the expression “committed abomination before [God].” He claims that Sodom was destroyed due to her pride and arrogance, and he does not consider the definition of “abomination before [God].” 

Homosexuality very well may have been the “abomination before [God]” as seen in the story of Lot, his daughters, the visitors, and the men of city. Lot did not attempt to keep the men of the city away from the visitors because the men of the city were selfish and arrogant. He attempted to keep them away, offering them to his daughters, because of the homosexual activities widely prevalent as intimated by the exact words that Lot used in his conversation with the men of the city. If Mr. White has studied “Hebrew and Greek to gain a better understanding of the original words of the Biblical texts,” as he claims on page three of his article, then he would know the basic meanings of the words Lot used. 
            On page twelve, in conclusion of the discussion of Genesis 19 and Sodom, Mr. White shares the story of Abner Louima, “a young black immigrant from Haiti [who] was assaulted by several police officers. . .” Mr. White finished the story by claiming “this was not a homosexual act. It was about power.” The statement is probably true about the horrendous actions that were inflicted upon Mr. Louima but it is totally irrelevant to the story of Sodom. Reverting to his tactic of using non-sequitur, Mr. White attempts to draw the attention away from his lack of knowing the basic meanings of Hebrew words.

Passage three has to do with “the holiness code.” Mr. White quotes Leviticus 18:6 as “You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female.” However, that is not Leviticus 18:6; it is Leviticus 18:22.


Missed Part 2? Get it here: http://baptistwriters.com/blog/2019/4/19/soulforce-article-critique-part-2

[1]“Then come unto him the Sadducees, which say there is no resurrection; and they asked him, saying, Master, Moses wrote unto us, If a man's brother die, and leave hiswife behind him,and leave no children, that his brother should take his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother.  Now there were seven brethren: and the first took a wife, and dying left no seed. And the second took her, and died, neither left he any seed: and the third likewise. And the seven had her, and left no seed: last of all the woman died also. In the resurrection therefore, when they shall rise, whose wife shall she be of them? for the seven had her to wife. 

And Jesus answering said unto them, Do ye not therefore err, because ye know not the scriptures, neither the power of God?  For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels which are in heaven. And as touching the dead, that they rise: have ye not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spake unto him, saying, I amthe God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living: ye therefore do greatly err.”

[2]One caveat: “Agreement” must occur for salvation for “agreeing with God about my sin” is the definition of repentance.

[3]AsI live, saith the Lord GOD, Sodom thy sister hath not done, she nor her daughters, as thou hast done, thou and thy daughters. Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good.

Soulforce Article Critique, Part 2

By Jason Tsaddiq

Tsaddiq.jpg

Soulforce Article Critique, Part 2

Another heinous example of Mr. White’s stacking the deck (ignoring evidence) concerns his example of the September 22, 2000 incident in which Ronald E. Gay fatally shot Danny Overstreet and injured seven other people at a “gay bar.” Mr. White failed to recount, or possibly failed to research, that Mr. Gay had served in Vietnam during a rather troubled time period in American history. He was well-known by his wives (plural), family members, and friends to be a drunk. He even told police after his arrest that this was not a hate crime. According to one source, Mr. Gay’s comment about being “a Christian soldier, working for Lord” was not shouted while he was at the bar, shooting at people as told in Mr. White’s article. Mr. Gay wrote that comment in a letter addressed to the Roanoke Timesafter his arrest.[1]Mr. White took the actions of Mr. Gay out of context, failing to report in his article that, in addition to his Vietnam-induced PTSD, Mr. Gay had been bullied and harassed since elementary school. One must not excuse Mr. Gay for his sin of cold-blooded murder but one must not use his twisted, deficient mind as an example of “Christians” who misinterpret the Scripture.

In Mr. White’s example of Matthew and Tyler Williams, he fails again to tell the whole story and continues to ignore some evidence that contradicts his own beliefs. Benjamin Matthew Williams and James Tyler Williams were both arrested, tried, and convicted for the murder of Mr. Gary Matson and Mr. Winfield Mowder in July 1999. However, the interesting facts that Mr. White leaves out concern their upbringing and their affiliations. It is common knowledge that both brothers were part of a white supremacist group whose targets included Jews, homosexuals, and other minorities. They dabbled in organizations such as Christian Identity[2]and The Church of the Creator (now World Church of the Creator).[3]It is interesting to note also that these two brothers were also arrested, tried, and convicted of burning of synagogues as part of their hateful white supremacist activities. Mr. White leads the reader to believe that Mr. Matson and Mr. Mowder were murdered only because of their sexual orientation. Most assuredly, they were chosen in part because of the sexual orientation but mainly because these two brothers were already steeped in false beliefs which taught that they should hate homosexuals, Jews, and other minorities since these people were below the value of standard white people.[4]

On the top of page six, the example Mr. White gives is about Matthew Shephard’s death in 1998, a brutal murder in Wyoming. According to Mr. White, an pastor wrote an open letter claiming the “Gays are under the death penalty. . . .” Online research fails to produce evidence of this letter other than from Mr. White’s own writings. Surely, an open letter would be somewhat easy to find for verification of facts.

Verification of facts brings up another tidbit of faulty research and deck-stacking: Mr. White, in this article, has not given credit or verification for any of the pictures and/or the anecdotes that he gives as proof. If his facts are all perfectly straight, then he should have no qualms about giving the accurate source of these “facts.” He has eliminated any reference to the fact that some evidence exists that Matthew Shepherd was a sexual partner with one of his murderers.[5]

His second paragraph on page six includes these words: “Most Christians have no idea that the people killing gay and lesbian persons go around quoting those few verses of Scripture as justification.” If this statement is true, then these people (“killing gay and lesbian persons” while quoting Scripture) are in the minority; in their misinterpretation of Scripture, they do not represent Bible-obeying mankind. Being skilled in stacking the deck allows Mr. White to ignore the evidence of this truth.

Mr. White’s third premise commits two logical fallacies, the first being the fallacy of promoting a bandwagon, which advocates the idea that everyone believes or participates in an idea or action and therefore, the reader should also. He begins this premise by stating “Even heroes of the Christian faith have changed their minds about the meaning of various Biblical texts.” Since these “heroes of the faith have changed their minds,” so should the reader. His premise that “We must be open to new truth from Scripture” should raise a red flag of concern – yes, changing one’s mind after studying Scripture may and should occur as a believer learns more about his God. However, the term “new truth” implies that God’s Word changes or has changed since He gave it to holy men so long ago. God is not a god of confusion: He said what He wanted to say; He needs no Bible.2; He needs no second edition or addendums. Allowing for “new truth” should alarm the diligent student of the Word.

He mentions Paul, Peter, Jerry Falwell, and Jim Jones as the “heroes of the faith” mentioned in his first paragraph. For Paul, “It took a blinding light. . .to help the apostle Paul change his mind. . .” However, one must realize that the blinding light did not change Paul’s mind – he already knew Who was getting his attention for he called Him, “Lord.”

In Mr. White’s example of Peter seeing the sheet filled with now-allowed edible animals was not an example of “new truth.” It was an example of God changing His will for a certain time period as He has done several times throughout Scripture. In the example of Jerry Falwell, Mr. White included the idea of black and white segregation in his church. One may call Mr. Falwell an “hero of the faith” if desired, but one must realize that every “hero of the faith” still sins. Possibly the Holy Spirit had been previously prompting Mr. Falwell to repent of his sin of bigotry or his sin of following the worldly crowd instead of Biblical principles and then, when “a black shoeshine man” asked him the question, he was ready to give into the Holy Spirit. Neither God nor Scripture changed or became “new truth.” Mr. Falwell decided to follow what the Bible says about all men being created the same.

Comparing Jim Jones to Paul, Peter, and even Jerry Falwell is just a tad bizarre. Mr. Jones was well-known as being quite Biblically-eccentric, especially after bouncing around from various types of churches to other types of churches, then mingling all the “doctrine” into his own Peoples Temple. Mr. Jones’ actions were very much unbiblical so he should not even be used in this premise (maybe Mr. White needed a red herring inserted here.).

The example of Jim Jones is a segue to Mr. White’s next fallacy: he contradicts himself. In the first paragraph on page seven, he claims that “it’s terribly dangerous to think that our understanding of every Biblical text is also without error.” In the next paragraph, the paragraph about Jim Jones, Mr. White claims that the only people strong enough to avoid cult-like leaders are the ones who “study the texts themselves.” In one sentence, he wants his reader to believer the he, the reader, might make mistakes when interpreting Scripture; in the next sentence, he wants the reader to “study the text” himself. This question must be asked: “Why should one ‘study the texts’ himself if he is inevitably going to come to the incorrect conclusion?” One must wonder if Mr. White believes that a diligent student of the Word can be taught accurately by the Holy Spirit.


Missed Part 1? Get it here: http://baptistwriters.com/blog/2019/4/12/soulforce-article-critique-part-1

[1]Corky McGraw, A “Gay” Hate Crime, http://corkymcg0.tripod.com/crime/gayhatecrime.html, 2001, Accessed June 10, 2017.

[2]“Christian Identity is a unique anti-Semitic and racist theology that rose to a position of commanding influence on the racist right in the 1980s. "Christian" in name only, the movement's relationship with evangelicals and fundamentalists has generally been hostile due to the latter’s belief that the return of Jews to Israel is essential to the fulfillment of end-time prophecy.” Southern Poverty Law Center, https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/ideology/christian-identity, Accessed June 10, 2017.

[3]An excerpt of some of their unscriptural beliefs is as follows: “Christianity is a violent religion. They have killed 1000 fellow Christians down through the years for every Christian that the Romans killed. They do not believe that Jesus existed in the 1stcentury CE. They point to the complete lack of evidence from any non-Jewish source that verifies His existence in Palestine. They reject the principle of loving your enemies. Enemies should be hated. They reject the ethic of reciprocity which is expressed in the Christian golden rule and in many similarstatements in other religions.” B. A. Robinson, Ontario Consultant on Religious Tolerance, http: //www. Religioustolerance.org/wcotc1.htm, Accessed June 10, 2017.

[4]An interesting note must be made here: after several hours of research, this author could not find the original source in which Benjamin Matthew Williams said to his mother, “I had to obey God’s law rather than man’s law.” Only one quite liberal source (salon.com) had a quote very similar to this aforementioned statement but with no credit given to the source.  All other incidents in which this quote appears are actually quoting Mr. White. This situation in addition to other incidences of careless research by Mr. White causes one to wonder as to its veracity.

[5]These two websites will give more details on this controversy: http://nypost.com/2013/10/28/uncomfortable-truth-behind-matthew-shepards-death/    and

http://www.advocate.com/print-issue/current-issue/2013/09/13/have-we-got-matthew-shepard-all-wrong

Soulforce Article Critique, Part 1

By Jordan Tsaddiq

Soulforce Article Critique, Part 1

Tsaddiq.jpg

Everyone has an opinion and everyone is legally entitled to hold to that opinion as long as it is not forced upon another citizen. A citizen’s right to his opinion stops at the beginning of another person’s opinion. Usually most Americans understand that concept. However, there are a few people who insist on forcing their agenda on others, often using illogical and slightly unethical methods. Mel White is one of those individuals.

            In his article titled What the Bible Says – and Doesn’t Say – about Homosexuality, Mr. White violates basic elementary logic principles in his attempt to justify the behavior of his homosexuality.

            In accordance with Daniel Wallace’s review,[1]one must concur with some of Mr. White’s ideas, specifically on page three. Sentences such as the following are quite logical and Biblical.

Many good people build their case against homosexuality almost entirely on the Bible. These folks value Scripture, and are serious about seeking its guidance in their lives. . . . We gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender Christian take the Bible seriously, too.[2]

One may concur that some “gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender Christians” may take the Bible seriously for the tender Christian must acknowledge that some people have not been taught the truth concerning this topic. For example, the story is told of an older male teen who was showing his appreciation for his high school teacher’s kindness and teaching skills by writing a note expressing some homosexual tendencies. When the Christian teacher approached the teen on the tone and suggestions in the note, the teen communicated a little of his life story – a life completely overwhelmed with the homosexual agenda. The boy’s father had used him in homosexual activity with other men since the boy was twelve years old. This young man, still a teen, had no idea that physical intercourse with another man was not normal. This young man had not been taught truth.[3]It is relatively easy to agree that some people, including Christians, have not been taught truth; therefore, in their Scriptural ignorance, they may believe that they “take the Bible seriously.”

