Survivor Digital Songbook Gripe!

I got the Survivor Digital Songbook last week. Basically its the complete score, guitar chord sheets and full text for all songs in all 4 'Survivor' music books on one handy CD. Its only £20 for the printable music for almost 700 songs. Great value.

This way I only need to print out the songs I want and never have to flick past pages and pages of songs I don't want. All good so far.

But I would like to print out the index for the thing - 13 pages of song titles (and composers) arranged in alphabetical order. But on the PDF they have included the index in white text on a black background! 13 pages which are probably over 95% black ink! The thing is designed to be printed out at home, that would use up almost one entire (£15) black ink tank on its own. What idiot had that idea? Aaaaargh!

(any hints on how to invert the colours of a PDF file before printing would be appreciated...)

Answers for the Hillbilly Atheist: Part 6

After a long break... Following on from parts one, two, three, four and five. And responding to these questions.

51. If you think the rest of the world is deceived or mistaken, even though they think their right, then what makes you any different?

For a start, I know the difference between "their" and "they're" :o)
I could be wrong, I'll admit that. But the experiences I have had have lead me to the conclusion that what I believe is at least consistent with the evidence and reasonable.

52. if we are designed so perfectly as intelligent design suggests, than why are there disabled people, retarded, blind, crippled etc.

Intelligent design is a nonsense. The bible does not shy away from the (undeniable) fact that we live in an imperfect world. It also proposes a plan to 'make everything new' and improve things.

53. If your answer to the last question was sin, then why did god make me blind at birth, I hadn’t done anything yet?

That wasn't my answer.

54. Why does god need us to kill animals then his son to forgive us, why couldn’t he just choose not to hold this incredible grudge?

Dunno. I believe the animal sacrifice thing was a way of explaining to simple people that there are consequences for your actions - it costs to fix the problems. And I have no idea why the death of Jesus was required. But I believe it did happen and was required. I know that's not very satisfying for you, but I'm sure there's things you don't understand either.

55. Since god wanted to kill Jesus to forgive us, why didn't he do it right after Adam ate the apple, that way the Jews wouldn't have to live under the oppression of the old testament?

Sometimes the best time to fix something is not immediately after it breaks. Maybe he waited for the right time? Or maybe the original problem wasn't actually fruit-related.

56. Why would a loving god create Parasites and Ebola and rabies or design animals to rip other animals apart and eat them?

Because evolution is not guided evolution.

57. Why is a first cause necessary, why not an infinite regression of causes?

Neither option solves the problem of origins.

58. isn't it such a coincidence that folks tend to believe the religion of their parents?

No. That's just human nature. Its far more interesting to look at those who convert from one religion to another. I know a few former muslims who are now Christians. I know a former muslim who is now a Wiccan, for that matter. I know a few Christians who have 'lost faith' and now are atheists. I know a few former atheists who are now Christians. I don't actually know anyone (or have heard of anyone) who was raised a Christian who now is a muslim.

59. If God has such a tremendous problem with uncircumcised penises, why did he make man with foreskin in the first place?

It was an act of devotion. It wasn't that God has anything in particular against foreskins, its just that it is a demonstrable act of sacrifice.

60. It says in genesis that the sons of god saw the daughters of men that they were fair... now since these "angels were able to copulate does this indicate that angels have a gender and are not spiritual beings. how did angel chromosomes work with the human genome.

Well, you're probably just misunderstanding the passage. What if there was a tribe who called themselves 'Sons of God'? Suddenly its all human.

The power of the devil?

I've touched on this in a previous post, but I want to raise the issue again.

What power does the devil have?

I heard recently of a newborn baby with tumours behind its eyes. The person recounting the news was absolutely convinced that these tumours were a direct spiritual attack - that the devil had caused the baby to be born with these tumours.

Does the devil have the power to do this? Or is this simply the product of a fallen world (i.e. is it just 'life')?

Mulling over my previous observations, I still observe that Jesus only attributes the powers of deception and theft to the devil - he does not give the devil credit for any power over nature. In the gospels, Jesus is the one who the wind and waves obey, not the devil.

Could this be a spiritual attack?

Hell freezes over!

I was at the evening service in the church that I grew up in last night. The church is a 'conservative evangelical' Church of Scotland (Presbyterian) and quite traditional. When I was there, a 'modern hymn' was considered to be anything written after the first world war, and modern 'choruses' were really considered as only fit for the children in the Sunday school to be singing.

When the 'new' minister was inducted in the mid/late 1990s, I predicted that the congregation would be singing 'choruses' within 5 years. It turns out I was wrong. Five years after he took the charge, the music was still firmly grounded in the 19th century. Hymns, organ, that's it.

Imagine my surprise last night to discover not one but three 'choruses' being sung. One of them as even less than 15 years old! (Matt Redman's "I will Offer")

OK, so they still sung them as if they were hymns, but its a step in the direction of the 21st century - and they were even played by a band (piano, guitar, sax, trumpet and even vocals (gasp)).

But for all that, I still felt that the church has a long way to go. The music and sermon were fine and were God centred, but there was no sense of meeting with Him, no sense of an interaction with the Spirit. Which is a shame.

