Reflections From 1 Corinthians CHAPTER 5: HOW IS ADULTERY AN EXPRESSION OF ARROGANCE RATHER THAN LOVE?  Part 2 (Vvs.6-8)

1-corinthians

We boast in many things, the majority of which tends to be sinful.  Paul indicts the Corinthian church of boasting in immorality (e.g., the son committing adultery with his mother) because they did not discipline this immoral act.  This is perhaps grounded in their perverted view of what it means to have “freedom in Christ” (1 Cor.6:12-20).  The point here is their boasting is sinful because it glorifies sin and Paul uses the metaphor of leaven to explain it:

Your boasting is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump of dough? Clean out the old leaven so that you may be a new lump, just as you are in fact unleavened. For Christ our Passover also has been sacrificed.

The apostle here reminds the Gentile Corinthian church of their roots in the Passover meal which Christ came to personify and fulfill through his death as the Passover Lamb (his body represented in the unleavened bread) holy and pure.

In the beginning of this letter, Paul describes the Corinthians as the “called” and as “saints” even though their lives were imbibing the world’s “wisdom” and its darkness.  The apostle (as God’s divinely appointed spokesman) is commanding zero tolerance for compromise to the Church because like a virus it will spread and eventually destroy the whole body (e.g., leaven, lump, dough).  Moreover, just as Christ is the Passover Lamb who died to sin and is now alive to God, so to the Corinthian’s are to emulate the Master in their sexuality (E.g., Rom.6:1-14), not the wisdom of this world with its’ “enlightened” and “liberated” views of sexual expression that is often praised among the unregenerate.  Paul continues:

Therefore let us celebrate the feast, not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

So, since we belong to Christ and are in this world that’s “leavened-sinful”, we’re to celebrate that feast (i.e., rejoice in God’s holiness that believers partake in) and not go back to “Egypt” into the slavery of the world with it’s greed, malice, wickedness, immorality, etc.  We are to ground our actions in what is sincere (i.e., un-hypocritical) and in the truth (i.e., what’s objectively true—Christ our Passover Lamb, risen from the grave).

The relevance of this passage can’t be overstated.  Adultery, fornication, and all kinds of sexual expression contra God’s design for human flourishing, not human misery, as some contend, are leaving image bearers empty, confused, unfulfilled, and eventually if un-repented of, will take them into a Christ-less eternity (i.e., Hell).

When believers buy into the prevailing “Same-sex” marriage and “Transgender” rhetoric of legitimizing its’ position which is blatantly contra design, are we not drinking in the “wisdom” of this world?  Yes, we are and far from being an expression of love, it’s an expression of treason against the self-existent Creator, who alone is the ground of what is beautiful, good and true, not the finite, feeble, dependent creature.

(SDG)

Advertisements

“MORAL CHOICES: An Introductory Course in Ethics” By Sergio Tangari

definition-of-morality

 It seems that today we’re bombarded with declarations of how we “should” or “should not live”.  The voices are loud and often belligerent.  Consider the latest headlines and moral pronouncements forcefully come through the page, screen, or I-phone.   These assertions come from a variety of sectors (e.g., universities, the media, politics, and friends and family) that operate under a particular worldview which guides how people think and live.

Moral demands and judgments are placed on us all, but how do we determine whether or not they are true and thus ought to be obeyed?   Populace opinions often lack substance yet the views of those that are loudest and strongest, too often mute the voices of those who are not.

As disciples of Jesus Christ, we are called to be salt and light in the world, not retreat from it.  We have a rich tradition of knowledge in in ethics and moral reasoning, so cowering need not be our legacy.  Instead through a little bit of instruction and effort, we can confidently, courageously, compassionately and courteously engage the issues of our day.