Mr. White claims on page three that “the Bible has a powerful message for gay and lesbian Christians – as well as straight Christians.” This statement is true and must be followed only as the student of the Scripture learns the “powerful message” of the Bible and not reads into the Bible his own “powerful message.”

Mr. White, on the first page of his article, obviously uses the logical fallacy of ad misericordiam, the argument being based on an irrelevant appeal to pity or sympathy. He reaches this fallacy by showing a crowd of people, each person holding a large portrait of “murdered lesbian and gay Americans.” When viewing these pictures, one must be sorrowful for any illegal, deliberate taking of a life, especially done in deceit or hatred. However, the fact that some people murdered “lesbian gay Americans” does not prove his point that homosexuality is Biblical. 

In his first premise which starts on page three, Mr. White is guilty of the logical fallacy of ad hominem, the concept of using a personal attack on the opponent rather than using the positive aspects of his own case. This fallacy is shown in the premise itself: “Most people have not carefully and prayerfully researched the biblical texts often used to condemn God’s lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender children.” Instead of propounding the merits of his case, he attempts to negate his opponents’ merits by claiming his opponents are ignorant of Scripture. His basic principle may be true – that many Christians have not thoroughly studied the proof text inside and out – but to use that concept as an argument in favor of homosexuality is unethical. A beginning nursing student may not know all the chemical reactions that take place in an infection, but she does know to apply antibiotic cream and a dressing. To claim that a Christian cannot know the truth only because he himself has not “spent more than 50 years reading, studying, memorizing, preaching, and teaching from the sacred texts”[4]is quite preposterous. 

As a side note, one should observe this fact: in the world of research, the careful researcher will attempt to quote as close to the original as possible to confirm the authenticity of the material presented. On page three, Mr. White quoted Dr. Peter Gomes’ book called The Good Bookinstead of verifying the statistics himself through the George Barna research polls which discovered those statistics. Mr. White failed to document/give credit to the primary source of his statistics, an action easy to do yet a fatal flaw in any legitimate research project. If he is not careful in scientific and composition research, how can one be assured that he has been careful in Biblical research.

His lack of carefulness in research is shown in his statement of “the Bible’s one million verses” for one must realize that there are only 31,102 verses in the Bible.[5]

His second premise beginning on page four is guilty of the logical fallacy called stacking the deck, an argument in which some or all the evidence is conveniently ignored. Mr. White claims that “historically, people’s misinterpretation of the Bible has left a trail of suffering, bloodshed, and death.”[6]He is ignoring the concept that not everyone who is against a certain thought or action has misinterpreted the Scripture. As an example, he uses “bloody crusades” but fails to mention that, for the most part, the Crusades were not executed by people known for following the literal, traditional interpretation of the Bible. In fact, the people group mostly responsible for the Crusades are quite well-known for changing their mind on their doctrine. Another example is “tragic inquisitions”; he, again, fails to mention the instigator of these inquisitions.  He uses the example “to support slavery” and fails to mention that Scripture does not condemn one working for another (though it condemns being unkind to another). He is almost using “slavery” to mean whatever he wants instead of defining which aspect of slavery he is referencing. His example of “persecuting Jews and other non-Christian people of faith” still is ignoring the fact that not every Christian or Christian-claimer has done these atrocities.  His example of “opposing medical science” ignores the fact that some “medical science” is unbiblical (Learning the definition of abortionwill give proof). Other concepts of “medical science” (genetic tampering, sexual transformations, abortions) are against certain inflexible Biblical principles. 

It is true that many evil deeds have been done in the name of God, but just as he asks his reader to do, (on page four), he should “test all things” to decipher who actually misinterpreted Scripture in order to justify these evil atrocities and not pass judgment on all Christians.

Also, on page four, Mr. White claims that “Jesus says nothing about same sex-behavior.” This statement ignores the fact that Jesus spoke often of the marriage between a man and a woman. Logically, if there were any other definition of marriage, then Jesus would have addressed it. Mr. White belittles himself when falling to this trick of stacking the deck.


[1]Daniel Wallace, Review of Mel White’s Article What the Bible Says – and Doesn’t Say – about Homosexuality, https://bible.org/article/review-mel-white-s-what-bible-says-and-doesn-t-say-about-homosexuality

Accessed 6-4-17

[2]Mel White,What the Bible Says – and Doesn’t Say – about Homosexuality,

[3]Frank Camp, Hermeneutics, class lecture, May 10, 2017.

[4]White, 3.

[5]Camp.

[6]His assuming that the reader is one of those who have misinterpreted the Bible and thus have “left a trail of suffering, bloodshed, and death” is off-putting, to say the least.

An Exegesis of Colossians 1:9-12

by Jason Tsaddiq

Thesis: A believer must take some specific actions before he can “be filled with the knowledge of His will in all wisdom and spiritual understanding” or “walk worthy of the Lord.

Tsaddiq.jpg

1. Paul’s first action is to pray. 

A. All Christians should pray.

B. The prayer life of a Christian should be without ceasing.

2. His second action is to desire. 

A. This word desire has two objects: “that ye might be filled” and “that ye walk worthy.”

B. A Christian does not wake up one day automatically filled or walking worthy; he must take other actions in order to produce these goals.

3. The last part of this passage (verse ten and all of verses eleven and twelve) is filled with participles that modify the one for whom the praying and desiring are done. A Christian desiring to “be filled with the knowledge of His will in all wisdom and spiritual understanding [and to] walk worthy of the Lord unto all pleasing” must actively pursue these characteristics.

A. “Being fruitful in every good work” is the first participle.

B. “Increasing in the knowledge of God” is the second participle.

C. “Strengthened with all might” is the third participle.

D. “Giving thanks unto the Father” is the fourth participle.

At first glance, it appears that Paul is simply praying that the members at the Colossian church would conquer just two spiritual goals: “be filled with the knowledge of His will” and “walk worthy of the Lord.” In one sense, he is. But the careful student will notice a little twist on those goals: Paul tells the believers how to be filled and how to walk worthy. He tells them that they must be proactive in their Christian life before those goals may be met. His instructions on “What Must Come Before”(1) is the main idea of the passage based on the meaning of his words and the logical conclusion brought forth in combination with other Scriptures.

Nothing is more frustrating than to have someone give an order but not explain how he wants it accomplished. With no explanation, the task usually is not accomplished in a proper or timely fashion. Because these are eternal, Spiritual goals, explanations are expected and necessary. Paul does not leave the original audience or his modern audience hanging with no elucidation.

Some introductory material is in order: Paul and Timothy were writing the church at Colosse, possibly a church to which Paul had never been. Epaphras (and/or possibly “other converts of Paul”) had started the church which was now under attack from some heretical views.(2) These heretical views were probably ceremonialism, asceticism, angel worship, depreciation of Christ, secret knowledge, and reliance on human wisdom and tradition.(3)

Paul labels these members as “saints and faithful brethren.” “As saints, they were set apart unto God…As faithful brethren in Christ, the Colossians possessed and confessed faith in God’s Son as their Savior.”(4) As set-apart believers, they were interested in pleasing the Lord, their redeemer.

It is possible that gnostics had been trying to infiltrate the church and Paul saw the need to assure the members of the correct spiritual path. Gnostics, named such after the Greek word for knowledge, “claimed that Christianity offered only incomplete knowledge, and they urged Christians to become initiated into a religious philosophy that involved hidden passwords and secret knowledge.”(5) Paul’s assurances later in the chapter are phrased this way by a scholar: “God had made full knowledge available to the Christians. Divine revelation, rather than human speculations, is the firm foundation for a sound theology and a holy life.”(6)

After his greeting, Paul begins the letter by giving thanks and telling them of his prayer and desire for them: that they would “be filled with the knowledge of His will…” and that they would “walk worthy of the Lord.” This Greek word translated prayer is the word that is usually referring to a prayer to God.(7) The Greek word translated desire is the word that means “to ask.”(8) A simple application may be made here on this note: often a Christian will desire something, but his desire does not transfer into a prayer of reliance on the only One Who can meet that desire; sometimes he chooses to plan and scheme to solve the issue himself. Paul instead takes his desire to God in prayer.

Another simple yet profound application may be made concerning the phrase “we. . .do not cease to pray…” How often modern Christians pray for a matter once or twice, assume that God said “No” and then move on. How the modern church could move forward for Christ if her prayer life was “not ceasing.”

Paul’s desire is that “ye might be filled with the knowledge of His will…” “To make replete, to cram” is the definition according to e-sword.(9) Vine claims that it means “to make full, to fill to the full.”(10) One Bible teacher articulates this concept this way: Christians, filled with knowing His will, are so governed by His will(11) that they change their attitudes and actions to His will.  Paul expounds on this thought in Romans 12:2 when he uses the term “the renewing of your mind” which has the end result of proving the will of God. “Renewing your mind” and “being filled” are not necessarily synonyms; however, one cannot be done without the other. To the degree one is willing to be filled with knowing God is the degree that he will “know His will in all wisdom and spiritual understanding.” 

On this topic, F. B. Meyer wrote, “We all need a quicker insight into God’s will, and this is only acquired through the wisdom and understanding communicated by the Holy Spirit to our spirits. But that understanding is conditioned, as in Col1:10, by a daily behavior which pleases God and bears fruit in every good work. It is as we slowly climb the ascent of consistent living that the landscape of God’s nature expands around us. As character and knowledge grow, so will our spiritual strength; . . .”(12)

As one is filled, crammed, replete with the knowledge of God or is consumed with meditating on His truths, he will then walk in truth, with God. Just as walking is a natural, normal behavior, walking in God’s will should be a natural behavior. Someone walking down the street does not have to ponder how to take the next step; he just does it. Someone walking in the knowledge of God’s will does not have to ponder if he will attend church faithfully, or if he will read his Bible with the intent to obey, or if he will tell his neighbor of God’s amazing grace; he will just do it. It will be natural. It will be what comes out of him for it is what has gone into him. 

This idea is the same as the tea bag illustration – when exposed to hot water, the contents of the tea bag will come out. When exposed to the hot water of normal, everyday life, a Christian will reveal what is in him.

On the topic of being filled, one observation must be made. Often in modern Christianity, adherents want just enough of God and His character to stay out of Hell but not enough to make any drastic changes in their life. After pondering all that God has done for mankind, why would any man want to short-change himself on the knowledge of His will. 

Many people sit and stew about finding God’s will as if it were a missing puzzle piece, failing to recognize that God does not hide His will. He wants His children to find it. In fact, He uses Paul’s words in this passage to tell Christian how to find His will.

Noticing the root meanings of the expression “knowledge of His will” will put a fresh outlook on this Scripture. This concept entails that the child of God not only know “God’s commands but [apprehend] the values and character of His heart.”(13) A Christian on one level may know what job God has planned, but to go to the next level of “walking worthy,” he must know the “values and character of God’s heart” so he can perform that job to His glory. A Christian on one level may know whom God wants him to marry, but he must also know the values and character of God’s heart so he can be the Godly spouse that God wants him to be.

One may engage the question, “How does one get to know the ‘values and character of God’s heart’?” The response is the same to the question, “How does one get to know the values and character of any person?”  The answer is by spending time with that person.

Spending time with God is the secret to this passage. Verse 9 mentions that the knowledge is “in all wisdom and spiritual understanding.” As finite man ponders how to have knowledge in all wisdom, he only has to obey James 1:5 which encourages the child of God to ask Him for wisdom – the same word for wisdom is used in Colossians 1:9 and James 1:5 so God promises that He’ll give wisdom to whoever asks. For some of the believer’s time with God, he should be asking God for wisdom which will then assist him in ascertaining God’s will in any matter that arise in life.

The term “spiritual understanding” also appears in verse 9. The Bible commentary e-sword says that this word understanding means “a mental putting together.”(14) Dictionary.com explains that this word means “to be thoroughly familiar with; apprehend clearly the character, nature, or subtleties of” a concept or person.(15)  Obviously then, “spiritual understanding” is the being thoroughly familiar with the character, nature, or subtleties of God’s character. Halley’s Bible Handbook claims that this expression means “knowing how to live a Christ-like life.”(16)

Paul’s second request is in verse 10: “That ye might walk worthy of the Lord.” An impossible task is this! How can sinful mankind even avail to such a goal? Paul tells the answer in the form of participles.(17) The participles in this passage are modifying the people for whom Paul is praying and by extension, the current-day believer for these wishes are eternal principles meant for every believer who desires to be filled and to walk worthy.