Wine and Heaven

Kind of out of character for me on this blog, but I listened to a downloaded sermon by Rob Bell yesterday which was just great. Its on 'Wine and Heaven'. There was so much insight and interesting stuff crammed into it that I thought I'd encourage you all to listen. Sadly the sermon in question has dropped off the bottom of the Mars Hill downloads page (they only list the most recent 12 sermons) but I have put it on my website for your edification: [click here to download] (12Mb). I can't actually remember the last time I heard a sermon go well past the hour mark and still be interesting...

Communion of the saints?

Last week, the guy who was leading communion in church said something and I've been mulling it over all week without really getting anywhere.

He said that once he was praying for something personal and he had a strong sense that God said to him something along the lines of "you're not the only person praying for this, others are praying for you about this matter, and you do realise that not all of those praying for you are on earth..."

I'm really not sure what to make of this.

I know that Catholic doctrine asserts that the departed saints watch over us and may intercede on our behalf, but I also thought that this was one of the things that got thrown out by protestants in the reformation.

This thought ties in with my earlier thought on what happens when you die. Are dead people really in a position to view what is going on on earth?

Where does this belief come from anyway? Well, the Catholic encyclopedia is quite handy at this point, it says:

"The communion of saints is the spiritual solidarity which binds together the faithful on earth, the souls in purgatory, and the saints in heaven in the organic unity of the same mystical body under Christ its head, and in a constant interchange of supernatural offices. The participants in that solidarity are called saints by reason of their destination and of their partaking of the fruits of the Redemption. The damned are thus excluded from the communion of saints. The living, even if they do not belong to the body of the true Church, share in it according to the measure of their union with Christ and with the soul of the Church..."

But I am slightly concerned that the first passage cited to support this statement comes from the non-canonical Gospel of Thomas.

But biblical origins of this doctrine seem to be based largely in Hebrews 12v1, where it talks about us being surrounded by a 'cloud of witnesses'.

Blueletterbible.org tells me that the word translated as 'witness' here is the Greek word 'martus' which is frequently translated as 'witness' in the NT but is also occasionally translated as 'martyr' (Acts 22v20 when referring to Stephen) or 'record' (Philippians 1v8 - 'For God is my record...'). So it is possible that the Hebrews passage speaks of a cloud of departed souls who are watching us, but it is equally possible that it is saying that we are not alone in our struggle - that we follow in the footsteps of those who were witnesses (and, indeed, martyrs); not that they're witnesses of us now, but they were witnesses for God and Christ.

Surely that is the point of the passage in Hebrews? Not that Abraham and the other heroes of faith are sitting up there watching us now, but rather that when they were alive they lived the life of a witness - they did something. I have always interpreted this passage to imply that given that there were witnesses in the past, there are others like them today - we are still surrounded by living witnesses, even if we don't realise it.

But are the dead witnesses of us now? If so, how can we know that?

Rob Bell: Sex God

You've got to wonder about the ego of a man who can write a book called 'Sex God' - knowing full well it will be listed as "Sex God: Rob Bell" or "Rob Bell: Sex God" in most book listings. But, thankfully, the book is not about the sexual prowess of the author - you buy the thing in Wesley Owen or Eden.co.uk (or your favourite local Christian bookshop) after all...

Just in case you don't know, Rob Bell is the founding pastor of Mars Hill Bible Church in Grandville, Michigan, USA. He is also the man behind the NOOMA videos (someone in your church has watched these already, I bet). This is his second book (I haven't read the first, 'Velvet Elvis', yet).

It says on the cover that it is "exploring the endless connections between sexuality and spirituality". Huh? What endless connections?

As everyone who has ever attended a Christian youth fellowship or youth camp will tell you, the 'sex talk' is always the most eagerly awaited part of the programme or the talk series. Yet it always turns out to be about 'relationships' and not actually about sex; teenagers are always disappointed (primarily because the youth pastor (or whoever) generally doesn't tell folk that it is OK to do what their hormones are telling them too...). For the most part, this is true here too. This is a book about relationships which occasionally strays into 'sex' territory.

But I can't knock it too much. It is well written and exhibits a fair amount of wisdom on the part of Rob Bell. Although, I got the feeling that much of the first half of the book was 'Christianised' common sense rather than original biblical teaching in many ways.

Theologically, Rob Bell seems to hold a few views that are closer to some of my doubts on this web page than to the orthodox 'the bible says it, I believe it' view. Yet (unlike this blog) he doesn't openly question these things, he subtly and carefully avoids the issues. For example rather than addressing the creation story and asking 'did it happen like this?' he frequently refers to it as a 'poem' and leaves it at that. Likewise, he refers to 'the author of the epistle to the [whoevers]' rather than claiming it was Paul who wrote it, and so on. Indeed, have a look at the 'directions' section on the Mars Hill website and you will see that their basis of faith contains very few statements about who God is, how accurate the bible is, etc. It is a pretty woolly basis of faith (but I don't necessarily think this is a bad thing).