Thus, this course is structured to equip believers: to understand worldviews and how they inform moral deliberation, to understand the systems of ethics that people practice, and to engage current issues that are dear to so many.  The goal here is to enrich our personal lives, inform our disciple making and embolden our evangelism so that we can more wisely and confidently navigate the shoals of the cultural landscape.  Click for the notes A2TQ 1_MORAL CHOICES_Considering the Alternatives

Summary of Chapter 2: WHAT IS ECONOMICS? by Ronald Nash

51i-aB7ZPIL._SL500_SX331_BO1,204,203,200_

In chapter two, What is Economics?, Ron Nash argues that economics studies the choices people make with regard to scarce resources which is an unavoidable feature of human existence.  Economic choices often have nothing to do with money, but with what people value most (e.g., goods, plus time, plus priorities=choices presented).   “Stand in line for a ticket or pay someone to do it for me?” the former option may cost less money, but the latter one reveals that my time is more important.  Hence, the two main ingredients in any economic study are scarcity and choice.

When we are talking about Micro and Macroeconomics the former concerns smaller individual persons, households and businesses, whereas the latter examines the aggregate of the micro economic choices, it studies a nation’s economy as a whole.  Here, to best understand how the whole functions, one must understand how the particular human choices are made.  When considering Positive and Normative economics we must understand that each has its place.  The former is descriptive, it tells us what is, the latter is prescriptive, it tells us what ought to be.  When policies intended to help the poor—again define?—actually hurt them, it’s time to re-consider the positive/normative angle being used.

Economics as a Way of Thinking considers the issue of incentives.  The key to economic growth are the incentives people have presented.  The critical factor here is whether or not the incentives given actually empower or enslave people.

Involved here is the benefit to cost ratio (e.g., are unemployment programs more lucrative than getting a job?).  The greater the benefits people expect to receive from the alternatives the more people are likely to choose that option.  The greater the costs expected from an alternative, the fewer people are likely to select it.

Moreover, everything has a price.  Scarcity demands cost for everything.  Again, scarcity, choice and personal value are reflected in people’s decisions where the need to make choices and the relative value placed on given options is seen (i.e., one man’s trash, is another man’s treasure). Perhaps the most alarming issue is that of antipoverty programs that don’t work and remain intact which perpetuate the poverty.  When long-range impact is not considered in any given policy, it’s merely putting a bandage over a cancer.  See quote pg. 21 second  paragraph.

Chapter 3: WESTERN “IGNORANCE” VERSUS EASTERN “CULTURE” (Pgs.55-76)

9780061582615_p0_v1_s550x406

            Contra current notions, Stark insists that Arab elites learned and acquired their sophisticated culture by those they vanquished.  When empires were conquered their particular crafts were learned by Arabs (E.g., Science, Medicine and Mathematics were learned from Nestorians, Persians and Hindus pgs.58-61).  The Arab mindset was one that learning was not required if it did not help one better understand the Quran and said learning is not to be desired if it contradicts the Quran.

Stark also shows that the term “Dark Ages” is a myth not a fact, and shows the many inventions that were created during this period were not grounded in Arab Muslim culture but came from European Christian influence.  See conclusion pg.76 for summary of details.

 Summary of Chapter 1: The Christian War Against Economics from “POVERTY and WEALTH: THE CHRISTIAN DEBATE OVER CAPITALISM” by Ron Nash

51i-aB7ZPIL._SL500_SX331_BO1,204,203,200_The topic of economics is both fascinating and often confusing for the average person.  All of us have a position on what economics is and how wealth is to be used even if we are not immediately aware of it.

In this book, Ron Nash offers some insight into what economics is, how it can be either used or misused, and how a Christian worldview ought to shape minimally professing Christians.

In chapter one, The Christian War Against Economics, Nash shows that to truly help the poor—which he has not yet defined—believers must use good intentions with guided insight concerning economics and what makes for a good or bad economic strategy.  To be in the dark concerning these twin pillars only perpetuates the unwitting darkness being embraced by well-intentioned people.  Moreover, believers must understand that Scripture is often used to propagate a Godless position (i.e., liberation theologians use the Bible to show that God is a Marxist).  Nash purports that “Evangelical publishers like Eerdmans and InterVarsity produce a steady stream of books recommending socialism as the only economic system that is consistent with the Bible.” [pg.11] It seems that at the time of said writing the facts argued contrary to the aforesaid view.