For proof of the ones being modified, one should consider this: since the first participle is “being fruitful in every good work,” the Bible student should ask himself, “Who in this passage is supposed to be fruitful?” It is not Paul or Timothy. It is not God. It must be the only other people mentioned in the text (the Colosse church) and anyone else who desires to be filled and to walk worthy. If one wants to be filled or to walk worthy, he must be fruitful in every good work. 

“Fruitful” meant to the Greeks the same concept that it means to current Christians – to bring forth fruit which is the result of growth, literally and figuratively. Vine holds that it includes the idea of bringing forth fruit “of conduct, or that which take effect in conduct”;(18) therefore, being fruitful makes a change in behavior. A man’s behavior is a result of his growth. If the man is an artist, his later works should be better than his earlier work. A runner should be faster as he grows in muscle development and in physical techniques.

“Good work” is the effect of the change in conduct. “Good” has the idea of being “beneficial in its effect.”(19) “Work” has the connotation of “toil, labor.”(20)  Logic demands then that a believer recognize that a “good work” is a toil or a labor that has beneficial results. 

Watching the actions and attitudes of some believers today makes one wonder if their work has beneficial results. Wisdom would dictate that “beneficial results” would be synonymous with “positive eternal results” for nothing else is beneficial. God has given each person only twenty-four hours per day. Acknowledging that one must give account for his actions and attitudes should prompt the diligent Christian to ensure that his actions are beneficial, not just to himself (for he is not the King) but to God Himself.

Verse 10 ends with the next participle that should be modifying the Colosse church and the current church: “increasing in the knowledge of God.” “Increasing” is simply to grow. In other verses, it has the connotation of going “over and above, to abound.”(21)

The Greek word translated knowledge is not the normal word for knowledge, ginosko, which means “to be taking in knowledge. . . to understand.”(22) The original Greek word is epiginosko which has the meaning “to observe, fully perceive, notice attentively, discern, recognize.” This word implies that the diligent believer does more than just take a Bible class or listen well in Sunday school; he is to be increasing, growing in fully perceiving and noticing attentively. 

Another demonstration of this word is the fact that a man may know (ginosko) the lady at work, but he knows (epiginosko) his wife as explained by Vine: epiginosko “suggests generally a directive, a more special, recognition of the object. . .it may also suggest advanced knowledge or special appreciation; . . .Sometimes epiginosko implies a special participation in the object known and gives greater weight to what is stated.”(23) No, no, and no again – a believer is not just to be staring at the facts about God but he is to be staring at Him, actively participating in Him, in His values, in His character. 

A gardener may know that his soil is hard, red, Carolina clay. But until he studies the soil with the intent to participate in it, to have advanced knowledge of it, and to have a greater appreciation for it, he will not understand the subtleties of its character – what minerals needs to be added, what additives will improve the soil, and what type of seed will grow best. Therefore, he will not have beneficial results. His toil will be wasted and so will the soil.

So far in this passage, every concept has been an action: “being fruitful” is an action; “increasing in the knowledge of God” is an action. The next participle is also action: “strengthened with all might.” This verb is somewhat different from the other verbal adjectives (participles) thus far. “Being fruitful” and “increasing” was action incumbent upon the Christian; however, this verbal adjective is in the passive voice – a technique used to show that the subject was acted upon. In this case, the church member and the current Christian was strengthened. Vine’s interpretation says that it means “to strengthen” and it is also used in Hebrews 11:34 where it means “were made strong.” Here, the Christian is told “to be made strong,” not “to be strong.” The average person will ask, “How?”

Again, Paul, the excellent teacher, explains: “with all might, according to His glorious power. . .” The word might comes from a Greek word that means “miraculous power.”(24) However, Vine takes it a little further when he states that this word “denotes inherent ability, capability, ability to perform anything.”(25) Putting these two explanations together leads one to a fascinating concept: a believer, being fruitful and increasing in the knowledge of God, has within himself the “inherent ability,” the “miraculous power” to be strong. Those who are participating in epiginosko already know the source of that “miraculous power” – God Himself in the form of the Holy Spirit. What a reward this is for participating in “observing, fully perceiving, noticing attentively.”(26)

This word might in verse 11 comes from the word dunamis which has several meanings relating to power, force, and strength. One commentator holds that it is synonymous with dominion, as in having dominion over something.(27) Evidently, Christians, as they are being strengthened, will have dominion over something. Leaning on the principle that this Christian is walking in God’s will, one may conclude that he will have the strength, the power, the force to have dominion over anything that is not God’s will. Obviously, sin is not God’s will; therefore, as the believer is being strengthened by that “inherent ability” given by His Holy Spirit, he is able to have dominion over sin.

This same commentator puts forth these synonyms for the word dunamis: “power, especially inherent power, . . power, especially in exercise, operative power, . . .liberty of action, . .  authority either delegated or arbitrary, . .  especially physical, power as an endowment.”(28) What an eye-opening significance these words and their meanings have for the Christian: because of his being fruitful and increasing in the knowledge of God, he has operative power, the liberty of action, and delegated authority because of the endowment of the Holy Spirit!

There is a preposition phrase that modifies that “strengthened” phrase – the phrase “according to His glorious power.” E-sword claims that the word power has the same roots as the word dunamis – the inherent, operative, liberty-to-act power; therefore, this glorious power is the inherent, operative liberty-to-act power that strengthens the believer.

The end of verse 11 entails three other terms that should be defined and explained. The Christian is being strengthened “unto all patience and longsuffering with joyfulness.” Strongs expresses the meaning of patience as “cheerful or hopeful endurance, constancy. . . . waiting.”(29) 

Often, God calls upon His children to wait, as in they are currently waiting for His return. Sometimes He calls upon them to wait in their prayer life for He is not ready to give them the answer they are so desiring. This waiting time cannot be filled with angst and turmoil of heart for one must appreciate the fact that He, not a mere human, is in control. 

Another view of this word translated patience demonstrates the ability “to stay under.” A patience person will stay under the responsibilities instead of running away. Patience also involves the mind as well as the body for a patience person’s mind will be cheerfully staying under the task at hand. Possibly God has a humanly disgusting place for a Christian in which to serve; his task is to be cheerfully staying under the task in mind and in body. Often a believer wanting to be out of a particular trial may leave the trial in his mind, an action that often is close to idolatry and/or adultery. For example, if God has given a special needs child to a mother and she is always desiring to have a “normal” child, she has built an idol to worship and crave instead of worshipping and craving God. If God has allowed a marriage to become soured due to sinful choices by one or both spouses, a spouse can commit adultery by leaving the marriage in his mind though not with his body. Scripture is full of examples of patient people: Abraham and Sarah, John the Baptist (did he really want to run around wearing only camel clothing and then be thrown into prison only to be beheaded?), Paul (how many times was he beaten just for obeying God?) Ruth (a widow who legally had not much control over her own life), Martha and Mary as they waited for Jesus to come heal their brother but He did not. 

It is possible that patience and faith are closely related in that faith produces patience. One must contemplate Hebrews 11 and the list of people who were commended for their faith – their patient waiting for God to do what He said He would do even though some of them “received not the promise.” They stayed under the task that God had assigned; some stayed even unto their death.

In context of Colossians 1:11, the believer being fruitful and increasing in knowledge is also being strengthened unto patience as he learns more of the values and character of God’s heart. An important word in this verse is the preposition unto. Strongs claims that this word means “indicating the point reached or entered,” a definition that gives a reason to ponder. In context, the Holy Spirit (the inherent ability, and the miraculous and endowed power) strengthens the being-filled-and-increasing-in-knowledge Christian unto the point of being patient. What a tragedy it is if one is attempting to be patient in an attempt to be strong when the correct direction is the other way around: God gives strength to be patient, not patience to be strong.

Paul mentions in this verse that believers are strengthened “unto all patience and longsuffering,” a word that seems to very close in meaning to patience. To determine its meaning, one could turn the word longsuffering around: suffering long. “Longsuffering is that quality of self-restraint in the face of provocation which does not retaliate or promptly punish; it is the opposite of anger, and is associate with mercy, and is used of God, . . .Patience is the quality that does not surrender to circumstances or succumb under trial; it is the opposite of despondency and is associated with hope.”(30) 

“Surrendering to circumstances” brings to mind the many temptations from the world, the flesh, and the devil. If a Christian is to be longsuffering in temptations, he must have already been made strong “unto [or to the place of] patience and longsuffering.” If a Christian is to be longsuffering in trials from God, he must have already had time spent with God to learn His heart values and character.

One more participle must be discussed: one more action that a proactive Christian must take if he is to be filled and to walk worthy. Verse 12 uses the term “giving thanks unto the Father” and then gives an extremely good reason to give Him thanks (for His work on the believer’s behalf). The thanks mentioned here has the connotation of being given freely, from a heart of gratitude.(31) Because God’s thoughts are so far above man’s thoughts, he may often struggle to ascertain a reason to give thanks. One writer says this about giving thanks though she refers to it as “choosing gratitude:” “It’s a choice that requires constantly renewing my mind with the truth of God’s Word, setting my heart to savor God and His gifts, and disciplining my tongue to speak words that reflect His goodness and grace. . .”(32) She says “renewing my mind” and Paul says “being filled with the knowledge of His will.” She says “setting my heart to savor God and His gifts” and Paul says “increasing in the knowledge [epiginosko] of God.” She says “disciplining my mind to speak words that reflect his goodness and grace” and Paul says “unto all patience and longsuffering with joyfulness.” 

True thanksgiving is the voluntary expression of heartfelt gratitude for benefit received. . . .Thanksgiving is in no way a payment for the benefit received; it is rather a gracious acknowledgement of the fact that the who had received the benefit is indebted to the giver. Since no payment can be made to God for His unmeasured and uncounted benefits, the obligation to be thankful to Him is stated thought Scriptures, and all thanksgiving is closely related to worship and praise.(33)

However, even though God may choose to send certain seemingly-negative trials, man can still give thanks for the reason Paul gives in this verse: The Father “hath made us meet [fit, appropriate, able] to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light” – a very good reason to give thanks freely, from a heart of gratitude. Bible scholars may disagree exactly what are the details of this “inheritance” mentioned in this verse but one may gratefully rest in the concept that his Heavenly Father knows the inheritance that He has planned.

In summary, Paul has a prayer and a desire: that his fellow believers “be filled with the knowledge of His will” and be walking “worthy of the Lord.” Because of Paul’s usage of participles, the believer must realize that he himself must be proactive, recognizing that he cannot accomplish those two goals until he pursues the goals of being fruitful, increasing in the knowledge of God, being strengthened, and giving thanks unto the Father.

Now one may ask, “How do I bring forth fruit, increase in knowledge, be strengthened, and give thanks?”  Knowing that the fruit of these behavior-commands results in a believer’s being filled and walking worthy, he must purpose to act and then act upon these deeds. 

The key to these four behavior-commands is the key to a successful Christian life: spending time with the Heavenly Father for only then can one know His will. “Spending time with the Heavenly Father” may seem to be a vague path to walk; however, because He loves a man enough to send His only begotten Son to die for him, He has revealed Himself to that man in His Word. Reading His Word with the intent to obey (Deut 6:1), always asking for wisdom for applying His Word (James 1:5), and then actually applying His Word (Proverbs 2:1-9) will result in being filled and walking worthy.

Often Christians will listen to a sermon or Bible lesson, acknowledge that they need to apologize to God about a particular sin and to stop making “provision for the flesh to fulfill the lusts thereof,” and then leave unchanged. It is by the Holy Spirit’s power that a man is convicted and only by His power does that man have the strength to make changes by recognizing that God has made a way of escape; however, a man must hear that way and to hear that way of escape, he must be listening to God’s voice. That listening and then obeying is the answer to living the Christ-filled life, being fruitful as one increases in knowledge of God, being strengthened, and giving thanks.

 1. The title of this expose´ is What Must Come Before.

2.  Hindson, Edward, ed., Zondervan King James Version Commentary: New Testament, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2010), 586-7.

3.  Ibid, 587.

4.  James T. Dyet, Complete in Christ, (Schaumberg, IL: Regular Baptist Press, 1994), 11.

5.  Ibid, 18.

6.  Ibid.

7.  W. E. Vine, Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary, (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, Inc, 1996), 480.

8.  Ibid, 162.

9.  Rick Myers, Colossians 1:9, e-sword Bible Commentary, 2016.

10.  Vine, 236.

11.  Dyet, 19.

12.  F. B. Meyer, Through the Bible Day by Day: A Devotional Commentary, n.p.:n.p. 1914, as quoted in e-sword, 2016.

13.  Hindson, 589.

14.  Myers.

15.  Dictionary.com, LLC, “understanding,” dictionary.com, Accessed May 16, 2017.

16.  Henry H. Halley, Halley’s Bible Handbook: An Abbreviate Bible Commentary, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1959) 622.

