I’ve been a bit intrigued by certain elections taking place last night. Especially the NJ governors race.  It was interesting and provided a bit of satisfaction to see Corzine the incumbent in NJ go down in defeat to the Republican Christie.

During Corzine’s concession speech, one of his final remarks was that he hoped New Jersians would be able to “Live the life that America has promised them.”    WHAT?  What life has America promised anyone?  It was just one more chant for spreading the wealth the progressives have been clamoring for since Obama let slip his comment to Joe, the plumber during his campaign.

The only life “America” has promised anyone is that laid out in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Documents that most progressives would soon did not exist. The only life “America” has promised anyone is the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, not on the backs of others but through personal responsibility and hard work.  The only life “America” has promised anyone is the one where we take care of our citizens not by coddling them but by giving them a hand when they need it and offering a free market of ideas and labor when they don’t.  There is no free lunch! Everyone doesn’t win. Entitlements are not long-term benefits for the lazy.

America’s promise to all who live legally within her borders – OPPORTUNITY. The opportunity to live unfettered by burgeoning government and meddling bureaucratic nincompoops who, for whatever reason, think they know more than the citizens who elect them and pay their salary.

Recently, for reasons mostly related  to work, I installed the new Windows 7 OS on both my laptop and desktop. For all intents and purposes things went smoothly on both. However, there were some problems on my laptop that were very frustrating but resolved to a large degree.  Each unit experienced difficulty with a reinstall of Security software. Those issues were also resolved with a bit of perseverance and a bit of technical assistance from the manufacturer.  While working on some of the issues with my laptop, a tech friend pointed me to a couple of different web browsers other than Windows Internet Explorer.  One was Google Chrome and the other was Opera.  Of course, I wanted to try them both and found each to be much faster and more efficient than IE. Each have features I like and some I don’t like. I’m not sure whether that’s because I have been accustomed to IE over the years or my learning curve is much longer than it use to be. Either way, it’s been interesting learning my way around these other programs.

Over the years I’ve also found myself experiencing different translations of the Bible. I’m never quite certain why there are so many biblical translations, even “eco-friendly” versions. Some are done for politically correct reasons – neutral language and the like, and others are done simply because they have a different theological viewpoint to promote Currently I use the Reformation Study Bible which is an ESV version. Prior to that, I used The New Oxford Annotated Bible NRSV, that one has probably been my favorite. Prior to that it was the New American Standard, before that the NIV, and prior to that the RSV and the of course there was the infamous King James Bible. Heck, even some of them were “red letter” Bibles. It’s always good to know when Jesus is talking and when he’s not.

I suppose each translation served to reflect a particular era in my theological journey. Some were chosen because they were the “in” translation at the College or Seminary I was attending. Some because is what my professors used or my pastor used. Others, I selected simply because I liked them.  My wife uses the New Living Translation and she likes it a lot. Me, not so much.  I’ve also used different translations in my study – but most of those are electronic versions all the way down to the Good News Bible.

Some people I know have used the same translation – sometimes the same Bible – all their lives. I’m not sure I would like that. It certainly prevents wrestling with different nuances of translation, but it does not necessarily serve to open the mind to new thoughts and ideas.

I’ve about run the course with the Reformation Study Bible and plan to move back to the NRSV. Not that I do not like the ESV translation, heck, I even have the behemoth ESV Study Bible sitting on my desk. Rather, I believe out of all of them I still prefer the scholarship of the NRSV.  Plus, I prefer more neutral notes in my study bible rather than notes with an obvious theological underpinning as in the Reformation Study Bible.

New things are good. Trying new things can open our mind and challenge us to learn and stretch our imagination.  But there is something about the familiar that beckons us to return. Perhaps, after a few weeks and months playing around with Opera or Google Chrome, I may find myself back at the familiar Internet Explorer. Until then, I’ll enjoy the experience of new things and see if I can master them to some degree.

As many of you, I get emails from well intended folks, sometimes family members, that proclaim a “spiritual” message and then impose a bit of guilt if you happen to be the one that does not forward the email to your friends and family.

That whole process bothers me.

I received such an email today and here are its final words:

This is the simplest test. If you Love God, and are not ashamed of all the
marvelous things he has done for you.. Send this  on .  A nation no longer under God is a nation gone under.

Now as well intended as that message is I’m not certain about “A nation no longer under God is a nation gone under.” Aren’t there many nations around the world that might be considered as “no longer under God,” if they ever were in the first place?  Most of them exist today and seem to fair a bit better than we are as a country right now. 

Having founding fathers that attempted to establish our nation with a spiritual birth right as “One Nation Under God….” does not necessarily give us a guarantee of prosperity or longevity. To think that is rather elitist in my opinion. We get so absorbed in our Western culture mentality that we often fail to realize there is a huge portion of the globe that finds its strength in  deities other than ours. Does that make them doomed?  Spiritually perhaps as they live without the gospel, but I suspect in no other way.