Summary of Chapter 2: CHRISTENDOM STRIKES BACK (Pgs.36-54)

9780061582615_p0_v1_s550x406

In this chapter Stark notes that the defeat in 672 of Muslim attacers on Constantinople occurred for two reasons.  First, Byzantium had made tools sophisticated enough to best Muslim forces.  The Western technology of impenetrable fortifications, along with natural sea barriers contributed to Muslim defeat.  Second, “Greek fire” a catapult with pumps acting as flame throwers could not be matched by Muslim armies.

The Battle of Tours/Poitiers was a fierce engagement where Muslim troops drove deep into Gaul not far from Paris and advanced to victory over the city of Bordeaux and plundered it.  Again, a small Christian army could not stay their own slaughter by the Muslim army at the Battle of the River Garonne.  It wasn’t until the Muslim army met Charles Martel, the ruler of Gaul, that the tables began to turn against the Muslim’s conquest of Europe.

Here, Martel the powerful battle hardened leader led his troops in battle and conquered the Muslims for several reasons according to Stark, the following of which are notable; the Gaul’s were heavily geared as opposed to Arabs lightly geared, the Frankish soldiers were disciplined, Arabs fled because they sensed they were outmatched.

Many historians see this battle as monumental between having an Arab vs. a Western civilization.  Others make little of this battle and Arabs see it as no big deal (Pg.43).  What is certain is that Spanish Muslims understood that their defeat by Charles Martel was had through an empire building people, not mercenaries or a barbarian horde.  The countries of Spain, Italy and Sicily had to also be reconquered.

All these victories preceded the First Crusade.  This means that when the armies and knights of Western Europe marched or navigated to the Holy Land, they were very familiar with their Muslim opponents and knew they could take them.

Now Available in Summary Form: “A CHRISTIAN VIEW OF THE CHURCH” by Francis Schaeffer

IMG_20170911_104955

In  Volume 4_A Christian View of the Church, Schaeffer considers many difficult issues Christendom needs to address if it is going to be salt and light in this world.  Among the issues is orthodox Christian doctrine, which too often is dispersed for peripheral doctrines that don’t hold up the structure of historical Christianity.   We major on the minor issues and ignore the major ones like “the perpetuity of spiritual gifts vs. the Trinity”.  This occurs when we do our theology from a man centered base, not from the God who is there and grounds all absolute truth.

Another issue is that the watching world longs for a love that is real and true.  Believers have an opportunity to demonstrate this love only when God’s truth is their passion and the Lord Jesus is their model.  Too often that’s not the case and God’s name ends up being profaned.   Then there’s the departure from our Reformation roots as evangelicals which has resulted in a loss of confidence in the Scriptures inerrancy and authority, and subsequent promises of blessing and cursing.  This has made the gospel a sham and many of our churches have become tombs for the living dead.  Lastly, if the aforesaid is not reversed, we will be remembered as that generation who talked the talk but did not walk the walk.  To such people Jesus says, “Depart from me I never knew you, you workers of iniquity .”

Summary of Chapter 1: MUSLIM INVADERS by Rodney Stark

9780061582615_p0_v1_s550x406

In this chapter Muslim Invaders, Stark points out that Muslim invaders got their orders from Muhammed who until his death fought, raided and plundered previous Christian lands in accordance with the Quran (Sura 9:5), such that 80 years after Muhammed’s death the Middle East, North Africa, Cyprus and most of Spain became part of the Muslim empire after conquering Christians.

Many historians hold that the Conquest of lands for Muslims was purely economic and also due to a population explosion that never occurred (Pg.14).  Moreover, rather than the hordes of Muslims believed to have invaded, the conquests were won through small, well organized and led Arab armies committed to the spread of Islam (Pg.15).  An example is the conquest of Syria that occurred, among other reasons, because the Arabs were considered liberators to those under Byzantium’s oppressive empire they were welcomed, and when the Byzantine (Greek) armies were overrun, the Arabs soldiers mutinied and fled.

Persia, the Holy Land and Egypt (among others) were also conquered for the following reasons: First, “civilized” empires had no disciplined armies and thus mostly employed foreign soldiers for hire.  The guards who stood inside the fortified cities were merely window dressing not real soldiers.