17.  A participle is a verb-looking word that modifies a noun (otherwise known as an adjective). Some grammarians call these verbal adjectives. Examples would include “the falling rain.” “Falling” is usually a verb but in this sentence, it is modifying a noun, thus making it a participle.

18.  Vine, 257.

19.  Ibid, 273.

20.  Ibid, 683.

21.  Ibid, 323.

22.  Ibid, 346.

23.  Ibid, 347.

24.  E-sword.

25.  Vine, 406.

26.  The Holy Spirit does not come into a believer when he is focused attentively at God; He comes into a believer at salvation. Salvation is by faith and grace, not by focusing on God’s character. However, as the Christian focuses more attentively at his Heavenly Father, he learns to submit his life in such a way that the Holy Spirit is displayed more and more and His power is revealed.

27.  Vine, 181.

28.  Ibid.

29.  Strongs, quoted in e-sword, 2016.

30.  Hogg, C. F., Vine, W. E., Notes on Thessalonians, (London: Alfred Holness, 1955) 183-4, as quoted in Vine, 377.

31.  Vine, 625.

32.  Nancy Leigh DeMoss, Choosing Gratitude: Your Journey to Joy, (Chicago: Moody Press, 2009) 17.

33.  Lewis Sperry Chafer, Major Bible Themes: 52 Doctrines of the Scriptures Simplified and Explained, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1974), 262-263. 

WORKS CITED

Chafer, Lewis Sperry. Major Bible Themes: 52 Vital Doctrines of the Scriptures Simplified and 

Explained. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1974.

Dyet, James T. Complete in Christ. Schaumberg, IL: Regular Baptist Press, 1994.

Dictionary.com. “understanding.” Dictionary.com. Accessed May 16, 2017.

DeMoss, Nancy Leigh. Choosing Gratitude: Your Journey to Joy. Chicago: Moody Press, 2009.

Halley, Henry H. Halley’s Bible Handbook: An Abbreviated Bible Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1959.

Hindson, Edward, ed. Zondervan King James Version Commentary: New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2010.

Hogg, C. F., Vine, W. E. Notes on Thessalonians London: Alfred Holness, 1914. As quoted in Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, Inc, 1996.

Meyer, F. B. Through the Bible Day by Day: A Devotional Commentary. n.p.:n.p. 1914.

Myers, Rick. Colossians 1:9, e-sword Bible Commentary, 2016.

Vine, W. E. Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, Inc, 1996.

Ephesians 5:25-28

by Jason Tsaddiq

Tsaddiq.jpg

The explanation of the context of Ephesians 5: 25-28 will offer the fact that Paul wrote this book to the church at Ephesus, probably between 60 and 64AD. Some sources say that the church was beginning to be exclusive – not allowing the Gentiles to be part of the church – and thus, the theme of the book could be Christian unity.

An outline of chapters four, five, and six in the Thompson Chain Reference Study Bible notes show these main ideas: the unity of the believers, consistent Christian life, the home life, and the spiritual warfare. These concepts are very relevant to each other in relationship: one builds on another and they all intertwine with each other.

A statement of the meaning of these verses would notify the reader that Paul is giving instructions to men concerning their role in the home. (Could it be that exclusiveness was appearing in the home?) The first command for the husband is to love his wife. Paul even gave a “love example” for the men to follow – Christ as He lay down His life for the church. God saw His loved one’s need – the need of a Savior – so He sent His Son to die for mankind. God’s example is really the definition of love – seeing a need and doing something about that need.

Then Paul gave the reason for Christ’s loving and giving Himself for the church – to sanctify it, cleanse it, and “present it to Himself…holy and without blemish.” Verse 28 teaches that a husband should love his wife just as much as he loves his own body and that a man who wants to take care of himself, to honor himself, to love himself will definitely take these same actions with his wife.

The explanation of the conclusions of these meanings is quite simple: he is to follow Christ’s example of love.

The statement of the significance of this passage is overwhelmingly amazing! If a husband fails to love his wife as Christ loved/s the church, he is missing great blessings that could be his for obedience. He is also not recognizing the truth in verse 28 – since they are one, if he mistreats her, he is really mistreating himself. As a side note, verse 29 tells that “no man ever yet hated his own flesh,” yet how many men fail to love their wives as themselves, and thus are really hating themselves.

Another significance of this passage is the fact that a husband failing in this area is causing a major stumbling block in his wife’s life. He is stealing her marriage – she has a right (given to her by God) to be loved by a Godly husband. A husband failing to love his wife and to nourish her (a term in verse 29) is failing to help her in her sanctification process. As he is over her in leadership, he will answer to God for how well he loved her, taught her the Word, and helped her be holy and set apart.

Another significance of this passage is the fact that the disobedient husband is stunting the growth of the church for young men in the church and even in his own family will be watching his example. As he continues to disobey, others will follow his footsteps, sinning in the same manner. However, if a younger man chooses to do right in the home, having a father that blatantly disobeys will cause frustration, a provocation to anger.

A statement of this text’s application is overwhelmingly abundant! Loving another has almost no bounds. As he learns more about Christ and His example, the obedient-to-Scripture husband will meet the needs of his wife: her spiritual needs because he already has had his spiritual needs met by his devotional life; her physical needs because he is not lazy; and even her emotional needs because he realizes that his prayers will be hindered otherwise. If I Peter 3:7 is to be used in conjunction with this passage, then he must find out what her needs are. Granted, she has a part to play in answering his questions lovingly and fully but it is incumbent upon him to know her needs and then strive to meet them. What one wife needs may not be the needs of another so each husband must spend time with his own wife to discern how he best may fit her needs to accomplish God’s will for his life and for hers.

Points to Ponder #4

by Jason Tsaddiq

Tsaddiq.jpg

As I considered what to call these little snippets of ponderable truths, these ideas came to mind: “Bible Bites”; “Tiny Truths”; and “Verse Vittles.” None of those titles gave enough weight to the concept of meditating, thinking deeply upon, mentally digesting, and estimating the worth of. Then “Points to Ponder” struck. Pound, pond, and ponder all come from the same root word. Pound is a weight. Pond is an enclosed area, usually of water. Ponder is the verb form that means to give weight to, to think deeply of a particular idea or concept.

As a Christian ponders Bible truths, he is giving weight to an enclosed, exclusive area – truth. What else is worth pondering?! “For in His law doth he meditate day and night.” (Psalm 1:2) Strongs declares that this word meditate by implication means to ponder. According to Psalm 1:1, the blessed man delights and meditates in His law.

Who doesn’t want to be blessed? Let’s ponder.

(Sources include eSword/Strongs and various online dictionaries.)

Points to Ponder #10

James 5:11 “Behold, we count them happy which endure. Ye have heard of the patience of Job and have seen the end of the Lord; that the Lord is very pitiful and of tender mercy.”

Ponder:

Behold – to see, pay attention to

Happy – to beautify, to pronounce fortunate (favored, prosperous, comfortable), blessed, felicitous (apt, well-chosen, fitting, suitable, appropriate)

Endure – to stay under, have fortitude, persevere, abide

Patience – cheerful or hopeful endurance, constancy, waiting

End of the Lord – the conclusion, the point aimed at as a limit (the goal, the purpose)

Is – remaineth, consisteth, comes

Pitiful – extremely compassionate, denotes action

Tender mercy – compassionate, merciful

What is the “end of the Lord”? What are His goals and purposes of my trials through which I must endure cheerfully? For me to realize my deficits; to see His provision; to see His power (His ability to change me and others)….all which lead ultimately to His glory.

Points to Ponder #11

Psalm 145: 8-9 “The Lord is gracious and full of compassion; slow to anger and of great mercy. The Lord is good to all; and His tender mercies are over all His works.”

Ponder:

The Lord – the self-existent One, Jehovah

Gracious – courteous, kind, pleasant

Full of compassion – compassionate (sympathetic, empathetic, understanding, caring), merciful

Slow – long suffering, patient

To anger – ire, suffering, wrath

Great – exceeding, high, long, loud, mighty, much, noble

Mercy – kindness, beauty, good deed, pity, favor

Good – beautiful, best, better, bountiful, cheerful, fine, glad, gracious, joyful, kindly, loving, merry, pleasant, precious, prosperity, ready, sweet, wealth

To all – the whole, any or every, ye altogether, every one/place/thing

Mercies – compassion, by extension the womb (as cherishing the fetus), tender love, pity, womb

Over – above, upon, against, after, beyond, through, touching

All – the whole, any or every, ye altogether, every one/place/thing

His works – an action, generally a transaction, by implication a product or property, deed, labor, thing made, thing offered, possession.

Mercies – by extension the womb: nothing gets into the womb without going through the mother. Satan could not get to Job without “going though” God Almighty. “. . .and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.” (John 10:28)

Using synonyms, the Lord is caring; suffers long before He has wrath; has high and long and loud kindness and good deeds; is bountiful, cheerful, and wealth to those and to that which are His by His transactions (Creation, the Cross).

Points to Ponder #12

Psalm 37:4 “Delight thyself also in the Lord; and He shall give thee the desires of thine heart.”

Ponder: Delight – contentment, glee, pleasure, joy, make happy

Thyself – same root word of a word that means soft or pliable, luxurious

In – above, over, on, against, of

Lord – the self-existent one, eternal Jehovah

Give – add, apply, appoint, lift up, make, ordain, pay, perform, recompense, render, requite, willingly

Desires – request, desire, petition

Heart – feelings, will, emotion, the center of everything

If I make myself happy in Him – His life, His truth, His being, His goals, His love, His mercy, His will – He is in the place to add my mind/will/emotion petitions to my center of everything.

What is His life? His truth? His being? His goals? His love? His mercy? His will?

Points to Ponder #13

Habakkuk 3:17-18 “Although the fig tree shall not blossom, neither shall fruit be in the vines; the labour of the olive shall fail, and the fields shall yield no meat; the flock shall be cut off from the fold, and there shall be no herd in the stalls: Yet I will rejoice in the Lord, I will joy in the God of my salvation.”

Ponder:

Fig tree shall not blossom –  the least of these 3 fruits, sweetness, usually very common so if figs are rare, it’s an extremely destitute time

Fruit [not] be in the vines – vine and fig together a picture of peace and rest, gladness, fruit of the vine was used in sacrifices to God, was a common drink for man

Labour of the olive shall fail – crucial to their diet, cheerfulness

Fields shall yield no meat – “staff of life” produces nothing (no wheat for bread, no plants for weaving into cloth or housing)

Flock shall be cut off – driven or carried away by enemies, no protein or milk

No herd in the stalls – no animals for plowing or clothing

Yet – a turning point conjunction, a contrasting connection

I will –  decisive, action, personal, definite

Rejoice – jump for joy, exultation, not quiet and private, energetic

In the Lord – not in my intellect or my wealth or my connections to solve the problem but in the self-existent One, the eternal Jehovah

I will – decisive, action, personal, definite

Joy – to spin around under the influence of a violent emotion

In the God –  Elohim, supreme magistrate

Of my salvation –  liberty, deliverance, prosperity

Peaceful confidence. Sweet submission. Human circumstances waiting for God’s timely deliverance. Joyful trust.  "Though he slay me, yet will I trust him" (Job 13:15).

“Destroy the “vines” and “fig trees” of the carnal heart, and his mirth ceases. But those who when full enjoyed God in all, when emptied can enjoy all in God. They can sit down upon the heap of ruined creature comforts, and rejoice in Him as the “God of their salvation.” Running in the way of His commandments, we outrun our troubles. Thus Habakkuk, beginning his prayer with trembling, ends it with a song of triumph (Job 13:15; Psalm 4:7; Psalm 43:3, Psalm 43:5).” These files are a derivative of an electronic edition prepared from text scanned by Woodside Bible Fellowship.

*This expanded edition of the Jameison-Faussett-Brown Commentary is in the public domain and may be freely used and distributed.Jamieson, Robert, D.D.; Fausset, A. R.; Brown, David. "Commentary on Habakkuk 3:17". "Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/jfb/habakkuk-3.html. 1871-8.

Points to Ponder #3

by Jason Tsaddiq

Tsaddiq.jpg

As I considered what to call these little snippets of ponderable truths, these ideas came to mind: “Bible Bites”; “Tiny Truths”; and “Verse Vittles.” None of those titles gave enough weight to the concept of meditating, thinking deeply upon, mentally digesting, and estimating the worth of. Then “Points to Ponder” struck. Pound, pond, and ponder all come from the same root word. Pound is a weight. Pond is an enclosed area, usually of water. Ponder is the verb form that means to give weight to, to think deeply of a particular idea or concept.