I get the impression that 'Velvet Elvis' may challenge some beliefs of orthodox Christians (how're you getting on with it San?). 'Sex God' doesn't. Its more of an 'oh, I'd never thought of it that way before' kind of book. Some bits are interesting, some you've heard before, but it is always well thought through. I guess that this is kind of the sermon notes for a series of talks that Rob Bell delivered some time. It feels like that.

The bit that struck me the most when reading it was the bit talking about Jesus saying "in my father's house there are many rooms..." (John 14v2) - here it is claimed that Jesus is actually quoting from the traditional Hebrew wedding ceremony and this is one of the things that the groom says to the bride - basically, "everything is now ready for you to leave your home and come and live with me..." - I found that very interesting.

Another interesting thought (although RB doesn't claim this as biblical or necessarily true, he just speculates) is what does 'married in the sight of God' mean? As far as God is concerned, when are people married? RB suggests that maybe the act of sexual union is that moment, not saying 'I do' in front of a preist, but the physical union of two people. Maybe we place too much empahsis on the ceremony and miss the point entirely? Or maybe not.

Anyway, its a good read (if a bit 'lite'), and I recommend it.

Beatitudes

Matthew 5v1-12:

Now when he saw the crowds, he went up on a mountainside and sat down. His disciples came to him, and he began to teach them saying:
"Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted.
Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth.
Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled.
Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy.
Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God.
Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven."

"Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you."

Another different perspective from Steve Chalke's book 'The Lost Message of Jesus'...

How many times have I heard this passage preached upon? Probably well in excess of ten times, I'd think. Most of those times, the passage was expounded in such a way as to suggest that the various qualities mentioned (i.e. 'poor in spirit', 'meekness', etc.) are the qualities that a Christian should have.

Steve Chalke suggests that maybe this isn't the case. Maybe Jesus was simply looking around at those around him. He sees some folk who are 'poor in spirit' and says to them 'you are blessed', and so on. The suggestion is that its not a case of 'in order to be blessed you must have these attributes' but rather it is 'you, whoever you are and whatever your status, are blessed by God' - the blessing comes before the transformation, not the other way around. Steve Chalke suggests that the message of Jesus is that God's blessing is available here and now for everyone, not just for those who have a particular set of attributes.

I like this reasoning. But is it right?

Do you need to repent or change in order to get the blessing, or is transformation an inevitable consequence of receiving the blessing?

The ten warnings

Exodus 20v1-3:

Then God gave the people all these instructions: "I am the Lord your God, who rescued you from the land of Egypt, the place of your slavery." "You must not have any other god but me..."

I've started reading 'The Lost Message of Jesus' the controversial book by Steve Chalke. Steve Chalke was on the telly a lot when I was a student, generally trying to play the role of the young, hip & trendy Christian minister on BBC religious programmes. For this reason I never really liked him much. But in this book (which was written a few years ago, but only seems to have become controversial this year) shows a much deeper insight and wisdom than I'd ever given him credit for.

I've heard a few preachers in the past trying to explain why the "I am the Lord your God..." line before the first commandment was so important, but I'd never really got the importance of it until I read the third chapter of Steve's book.

That line is there to put the commandments in context. They're not a list of "thou shalt not do [whatever] or else!" as is the common perception. Rather, the list is more one of warnings: "It would be better for you if you didn't do [whatever] because that action will have negative consequences...". And the consequence is not the wrath of a vengeful God for breaking His law, the consequence is the breakdown of happy family and community life.

All this is conveyed in Exodus 20v2: "I am the Lord your God, who rescued you from the land of Egypt, the place of your slavery."

The point is not "I am a great and powerful God who Lords it over you" but rather "I am the God who loves you, who has already demonstrated this love for you, and who wants the best for you... and the best will only be realised if you avoid doing these things..."

How come I'd never seen it like that before? Has society's negative view of God infiltrated the church so much that we believe in the angry, vengeful God?

---

I'm hoping for more big insights in the rest of the book... and I haven't even got to the controversial bit yet. Watch this space...

What happens when you die?

What happens when you die? I mean, where do you go?

The bible seems to imply that you go directly from death to the judgement, but it also implies that the judgement is at the end of all things.

If time is linear (and I'm not altogether certain that it is), then where do you go between death and judgement? Does anyone actually hang around as ghosts?

My default belief up to this point was that when you die, the part of you that survives the death of the body is somehow taken out of space-time directly to the judgement and the start of eternity, whatever that is. But this is not explained in the bible, this was just the position I came to from various chats and thoughts over the years.

But. Something odd happened a few weeks ago which challenged this view.

Last month, an elderly relative of mine died. The following week three inexplicable things happened to three of her close relatives. Basically in each of the three cases, at night, in locked-up houses, while the folk were asleep, things were moved in inexplicable ways. Each of the three events was totally consistent with the character of the lady who had died. Those involved are quite certain that their Granny came back to visit them.

The thing is, as one relative put it: "If anyone is going to heaven, she is" - she was a committed, faithful and prayerful Christian.

I have always been skeptical of the notion of ghosts. Or rather, I have always been skeptical that the phenomena labeled ghosts are the disembodied spirits of deceased people. Sure, there may be spiritual beings around, but I have never believed that they actually were dead people. But when stuff like this happens in your family, you have to wonder.

What does happen when you die?