Second, there was a chronic shortage of troops.  Because Byzantium was so vast, they could not possibly control their borders.  Third, Byzantium’s cavalry were mostly Arabs who sympathized with the Muslim cause and thus would join forces with the Arabs.  Fourth, Muslim soldiers trained since childhood from the same tribes, villages and families.  This created social pressure to never retreat in battle but rather to show their mettle.

Fifth, camels were a superior form of transportation compared to the cavalry of Byzantium.  The desert is the perfect place for the former to last and the latter to perish and thus geography proved to favor the Arabs over against Byzantium if they needed to retreat.

Sixth, smaller Muslim ranks favored rapidly moving in stealth as opposed to the time it took to muster large troops.  Couple this with the Imperial forces lacking tactics when vulnerable and their end was disastrous.

Seventh, Arabs were led by elite warriors who advanced in rank through their own merits, not via birth rite.  Thus, these leaders were battle hardened and more able to succeed in battle compared to the nobles.

Conquered Subjects

            The conquered peoples of the lands were not treated well contrary to popular demand.  Instead the intolerance Islam showed the conquered manifested in the: excessive taxation compared to Muslims; outlawing Jewish or Christians to build sanctuaries of worship, not permitting them to read or pray aloud either publicly or privately; their nobles were burned; their Jewish males beheaded; there was major bloodshed.  The point here is that Jewish and Christians were not the only intolerant peoples, the Muslims were also contrary to popular notions.

Conversions

            A small number of elites governed the non-Muslim (mostly Christian) newly conquered lands.  This means that there were no mass conversions contra to popular notions.  Conversions were either “treaty conversions” or “personal beliefs and practices conversions.”  This means that sometimes tribes (E.g., the Berger Tribe) would convert for weapons, but not really believe the teachings of Muhammed.  Others would convert for fear of their personal safety.  Conversions of conquered people were slow, never quick.

Now Available in Summary Form: “A CHRISTIAN VIEW OF SPIRITUALITY” by Francis Schaeffer

IMG_20170911_104919

In volume three A Christian View of Spirituality, Schaeffer dovetails the thought of the “God who is There”, and considers what spirituality consists of.   He starts off by accentuating the fact that no people are “little” or insignificant because they are image bearers and it’s often the little matters that have monumental consequences in life.  Moreover, true spirituality is always grounded in the thought life where ideas ultimately govern people’s destiny.  Because the life of the mind is downplayed in many Evangelical circles, too many of its’ youth who grow up in church leave the faith never to return.  a major contributing factor is the egregious way God’s word is ignored and handles by leadership.  Sermons are constructed in shallow and glib manners.  This has terrible effects on the witness and vitality of the church.   The remedy is getting back to sound doctrine and living out its implications so that Christ is honored among the nations as the church community is true to the Lord. Follow the link Volume 3_A Christian View of Spirituality  and enjoy friend.

Summaries of GOD’S BATTALIONS: The Case for the Crusades by Rodney Stark

9780061582615_p0_v1_s550x406

Introduction: GREEDY BARBARIANS IN ARMOR? (Pgs.1-9)  In this introduction, Stark points out that there are two very different accounts of the Crusades, the reason for them, etc.  One is the Traditional view and the other is the Enlightenment view.  On the one hand, the Traditional View states that converts to Islam—the Turks, had invaded and conquered Jerusalem unprovoked.  Moreover, they invaded the Middle East and grossly treated it’s captors through rape, torture, and inhumane atrocities.  Alexius Comnenus the emperor of Byzantium called for Rome’s help before they too would be slaughtered.

On the other hand there’s the Enlightenment View which says that the crusades were realized through an expansionist imperialistic Christendom that brutalized, looted and colonized a tolerant peaceful Islam.

However, post 9/11 this issue is bigger than ever before to revisit. If we consider the twisted and cowardly way the media covers Islam, the inanity of political correctness which refuses to look at Islam’s darker side, and the fearless way in which Christendom’s worldview is smeared that makes our fleeting way of life so precious, re-thinking the crusades and what is “common knowledge” must be revisited.  Beware Christian pacifists!