As a Christian ponders Bible truths, he is giving weight to an enclosed, exclusive area – truth. What else is worth pondering?! “For in His law doth he meditate day and night.” (Psalm 1:2) Strongs declares that this word meditate by implication means to ponder. According to Psalm 1:1, the blessed man delights and meditates in His law.

Who doesn’t want to be blessed? Let’s ponder.

(Sources include eSword/Strongs and various online dictionaries.)


Points to Ponder #7

Joh 14:27 “Peace I leave with you, My peace I give unto you; not as the world giveth, give I unto you. . .”

What does peace mean?

One, quietness, rest, peace of mind, invocation of peace, a common Jewish farewell; to join, tie together as a whole, properly, wholeness, i.e., when all essential parts are joined together; God’s gift of wholeness. (Strongs)

Security, safety, prosperity, felicity (because peace and harmony make and keep things safe and prosperous); the way that leads to peace; “the tranquil state of a soul assured of its salvation through Christ, and so fearing nothing from God and content with its earthly lot, of whatsoever sort that is.” (Thayer’s Greek Lexicon) (emphasis added)

“Peace for the believer is not the absence of danger but is the presence of God. Peace rules your day when Christ (and His word) rules your mind.” (Preceptaustin.org)

Enemies to peace: greed, ambition, envy, anger, and pride (Petrarch)

Ponder: Fearing nothing from God. Why can I fear nothing from God? Because Jesus took everything “fearful” for me on the cross.

Not the absence of danger but is the presence of God. Why do I not stay in His presence? What makes me leave?

Enemies to peace. Why do I tolerate them?

Points to Ponder #8

Psalm 37:5 “Commit thy way unto the Lord; trust also in Him; and He shall bring it to pass.”

Commit – roll, seek, trust, wallow 

Way – road, course of life, mode of action, conversation, custom, journey, manner

Unto – upon, against, because of, beside, by (reason of), on, through, touching

Lord – the self-existent One, eternal, Jehovah

Trust – for refuge, be confident or sure, be bold, careless [without care], put confidence

In – upon, against, because of, beside, by (reason of), on, through, touching

He – only expressed [in Scripture] when emphatic or without a verb

Pass – accomplish, advance, appoint, become, bear, bestow, bring forth, bruise, be busy, certainly, have the charge of, commit, govern, grant, keep, maintain, be meet, be occupied, perform, prepare, procure, provide, requite, serve, work. (Strongs)

Ponder: Synonyms for wallow: flounder, stumble, lurch, stagger

I wallow; He works.

I roll; He requites.

I am bold because He governs.

I seek; He brings forth.

I take refuge; He bestows.

What wonder!


Points to Ponder #9

Hebrews 8:12 “For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sin and their iniquities will I remember no more.”

Ponder:

I – supreme authority, master, God

Will be – definitive verb, future assertion

Merciful – cheerful, propitious (favorable, encouraging, promising, gracious, discerning, alert, wise), averting some calamity

Unrighteousness – injustice, moral wrongfulness, iniquity, unrighteousness

Sin – offence

Iniquities – illegality, violation of the law, transgression (wrongdoing, infraction, impropriety, misdeed) of the law

Remember – to bear in mind, to recollect, and by implication, to reward or punish

No more – double negative strengthening the denial, not at all, by no means

Points to Ponder #2

By Jason Tsaddiq

As I considered what to call these little snippets of ponderable truths, these ideas came to mind: “Bible Bites”; “Tiny Truths”; and “Verse Vittles.” None of those titles gave enough weight to the concept of meditating, thinking deeply upon, mentally digesting, and estimating the worth of. Then “Points to Ponder” struck. Pound, pond, and ponder all come from the same root word. Pound is a weight. Pond is an enclosed area, usually of water. Ponder is the verb form that means to give weight to, to think deeply of a particular idea or concept.

As a Christian ponders Bible truths, he is giving weight to an enclosed, exclusive area – truth. What else is worth pondering?! “For in His law doth he meditate day and night.” (Psalm 1:2) Strongs declares that this word meditate by implication means to ponder. According to Psalm 1:1, the blessed man delights and meditates in His law.

Who doesn’t want to be blessed? Let’s ponder.

(Sources include eSword/Strongs and various online dictionaries.)

Points to Ponder #4

Matthew 7:8 “For everyone that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.”

Ponder: The verse does not detail what will be received or found or opened. Will I trust Him that what I receive or find or have opened will be the best for me?

The verse does not detail when the receiving, finding, and opening will happen. Will I trust Him in His timing?

Points to Ponder #5

Psalm 37:1-2 “Fret not thyself because of evil doers, neither be thou envious against the workers of iniquity. For they shall soon be cut down like the grass, and wither as the green herb.”

What does fret mean?

To glow or grow warm; to blaze up of anger, zeal, jealousy; be angry, burn, be displeased earnestly, grieve, be (wax) hot, be incensed, kindle, be wroth. (Strongs)

What does evildoers mean?

To spoil (literally by breaking into pieces); figuratively, to make (to be) good for nothing, that is, bad (physically, socially, or morally) (Strongs)

What does iniquity mean?

To distort morally, evil, perverseness, unjust, unrighteousness, wicked (Strongs)

What does for mean?

Indicating causal relations (forasmuch, inasmuch, whereas, assuredly, certainly, doubtless) (Strongs)

What does wither mean?

To wilt, to fall away, faint, fail; figuratively, to be fooled or (morally) wicked; causatively to despise, disgrace. 

Strongs concordance gives the impression that the word wither in Psalm 37: 2 is the root word of the name Nabal (I Samuel 25:3) (H5037) this word comes from the same root as (H5036) which means “stupid, wicked”; this word comes from the same root as (H5034) which means “to wilt; generally to fall away, fail, faint; figuratively to be foolish or (morally) wicked; causatively to despise, disgrace: - disgrace, dishonour, lightly esteem, fade (away, -ing), fall (down, -ling, off), do foolishly, come to nought, X surely, make vile, wither.”

Ponder: Do I become angry because of people doing wrong, especially to me? Why am I wasting my mental, physical, and spiritual resources on that which is wicked, stupid, foolish, despise-worthy, dishonoring, lightly esteemed, fading away, coming to nought?


Points to Ponder #6

Philippians 4:19 “but my God shall supply all your need according to His riches in glory by Christ Jesus.”

Context: In a chapter about giving to those in need. (4:14, et al)

Ponder:

My – a personal pronoun, possessive

God – not me, not my job, not my family

Shall – a definite word, strong assertion or intention

Supply – transitive verb, demands a receiver of the action

All – not some, not most

Your – a personal pronoun, possessive

Need – not wants, though context implies quality (vs 18: “sweet,” “acceptable,” “well-pleasing”) and quantity (vs 16 “once and again”)

According to His riches – mercy, truth, power, grace, knowledge, forgiveness, justice, holiness, and more

In glory – “In God’s true nature” (Ellicott); “In a glorious manner” (John Gill); “To show Himself glorious and make His people so” (John Gill)

By Christ Jesus – the Mediator “for the sake of Christ Jesus” (John Gill)

God usually blesses those who give and those who will use the resources they have according to His purposes” (biblehub.com)

“Alexander the coppersmith” – if God rewards evil, shall He not reward good?


Points to Ponder #1

By Jason Tsaddiq

POINTS TO PONDER Introduction

As I considered what to call these little snippets of ponderable truths, these ideas came to mind: “Bible Bites”; “Tiny Truths”; and “Verse Vittles.” None of those titles gave enough weight to the concept of meditating, thinking deeply upon, mentally digesting, and estimating the worth of. Then “Points to Ponder” struck. Pound, pond, and ponder all come from the same root word. Pound is a weight. Pond is an enclosed area, usually of water. Ponder is the verb form that means to give weight to, to think deeply of a particular idea or concept.

As a Christian ponders Bible truths, he is giving weight to an enclosed, exclusive area – truth. What else is worth pondering?! “For in His law doth he meditate day and night.” (Psalm 1:2) Strongs declares that this word meditate by implication means to ponder. According to Psalm 1:1, the blessed man delights and meditates in His law.

Who doesn’t want to be blessed? Let’s ponder.

(Sources include eSword/Strongs and various online dictionaries.)


Points to Ponder #1

Psalm 34:10b “. . .But they that seek the Lord shall not want any good thing.”

What does seek mean?

Seek: to resort to, to seek, specifically to worship.

What does worship mean?

Worship: “active response to the character, words, and action of God, initiated by His revelation and enabled by His redemption, whereby the mind is transformed (e.g. belief, repentance), the heart is renewed, (e.g. love, trust) and actions are surrendered (e.g. obedience, service), all in accordance with His will and in order to declare His infinite worthiness.” (theopedia.com)

Ponder: Active response. Character, words, and action of God. Initiated by His revelation. Enabled by His redemption. Mind transformed. Heart renewed. Actions surrendered. In accordance with His will. His infinite worthiness.

Points to Ponder #2

Psalm 34: 22b “. . .and none of them that trust in Him shall be desolate.”

What does trust mean?

To seek refuge, to flee to for protection, to confide in, to have hope in.

What does desolate mean?

To be guilty, to be punished, to perish, to be destroyed. (Strongs)

Ponder: None (not a solitary, single one!)

of them that trust (to seek refuge, to have confidence in)

 in Him (the Almighty Creator, Jehovah-Jireh, Abba Father)

shall be (a definitive word)

desolate (guilty, destroyed)

Points to Ponder #3

I John 5:4 “For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith.”

What does born of God mean?

Filial devotion, moral resemblance, glorious heirship. (studylight.org)

What does overcometh mean?

Defeat, beat, conquer, trounce, thrash, rout, vanquish, overwhelm, overpower, get the better of, triumph over, prevail over, win over/against, outdo, outclass, worst, crush, get the better of, control, get/bring under control, master, conquer, defeat. (google dictionary)

What does the world mean?

 “The sum total of outward things, considered as apart from God – the world and God we make to be antagonists to one another. . . And the world conquers me when it succeeds in hindering me from seeing, loving, holding communion with and serving my Father, God. . . the one victory over the world is to bend it to serve me in the highest things – the attainment of a clearer vision of the Divine nature, the attainment of a deeper love to God Himself, and of a more glad consecration and service to Him.” (biblehub.com)

Ponder: Born of God. Filial devotion. Moral resemblance. Glorious heirship. Defeat/conquer/trounce/crush. Hinders me from seeing my Father, God. Hinders me from loving my Father, God. Hinders me from holding communion with my Father, God. Hinders me from serving my Father, God.

Do I even want to conquer the world?

Tsaddiq.jpg

Famine, Funerals, and Farming: A Study of the Book of Ruth

By: Jason Tsaddiq

Tsaddiq.jpg

The book of Ruth was written probably by Samuel (1) “during the reign of David (1000-961BC), yet the actual setting takes place during the period of the judges’ rule over Israel, sometime between 1150 and 1100 BC.” Many Bible scholars believe that he wrote it to validate David’s royalty for “. . . Ruth is the only book in the Old Testament that presents the family tree of David, proving to be the most vital link from Abraham to the coming Messiah.” (2)

As one pursues a diligent study of the book of Ruth, he must be determined to study exactly what is there and not to add any romantic or westernized ideas into the story. A survey of the contents includes this summary of the story: a man took his wife and two sons to another country due to the famine in their land. He decided to stay there. He died. His two sons married women from this foreign land instead of choosing wives from their own land. The sons died. The three widows decided to go back to this man’s homeland. Very soon however, one of the widows, (one of the daughters in law) decided not to leave her own land. Thus, the widow of the man and the other daughter in law returned to the homeland. The daughter in law gleaned in the field of a rather wealthy man who turned out to be a kinsman. He noticed her, welcomed her into his fields, and eventually took upon himself the responsibility of marrying her. In the last few verses, the reader is told through the genealogies that this daughter in law was the great grandmother of King David who was in the line of Christ.

Many preachers, teachers, and commentators add to this story. Additions to this story include the “fact” that Elimelech was sinful in traveling from Bethlehem to Moab to avoid the famine. However, Scripture does not communicate that Bethlehemites were not allowed to travel, even to Moab. In fact, Scripture does teach that a man should provide for his family (physical needs as well as other types of needs). Understanding that God expects His children to live holy lives while providing for those needs, one must also realize that an occasion may arise in which a person may take an action that is not the preferred action, even though it is not sin. (3)

God “forbade the Ammonites and Moabites entry into the congregation of the Lord and told His people not to seek their peace of prosperity. (See Deut. 23:3-7.)” (4) He did not forbid children of Israel to sojourn there.

 Pointing to the fact that chapter 1, verse 2b says that “they came into the country of Moab and continued there,” many Bible students claim that Elimelech sinned since he stayed. Nowhere does Scripture say or imply that Elimelech chose to stay because he was a sinner or because he was out of God’s will. Possibly they met unforeseen financial circumstances and could not afford to return as soon as they would have liked. Possibly God allowed severe illness to strike Elimelech, Naomi, Mahlon, or Chileon, preventing travel until healing had occurred. The current Bible student must acknowledge that he cannot know the mind of Elimelech and must prevent reading his own interpretation into the verse.

Another addition to the story hovers around the fact that the two sons “took them wives of the women of Moab.” Deuteronomy 7 among other passages confirms God’s command that His children be not married to or “unequally yoked with unbelievers.”  It does appear that these two sons disobeyed God’s will. However, to say that “either Naomi made no objection to these marriages because of her resignation of never returning to her home country, or her grief was so great over the loss of her husband that she no longer cared” (5) is definitely reading into Scripture. The current believer has no clue to know if Naomi made no objection or if she were resigned to never returning to her home country, or even if she had grief over her husband’s death. Possibly she had no grief for if one believes Naomi to be a wonderful “Christian,” then maybe Elimelech took her out of Bethlehem against her will and she was glad that he had died.

After the men’s deaths, Naomi decided to return to Bethlehem as explained in chapter 1, verse 6. She encouraged her daughters in law to stay in Moab, their homeland. Orpah, in verses 14 and 15 “went back unto her people, and unto her gods;” (6) One Bible teacher claims that “Orpah promptly declared her intention to follow Naomi, and just as promptly she turned back to her own people and her own gods. Such is human nature – frail, shallow, and superficial in some.” Yet in the same book, this author claims that Christians can “practice their faith” (7) in the world. He tells a story of a factory in the south that holds a chapel service for its employees every Monday morning, even at a cost to the employer. Possibly Orpah was not going back to her gods as Naomi said; maybe she was going back to be a light, a missionary to her family. Maybe Orpah was not as shallow and superficial as some may think for God had not told the Moabites to leave Moab. (8)

One of the most heinous additions to the Biblical story of Ruth is based on chapter 1, verse 20 where Naomi states, “Call me not Naomi, call me Mara: for the Almighty hath dealt very bitterly with me.” Almost every preacher, teacher, and commentator use this verse to prove that Naomi was bitter. However, this verse does not claim that Naomi was bitter; it claims that God had allowed bitter events to occur in her life. It is quite possible for a believer to experience bitter incidences and not become bitter. Naomi gave no indication of her heart condition before her journey to Moab, during her time there, and after the men in her immediate family died. God, for some reason, kept quite a bit of personal intimate emotion out of this book of the Bible. 

Several reasons exist for one to believe that Naomi was not bitter. The first reason is that she did not say she was bitter. She said that God had dealt bitterly with her. The careful Bible student must read exactly what is in Scripture and not place his own possible emotions into the people involved.

The second reason is the definition, so to speak, of the word Almighty. In the Hebrew, she used the word el shaddai which has several shades of meaning. One source claims that “the focus does not seem to be so much on power and might (although that is implied) but more on sovereignty and kingship.” (9) It is possible that Naomi was recognizing that the Most Sovereign and Kingly God had brought about bitter trials. Wikipedia presents several ideas, one of which is that “the root word "shadad" (שדד) means to plunder, overpower, or make desolate.” (10) Perhaps Naomi was feeling that God had overpowered and made desolate her family when He allowed the men to die. A woman who truly loves her husband and children may feel plundered and overpowered after three deaths within approximately ten years. Plundered does not mean the speaker is bitter. Wikipedia offers another slight variation: 

"El Shaddai" may also be understood as an allusion to the singularity of deity, "El", as opposed to "Elohim" (plural), being sufficient or enough for the early patriarchs of Judaism. . . meaning a god who is sufficient in himself, that is, a self-determined eternal being qua being, for whom limited descriptive names cannot apply. This may have been the meaning the Hebrew phrase "ehyeh asher ehyeh" (which translates as "I will be that which I will be") and which is how God describes himself to Moses in Exodus 3:13–15. This phrase can be applied to the tetragrammaton Yhwh, which can be understood as an anagram for the three states of being: past, present and future, conjoined with the conjunctive Hebrew letter vav. (11) (Emphasis was added.)

Maybe Naomi was recognizing that, even though all of life’s misfortunes, El Shaddai was sufficient; He was enough. If she were bitter, possibly she would have used the name El Elyon (“the most high God”) or El Olam (“the everlasting God”) or El Roi (“God who sees me”).

An explanation of the theme of the book must include the definition of the name of God that was used in chapter 1, verse 20: El Shaddai – the kingly sovereign, all-sufficient One. The first chapter of this book seems to cover quite a bit of time and quite a few events. Then the action seems to slow down. Yet each step of the story shows an aspect of El Shaddai’s name.

His sovereignty is shown by allowing the family to move to a specific country, by allowing the dad to die at a specific time, by allowing the sons not to marry until after the father’s death, by allowing the news of the famine being over not to reach Naomi until His timing was perfect, by allowing one (and only one) daughter in law to return with Naomi, and so on, all the way until after Obed is born.  Only a Supreme Power could devise and execute such a detailed plan.

His all-sufficiency is shown by His being powerful enough to make all the details fall completely in line, at the right time.  Naomi and Ruth arrived at Bethlehem during the time of harvest – this occurrence was not a coincidence. The only other kinsman redeemer did not want to fulfill the kinsman responsibility – if Ruth were as wonderful as Scripture states, one must wonder why he did not jump at the chance to have her. But God had already planted other responsibilities into his life. God’s plans were sufficient to provide the way for Ruth to be grafted into the royal line. The other kinsman would not have placed Ruth in the royal line.

In pondering the all-sufficiency of El Shaddai, one must consider His only begotten Son -  the king of all. El Shaddai is used to denote a king and this God Who patiently put all the details in order is still the King of kings.

The significance of this book is multifaceted based on the application of each truth. The first significance and thus application is that one must see God’s attributes: kingliness, sovereignty, all sufficiency. If God is king, sovereign, and all-sufficient, then one must obey Him with no argument. Obeying a king is not always easy; however, as Boaz could picture God’s redemptive love for Gentiles, then one may rest in His goodness for being the all-providing One. Naomi, though widowed, was never technically alone – she had her sons and her daughters in law. This Good King still was caring for her even in a foreign country. She may have rested in that knowledge. 

The obedience principle is shown several times through Ruth’s action. Due to Ruth’s Moabite ancestry, many of Naomi’s practices and instructions may have been unusual; yet Ruth still obeyed.

The second significance and application of the book is that one must see that Gentiles can participate in God’s will. Since God is no respecter of persons, each person has a task to perform under His guidance; each person is loved with an everlasting love; no one is better than another. The modern believer must treat others as God treats them: righteously, purely, and kindly.

The third significance and application of the book is that God has everything in control – a very trite but true saying. Bethlehem may not have understood the complete reason for the famine. Naomi may not have understood why she had to move to Moab nor why her husband and sons died. Maybe Naomi did not understand why Orpah went back to her people (What would have happened if she had traveled to Bethlehem?) Ruth may not have known why her husband died before they had children. Boaz may not have understood why he felt compelled to go to the field that particular day since he was a very busy man. Some scholars say that Boaz was a widower – if so, maybe he did not understand why his wife died. Yet these events happened to these people because God was working behind the scenes just as He did with Job and just as He does with believers in the church age.

Even though many so-called Bible students read much of their own emotions into this book, the diligent serious student may glean many other truths that apply to his individual life. Just like all the other books of His Word, Ruth may be read and re-read many times before all its treasures are mined.

 

1 Diana Hagee, Ruth: The Romance of Redemption, (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, Inc, 2005), 3.

2 Ibid, 7.

3 Current examples would include working and traveling on Sundays, spending money on hobbies and entertainment when missionaries and pastors are going without some necessities, gorging oneself at dinner when God expects Christians to care for their bodies.

4 Stanley Collins, Courage and Submission: A Study of Ruth and Esther, (Glendale, CA: G/L Publications, 1975) 7

5 Hagee, 16.

6 David Nettleton, Provision and Providence: The Books of Ruth and Esther, (Des Plaines, IL: Regular Baptist Press, 1975), 6.

7 Ibid, 12.

8 Granted, because of the assumed close familial ties between Naomi and Orpah, one may conjecture that Naomi knew Orpah’s heart and life choices better than the current Bible student and thus was correct when she said that Orpah had returned to her gods. Maybe Orpah told Naomi that the only reason she was going to Bethlehem was due to the social expectations of the times. Possibly Orpah even told Naomi that she was returning to her own gods as she was leaving. 

9 Cory Baugher, knowingthebible.net/the-meaning-of-el-shaddai, (2017). Accessed June 3, 2017.

10 Wikipedia.com. (2017). Accessed June 3, 2017.

11 Ibid.

Review of The Emotionally Destructive Marriage

Tsaddiq.jpg

By: Jason Tsaddiq

Review of The Emotionally Destructive Marriage: How to Find Your Voice and Reclaim Your Hope by Leslie Vernick -- Waterbrook Press, an imprint of Crown Publishing Group: New York; 2013

Please hear me: God doesn’t want you to hang on by a thread, my friend. He gives you a lifeline. Grab hold of it and live. (page 4)

Author:

Leslie Vernick is a “licensed clinical social worker and relationship coach,” according to the book cover information. She holds webinars, writes a blog, speaks internationally, and maintains a private practice. The author of several books including How to Act Right When Your Spouse Acts Wrong and The Emotionally Destructive Relationship, Mrs. Vernick chose to use these Biblical principles in her relationship with her mother, though most readers would assume, by her book titles, that she has a lousy marriage and hates men. 

In perusing her website, leslievernick.com, one cannot find her personal story of salvation or any “religious” associations; however, she constantly states, in various ways, that God has the answer and the answer is simply Him and His Word.

Review:

The book addresses a crucial yet ignored topic in Christian circles – emotional abuse in the home. It appears in the last fifty years or so, that many preachers have preached only two truths concerning the home: husbands are to lead and wives are to submit. However, it seems that the leadership that has been preached, or at least the leadership that has been practiced, is more like dictatorship and not true, Biblical leadership. Much confusion and damage has been done to the Body of Christ through this misstep.

The confusion and damage are further deepened by pastors and church leaders themselves misunderstanding the concept and therefore, they are Biblically ignorant of the proper balance between Godly leadership and Biblical submission. Often, the church leaders are willfully ignorant of this mess.

We’ve also misplaced the responsibility on a wife’s shoulder to somehow maintain a loving and warm relationship with a husband who treats her with cruelty, disrespect, deceit, and gross indifference. It’s not feasible, nor is it Biblical. (page 1, introduction)

The very first concept that Mrs. Vernick addresses is the difference between a disappointing marriage and a destructive marriage, an important concept to understand before reading the rest of the book. Every marriage can be considered “disappointing” for each spouse gets old and wrinkly; however, some marriages are absolutely destructive, not what God intended.

The author gives examples of incidents which have occurred in Christian homes, some of which are less gentle than others. She stresses that the definition of emotional abuse “is not usually diagnosed by looking at a single episode of sinful behavior (which we’re capable of) but rather repetitive attitudes and behaviors that result in tearing someone down or inhibiting her growth. This behavior is usually accompanied by a lack of awareness, a lack of responsibility and a lack of change.” An emotionally abusive marriage is not one that is shaken because a spouse puts the toilet paper on the roll backwards or squeezes the toothpaste tube the wrong way. Emotional destruction runs much, much deeper and is common in Christian circles.

 For context of the book, she defines emotional abuse on page 11: 

 Emotional abuse systemically degrades, diminishes, and can even destroy the personhood of the abused.

In Part One, titled “Seeing Your Marriage Clearly,” in chapter one, the reader is encouraged to take a self-administered test to analyze her own marriage. Chapter two leads the reader in learning the “Three Essential Ingredients in a Thriving Relationship”: mutuality, reciprocity, and freedom. Chapter three explains “Five Patterns That Destroy a Relationship and Damage People”: reactive abuse, controlling abuse, deceit, dependence, and indifference. Chapter four asks the question “Where is God in all This?” The chapter begins with this letter:

Leslie, I don’t know what’s happening to me. Every day I thank God that He’s kept me sane in this web of chaos, anger, and deceit, but I’m starting to lose it. I’m having heart palpitations, I feel sick to my stomach, I can’t think straight, and I’m scared, angry, and hurt all the time.

Despite my husband’s lack of any type of remorse, I stand on the truth of God’s Word and take my marital vows seriously! I don’t want a divorce…but how much can one person take? I feel like I am going crazy! The more Christian wisdom I seek, the more confused I become. [emphasis added] 

I don’t want to manipulate God’s word for my benefit or to relieve myself from this pain or journey. But surely God does not require that we live in this type of hell simply to remain faithful to our marriage vows, does He? Am I forever damned to this marriage?

I have sought much Christian guidance and, sad to say, it has been horribly ineffective and more damaging, which leads me back to the place I started. I don’t want to break the vow I made to God in this marriage, and yet I am trapped in a marriage that I am trying to survive while dying more every day. [emphasis added] What is the answer?

Surely I am more to God than just a sacrificial lamb!

Mrs. Vernick’s last point in the fourth chapter “Where is God in all This?” is the concept that “God values your safety and sanity.” She gives several Biblical illustrations where a child of God was allowed and/or instructed to leave for his life, not staying in a volatile situation. 

Women feel guilty taking measures to protect themselves, because they’ve been taught it’s unbiblical or ungodly. Perhaps their Christian friends or leaders have told them they have no biblical right to safety and they must stay in the marital home, no matter what. They suffer endlessly with verbal battering and even physical abuse, believing that by doing so, they’re being Godly martyrs or fulfilling a call to be a sacrificial lamb. Keeping the family together at all cost is seen as God’s highest value. But there are times when keeping the family together has an extremely high price for a woman and her children, and it may actually cost them their lives. In addition, staying together regardless of the costs continues to enable the husband to grossly sin against them with no consequences, which is not biblical.” [emphasis added] (page 69-70)

Part Two, “Change Begins with You,” begins with chapter five asking the question “What’s Wrong with Me?” The author explains that “change requires self-awareness,” “change happens when we believe God’s Words above all else,” “change happens when we seek and receive feedback from wise and Godly people,” “changes happens when we take responsibility for our part of the marital dysfunction,” “change requires self-reflection,” “change requires self-examination,” and “change requires putting your marriage in its proper place.” In this chapter, the reader is strongly encouraged to “self-reflect” and “self-examine” for any contribution to the mess she herself is making. It is in this chapter that the reader is assured that not all marital problems are caused by the husband. The wife interested in obtaining a clear-eyed view of her situation must be willing to humbly evaluate her own sin patterns, repent and change them, and then move on.

Chapter six warns the reader with this title: “When Trying Harder Becomes Destructive.”

The author explains:

In some marriages, trying harder does not engender a reciprocal response. It has the opposite effect. It feeds the fantasy that the sole purpose of your life is to serve your husband, make him happy, and meet his every need. It feeds his belief of entitlement and his selfishness, and it solidifies his self-deception that it is indeed all about him.

When destructive behaviors are a regular pattern in your marriage, understand this important truth: Your husband doesn’t want a real wife who will reflect to him her pain when he hurts her or God’s wisdom when she sees him making a foolish decision. What he demands is a fantasy wife, a blow-up punching-bag wife who continues to bounce back with a smile even when he knocks her down. He wants a doll wife who always agrees, always acts nice, always smiles, and thinks he’s wonderful all the time, not matter what he does or how he behaves. He wants a wife who loves to have sex with him whenever he’s in the mood, regardless of how he treats her. He wants a wife who doesn’t ask anything of him or hold him accountable for anything, yet allows him to do whatever he pleases. He wants a wife who will never upset him, never disagree with him, or never challenge him. He wants a wife who grants him amnesty whenever he messes up, never mentioning it again even if the same sin happens again and again. Trying harder to become the fantasy wife is not helpful to your husband or your marriage.

She continues in the next paragraph:

The more you collude with his idea that he’s entitled to a fantasy wife, the more firmly entrenched this lie becomes. You will never measure up to his fantasy wife because you, too, are a sinner. You will fail him (as every partner does in a marriage) and won’t always meet his needs (or wants). In addition, you are created by God as your own, unique, separate person. Therefore, you will have feelings of your own and won’t always agree with everything he says or wants. It is not your sole purpose to serve him and meet his every need. Trying to be his fantasy wife not only hurts him, but it hurts you too. It diminishes the person God has made you to be because your husband has now become your god. He dictates who you are to be and what you are to do. And when you bow to this god, you soon become ruled by fear, not God’s love. Your spirit becomes deformed, and you will never grow to be the woman God created you to be.

This concept (It is not your sole purpose to serve him and meet his every need) flies in the face of what the average Baptist church preaches concerning leadership and submission. However, one must acknowledge its truth. A spouse’s sole purpose is to glorify God and other like-worded goals and enabling a loved one to continue in sin is definitely not glorifying God.

Chapter seven is titled “Building Your Core.” The word CORE is used to demonstrate these concepts:

Committed to truth and reality

Open to growth, instruction, and feedback

Responsible for myself and Respectful toward others without dishonoring myself

Empathic and compassionate toward others without enabling people to continue to abuse and disrespect me.

Chapter eight, the last chapter in Part Two, explains how to “Get Prepared to Confront Wisely.” The author discusses the concept that, though all have sinned, a habitual sinner must be confronted in a Biblical method. Confronting any other way produces more destruction. Some information in this chapter also flies in the face of advice given in the typical book or sermon on the Christian home. However, as the reader has seen the Bible’s view of emotional abuse and of leadership and submission, he must acknowledge the truth of the confrontation methods and ideas presented in this chapter. The author does not claim that minor offenses be confronted using these strong methods, only on-going, non-repentant sin.

Part Three, “Initiating Changes in Your Marriage” contains “specific strategies to wake up your husband to his destructiveness and invite him to Godly change.” Chapter nine is titled “Learn to Speak Up in Love.” 

When a woman stops being a resentful martyr or a helpless victim and starts living from her CORE, she can learn to become God’s warrior to bring about her husband’s good. (page 135)

This chapter gives three questions that a wife should ask her husband: “Are you happy?” “What do you see as our most important goal or challenge as a couple if we’re going to improve our relationship?” “What kind of husband and father do you want to be?” Asking these questions and then honestly and kindly listening to the answer will make great strides in discerning the direction of the relationship.

Chapter ten “Stand Up Against the Destruction” gives a suggested strategy to approaching the destructive husband. The author gives Biblical themes and practical safety plans to combat the consequences of the wife’s standing up for righteousness in the relationship. If one begins reading the book in this chapter, ignoring the previous chapters, he may believe that the author is propounding that the wife is in charge of the relationship. The reader must take all the concepts together.

Marriage does not give someone a “get out of jail free” card that entitles a husband to lie, mistreat, ignore, be cruel, or crush his wife’s God-given dignity. (page 157)

Chapter eleven titled “When There is no Obvious Change” explains that a wife may be tempted to allow others to tell her what to believe and do, but the author stresses that a Christian wife has no excuse not to study the Scripture to discern what God would have her do. The concept of “choosing well” is explained. If the wife chooses to stay in the home, then she must stay Biblically – unresentful, submissive. If she chooses to leave the emotional abuse, then she must leave Biblically – humbly, kindly, well-prepared.

In summary, if you stay, stay well. Get help for yourself so you don’t have a breakdown. Distance yourself emotionally. Have no expectations. Connect with other women. Grow, learn, be as healthy and whole as you can while in a destructive marriage.

If you must leave, leave well. Expose his indifference, his verbal abuse, deceit, or whatever is destroying your marriage to your church leaders and separate for the purpose of reconciliation in the hopes that it will bring him to his senses. When you put your foot down and say, “I will not allow myself or the kids to be treated this way anymore. It’s destructive to me, to them and to our marriage,” you are not going against God by speaking the truth in love. You are standing for goodness, for truth, and for the healing and restoration of your marriage. But now you refuse to pretend and stay together at any cost, including your own physical, emotional, mental, or spiritual health. (page 176)

Chapter twelve “Necessary Changes for Marriages to Heal” encourages the wife to analyze the situation before the whole marriage can be restored. “He accepts responsibility.” “He makes amends.” “He displays willingness instead of willfulness.” Then the author gives advice to the husband that may help him analyze his own walk with the Lord and with his wife. These suggested steps are Biblical and practical in nature, simple to accomplish step by step.

Chapter thirteen, “Restoring the Destructive Marriage” is really a continuation of chapter twelve in that it encourages the reader to continue learning from God’s Word, standing for righteousness in the marriage relationship, and maintaining her own safety, sanity, stability, and security. Each of these four concepts (safety, sanity, stability, security) are defined and directions on how to incorporate them into the marriage are given in simple stages. 

Appendix A is titled “Resources for Help” and include immediate help, support resources, educational resources, and a list of treatment groups.

Appendix B is titled “Five Common Mistakes People Helpers Make.”

Any honest Christian must admit that emotional abuse is alive and well even in Baptistic circles. Often the Christian man has his church so deceived that the wife has much difficulty in proving his deceit in the marriage relationship. Every Christian must be on guard to discern emotional abuse and must be prepared to combat it immediately. This book is a very practical. Bible-based approach to refuting the evil in the abusive home.

If the Christian marriage is the basis of society…if the Christian marriage determines the spirituality of the church … if the Christian marriage is a picture of Christ and the church, then this blatant sin against God’s will must be stopped. Now.

 

 

 

 

 

The Lord and the Crockpot

By Jason Tsaddiq

“Good morning, Lord; I’ll be right there.”

After I showered and made myself somewhat presentable to other humans, I met the Lord in the kitchen as I poured the cure-all for all that ails mankind into my favorite mug and began to stroll back into the living room to “officially’’ begin my day with reading His word and having a full conversation with Him. However, He didn’t follow me into the living room.

“Um, Lord?”

“I think we’ll stay here in the kitchen this morning. Don’t you have supper to prepare?”

“Oh, dear! I forgot to plan supper. And I’ve got to teach all day. Wonder what’s in the fridge?”

“Well, let’s look. Oh, what in the world is this?”

“Oh. Well, Lord…. It’s like this…..um.”

“Yes, I see. It’s something that needs to be discarded into the trash immediately, isn’t it, My child?”

“Yes, Lord; You’re right.”

“Okay, now that the odor is out, let’s find something profitable to prepare for your family. Ahh, carrots and celery. Here, lay those on the counter. Prepare a cutting board and a knife and I’ll get out the crock pot.”

“Carrots and celery? I was hoping for prime rib, Lord.”

I thought I heard Him snicker. “You’re not on Bill Gates’ budget; you teach at a Christian school, remember?”

As we worked side by side, we chatted – about my family and their needs and desires, about the neighbor lady who is struggling, and of course, the preacher and his family. 

“Argh! I cut my finger with this knife! Great! Now I’m bleeding all over this carrot. Where’s a clean dish towel when ya need one?”

“My child, be still. Does panic actually help the problem?”

“No. You’re right, Lord. I’ll stand still and watch you heal this and then I’ll rinse off the carrot. Uh…hmmm….a bandaid?  Th..tha…that’s ..that’s all you’re going to do? Your Word tells that You healed a gazillon people; why aren’t you healing this cut? Lord, You’ve raised the dead, made the blind see, and the lame walk. Why can’t you heal this little ol’ cut?”

“Not all my children have the same needs. You, Dear, need to be hindered today. You need to be aware of a particular fault in your humanness. If you waltz through your day with nary a care, you’ll forget Me; won’t you?”

I nodded in agreement, head bowed, tears threatening.

“Ok. Now for the onion. Please, My daughter, grab us an onion.”

“Oh, no, Lord. My family doesn’t like onion. They’re pretty picky and all.”

“But I know what is best for you and your family. Now we can stand here and argue, not getting My will accomplished or you can just find an onion for the pot. 

“Yes, my Lord.”

“Let’s look through the cabinet and see what other items will be good for this soup. Ahh, yes. Just what I was looking for. Your face shows Me that you disapprove of this item too?”

“Um, well. I don’t really see how that flavor is going to mix well with the others. I guess we’ll try it Your way.” I tried not to roll my eyes in front of the One Who sees all.

“Now, the vegetables are in the crockpot. Where are your seasonings and spices?”

“Uh, well, Lord, that cabinet’s rather messy and disorganized. Let’s just skip the seasonings and um, well, ya know, like they say on the Food Network, ‘let the flavors marry.’”

“The spice cabinet, please.”

“Yes, Lord,” as I cautiously, ever-so-slightly opened the door, knowing what would happen. 

It did. Garlic, onion powder, parsley, basil, poppy seeds, mustard seeds – all tumbled out, spreading themselves on the counter and some even bouncing onto the floor.

“Hmmm. Not all of your kitchen is in order, is it? Is there a reason?”

I hesitated, full knowing that He knew my thoughts and intents.

“Well, Lord, I just get busy sometimes and I let some things go; I can’t do everything, ya know, right? I’m only human.”

“Who has asked you to do everything? Who has given you your to-do list?”

“Well, I saw on Pinterest all these cute little things I could do to re-decorate the bathroom and I’ve been overwhelmed with all that and work and family stuff and church stuff.”

“Didn’t I ask you to organize the kitchen the last time we met? I didn’t need your bathroom re-decorated. Why did you choose that chore instead of the chore I asked of you?”

“Lord, I just thought….”

“’You just thought’? Are your thoughts and plans better than mine?”

Ashamed at my disobedience, I bowed my head.

“Now, please add a little salt.”

“Salt? But Lord, salt stings.”

“Yes, I know. Now some pepper.”

“Pepper? But my family doesn’t… Oh, never mind.”

“Now the parsley.”

“Lord, You know all things but parsley sticks in my teeth and I have to stand in front of students and it’s quite embarrassing to have little green flecks stuck in your teeth. Could we use something different?”

“You’re embarrassed about little green flecks? Have you heard about My children who are being persecuted because they claim My name and you’re worried about little green flecks? Do you want to put it in or should I?”

“Oh, no, Lord; I’ll submit.”

“Let’s turn on the pot and go about My business for the day.”

“Are you sure this crock pot won’t catch the house on fire while I’m gone all day?”

“Who made the metal that makes this crockpot? Who made the materials to build this house? Who made you healthy enough to earn money to purchase this house?”

He paused. “And don’t you think it could catch on fire when you’re here? Does your presence protect this house or does Mine?”

I was catching on. Somewhat. I should just do what He says to do.

We drove to school, singing His praises to the radio. Well, I tried to sing and He just listened with a “That’s nice, little girl” look on His face. I was honored though; He could’ve been listening to Ray and Ann Gibbs or a Scovill or Dr. Beal or Mina Oglesby but He was listening to little ol’ me.

I scurried to gather my briefcase and other supplies and rushed to my first hour class, still wondering about the crock pot. How was the soup going to taste, especially with that ingredient of which I didn’t approve?

“Oh, no, Lord; we didn’t put in any meat. The kids need protein for their growing bodies. Oh, the whole meal is ruined!”

“Meat? You want meat? ‘My meat is to do….’” He left the sentence undone. I knew what He was saying: “Do My business and your life will be just fine.”

Teaching is exhilarating. Exhausting, but exhilarating. Except for that one student. He knows everything; at least, he thinks he knows everything. 

Out loud, I said, “Now, a gerund is a verb-looking critter acting as a noun.” Inside, I said, “Lord, he’s raised his hand again. This is the fourth time just this hour. Will You protect me from a law suit if I don’t answer him every. single. time. he raises his hand?”

“Don’t I answer you every. single. time. you raise your hand?”

Out loud, I said, “Franklin, do you have a question? I’m ready to answer it now.”

The day hastened by: busy, busy, busy – answering questions, helping with make-up work for previously absent students, a speech recital practice, a conversation with a colleague – all the while, I was thinking, “Vegetables and salt and pepper and low heat all day? Oh, and that parsley?! I might as well stop by Bojangles on the way home ‘cuz there’s no way that crockpot meal is going to be satisfying.”

And the One Who knows my thoughts simply asked, “Are you trusting me?”

The school day was over and my weary mind was glad! My hungry body was nervous: was supper coming from Bojangles or from the crockpot? Was I going to be fed from His recipe or from mine? Yes, the choice was mine. The power was His.

As I walked into my house, the heavenly aroma of an already-prepared feast awaited me. Oh, the lessons I had learned: God doesn’t need to meet me at the couch to fulfill my needs; He can meet me anywhere, even in the kitchen.  My time with Him must begin with removing the moldy, old sin that’s been hiding in plain sight. He works with each of His children on their level to meet their individual needs. I must obey His commands for future projects to be accomplished smoothly. Embarrassment is nothing when compared to doing His will. And probably the most important lesson: “All things work together for good to them who love God.”

Review of The Weapon of Prayer

By: Jason Tsaddiq

Review of The Weapon of Prayer

E. M. Bounds

Moody Press: Chicago, 1980

Nothing is more important to God than prayer in dealing with mankind. . . Failure to pray is failure along the whole line of life. It is failure of duty, service, and spiritual

progress. . .He who does not pray, therefore, robs himself of God’s help and places God where He cannot help man. (page 9).

Author

Well-known for his series of books on prayer, Edward McKendree Bounds did not start out his life planning to write books. Admitted to the bar before his nineteenth birthday, he soon felt called to preach and left the litigation industry at the age of twenty-four. 

During his second pastorate, the Civil War broke out and he was arrested for sympathizing with the Confederate. Released after a year and a half, he continued his military service, being made chaplain of several troops. Again, being captured, he eventually was released and continued pastoring as the Lord led him.

His wife Emma gave him three children before she died nine years after their marriage. Her cousin Harriet became his second wife.

The final two decades of his life were filled with simple writing, praying, and reading. When he passed to Glory, he was not famous nor popular; however, he had tapped into a simple yet profound truth: prayer is the connection to God Almighty.

The estimate and place of prayer is the estimate and place of God. To give prayer the secondary place is to make God secondary in life’s affairs. To substitute other forces for prayer retires God and materializes the whole movement. (page 12)

Review

No soldier can move effectively if he is not in communication with his commander. In like manner, a Christian must be in constant communication with his Commander; listening, obeying, reporting of his actions must be an ongoing, constant activity. Mr. Bounds repeats his message of the weapon of prayer throughout this entire book, very seldom giving in to the modern author’s temptation to fill a book with funny little examples and dusty anecdotes that may or may not relate to the main Biblical truth being presented. Occasionally he quoted another man such as this example found on page 103: 

Go back! Back to that upper room; back to your knees; back to searching of heart and habit, thought and life; back to pleading, praying, waiting, till the Spirit of the Lord floods the soul with light, and you are endued with power from on high. . .  Samuel Chadwick

His vocabulary is fitting for his time period. No modern slang or examples or expressions are used. However, the sentence structure is more formal than what is currently used; therefore, this is not a book for easy reading. It must be read slowly, diligently, and deliberately. Then it must be acted upon immediately before the seed is snatched. Mr. Bounds recognized that prayer itself is slow, diligent, deliberate work:

Study how to pray, O Preacher, but not by studying the forms of prayer, but by attending the school of prayer on your knees before God. Here is where we learn not only to pray before God but learn also how to pray in the presence of men.

This book should be used for any Christian honestly searching to learn about God and His method of communication. One who struggles with reading should not attempt to conquer the whole book in a week. Probably for the average reader, a month of reading 10-15 minutes a day would give a myriad of prayer-truths upon which to meditate and to practice would suffice. Possibly writing down in a journal the important truths about which God convicts would further cement the truths in the heart. However, a time limit can not truly be given for God may stop the reader at any page.

An honest Christian will be changed by obeying the Bible truths presented in this book.

Chapter titles are as follows:

“Prayer Essential to God”; 

“Putting God to Work”; 

“The Necessity for Praying Men” (very convicting!); 

“God’s Need of Men Who Pray”;

  “Prayerless Christians”; 

“Praying Men at a Premium”; 

“The Ministry and Prayer”;

 “Prayerlessness in the Pulpit”; 

“Prayer-Equipment for Preachers”;

 “The Preacher’s Cry – ‘Pray for Us!’”;

 “Modern Examples of Prayer” (a chapter which includes women of prayer); 

“Modern Examples of Prayer, continued.”

Quotes:

Whatever affects the intensity of our praying affects the value of our work. . . Nothing is done well without prayer for the simple reason that it leaves God out of the account. (page 13)

It is so easy to be seduced by the good to the neglect of the best, until both the good and the best perish. (page 13)

In reality, the denial of prayer is a denial of God Himself, for God and prayer are so inseparable that they can never be divorced. (page 22)

The closet is the garden of faith. (page 41)

Prayer-leadership preserves the spirituality of the Church, just as prayerlessness leaders make for unspiritual conditions. (page 47)

We pray as we live; we live as we pray. Life will never be finer than the quality of the closet. (page 51)

There are certain conditions laid down for authentic praying. Men are to pray “lifting up holy hands”; hands here being the symbol of life. Hands unsoiled by stains of evil doing are the emblem of a life unsoiled by sin. Thus are men to come into the presence of God, thus are they to approach the throne of the Highest, where they can “obtain mercy and find grace to help in the time of need.” 

Here, then is one reason why men do not pray. They are too worldly in heart and too secular in life to enter the closet; and even though they enter there, they cannot offer the “fervent, effectual prayer of the righteous man, which availeth much.  (page 52)

. . . for secret prayer and holy living are so closely joined that they can never be dissevered. (page 92)

Adoniram Judson speaking of the prevailing power of prayer said, “God loves importunate prayer so much that He will not give us much blessing without it.” (page 157)

Chicken Chat #10

By: Jason Tsaddiq

A hen was brooding. The long, rectangular hen house had nesting boxes down each side and she had set up her “nursery” in a nesting box close to a door for which we were thankful since we could reach her and the chicks easily.

We affixed chicken wire to the outside of the nesting box – between the box and the rest of the hen house – to prevent the other hens from messing with the broody hen and her eggs, and eventually, her chicks. We cared for the broody hen daily by bringing just the right amount of feed and water only for her since she would not, and now could not, leave the nesting box.

Soon the eggs hatched and tiny little sounds joined the loud ruckus of the other larger, older, more experience fowl. Again, we cared for the babies as we had cared for their mama – bringing the proper feed and water in a small shallow bowl.

One spring day, I was tending the hen houses. As I approached the house, I heard a cacophony of commotion emanating from the hen house, not an uncommon occurrence. I opened the broody hen’s nesting box from the outside and saw the reason for the disturbance: one of the new baby chicks had some how found its way between the chicken wire and the rest of the hen house. Two or three older, more mature hens were pecking relentlessly at the baby chick who was now stranded: she couldn’t tackle the much larger hens and she could not return to the safety of her nesting box for the chicken wire had been bent back in all the chaos. 

But the most heart-breaking yet cheering aspect of the turmoil was the action of the mother hen: she was ramming her head into the chicken wire, attempting to destroy the one thing that was between her and her baby chick. The wire had been stapled somewhat securely against larger hens but evidently a little space was left unguarded – the little space that the chick found and escaped through. As relentless as the older, more mature hens were pecking, attacking, squawking at the little one, the mother hen was just as relentless in her attempts to protect and save her vulnerable chick. Head butt after head butt against the stapled wire, the mother tried and tried, to the accompaniment of the tiny, little chirps crying for help and the loud, ruckus war-like squawks of the older hens.

Quickly, slender teen son was fetched to crawl into the hen house to rescue the scared, helpless little chick and to return it to its now-bloodied mother. Peace reigned.

Chicken Chat #9

By: Jason Tsaddiq

The hen was brooding. We prepared: special medicated feed is important for the first few weeks of a chick’s life. The eggs hatched much to our excitement. New life is always fun to watch. 

However, as I watched the mother hen, I noticed that she dipped her head into the very shallow feed bowl which contained the medicated feed for the chicks and, in addition, she ate from her own bowl of feed. Always the penny-pinching one, I thought, “We can’t afford to feed this stuff to her, too; it’s just for the babies.”

But as I watched, I saw the chicks imitate her. When she dipped her head, they scurried over and dipped. I thought, “Well, this is the way the babies learn to eat. I guess I can afford it.’

Then I noticed another aspect: she didn’t eat the medicated feed; she only dipped her head into it, signaling its acceptability to her babies. She drank from their very shallow water bowl even though she had a fuller water bowl just out of their reach (to prevent their drowning).

The babies, not discerning enough to do research on their own, trusted their mother hen to teach them properly. Due to the mother’s teaching, the chicks survived and thrived.

When do I “dip my head”? Who is watching me dip my head, signaling acceptability for a younger Christian? When do I not dip my head? Whose head am I watching? Am I Biblically studious enough that I know into which philosophy I can dip and still please my Lord? Is someone, unbeknownst to me, watching my head? Have I dipped well enough that someone wants to follow my example as follow my Lord?