It’s accurate to believe a culture without the underpinnings of faith can find itself mired in all sorts of difficulties – morally, monetarily, and otherwise. Yet, this country, from its very beginning has struggled with many issues that we prefer to sweep under the rug -slavery is just one example. Does that make us less faithful or spiritual or God-dependent?   Have we lost our moral compass because our whole society is not on the “Jesus Saves” bandwagon?  Has there ever been a time when a whole culture was wholly committed to the God of the Bible?

I’m no historian or anthropologist, but it seems that over the centuries cultures have come and gone. Cities, towns, people-groups have risen and fallen perhaps not so much because they didn’t believe, but because they could not adapt. Perhaps we, as a nation, will find ourselves in that same predicament.  To think it could not happen to us is indeed rather elitist.

I’m heading full speed ahead toward the big 6 0 and this is one of the few times in my life when I’ve tried to be engaged in government affairs and how the action of the federal government shapes personal lives and history in general.  Quite frankly, I don’t like it.  Yes, I’ve voted regularly in national elections in the past, not so much in local elections. However, much of the time I was voting against someone or something instead of voting for someone or something. That’s never good.  And yes, I would suspect folks would label me as a conservative.

What concerns me about engagement is what you learn. You learn there are different standards for those in Washington DC and the rest of the world. You learn that politicians, in general, really don’t listen to their constituents unless it happens to be an election year. You learn that it’s all about control. If a particular party controls a branch of government then the country plays by their rules.  In this particular time, we are learning that the rules are more than partisan, they are down right in-your-face, personal, and often vindictive. For example, the current administrations attack on the FOX News Network.  What has Fox done to deserve this dubious target?  From what I have observed, whether it is opinion pieces or hard news, they have attempted to present the facts as they find them or as they are fed them from Washington. Then they make an effort to verify the “facts.”  If that is offensive to the White House, then perhaps they should counter with facts not attacks.

I’ve also learned over the years that being engaged in local congregations can bring it’s own issues. I suspect that is why I find it hard to be comfortable or find a place where we feel comfortable in worship and Bible study.  Some of the problem is a result of my getting-off-the-couch spiritually and thinking for myself when I read scripture and attempt to extract its meaning. I’m not content to have someone tell me what to believe, I want to learn it for myself and decide the merits of certain political issues.  For example, when we were attending a PCA church and taking a doctrine class. I wanted to be engaged in dialogue about the issues presented, not simply acquiesce to what was being taught. That proved uncomfortable for many, including myself, and often bordered on confrontational.  However, the seeds planted there have caused me to read scripture with a more critical eye when it comes to Calvinistic tendencies and the merit of such a theology.  Which in turn has fostered an examination of long held beliefs that, on occasion, must be abandoned.  That’s uncomfortable but refreshing in its own way.

I’m reading the Book of Daniel now. It’s one of the most challenging books in Scripture because of its supposed apocalyptic tendencies and it’s extended prophecy. Naturally, commentators of all sorts have opinions about the sitz in leben for the book and whether or not it foretells the exact year of the coming of the Messiah and what the end times will be like. This makes for interesting reading however I’m not certain those positions are always correct. Twenty years ago I would have swallowed it all hook line and sinker, but now I’m a bit more skeptical about what I read and whether it not it meshes appropriately with that the evidence shows.  Of course, in certain settings and with certain people, if you offer differing opinions it is seldom accepted and one is often isolated as not being in step with the teachings of scripture.  So much for being engaged.

I like engagement…even with its baggage. No, it is not all it’s cracked up to be – it can leave you scratching your head wondering “Why don’t they see that?”

Recently my sister in-law sent me a video clip entitled “Did Jesus Reveal the Name of the Anti-Christ?”  If I can do this correctly, here is the link to that video clip.  Besides the content of the clip it was interesting that the author ended the piece with something like, “here are the facts – you decide.”  Rather Fox Newsish but also rather misleading.

I’ll be sixty years old soon. I’ve been involved in the faith at one level or another for over forty of those years and I can’t tell you the number of times this issue of the anti-Christ has come up with one leader or another. That and the assignment of the number 666 to one name or another. You would think after a while, folks would simply not do this any more because in my opinion it discredits the value and credibility of scripture and the Christian faith.

Now on face value, the author is basically correct in his terms and their definitions. But there is more to the “story”. For example Strong’s word H1116 baw-maw is the same word used for “high places” several times in the OT.   The word used for “lightning” (Strong’s H1299) is used sparingly and refers both to the phsyical event and figurative.    Not sufficient evidence especially if one realizes that his primary text reference starts with Luke 10:18 and in the context has nothing to do with naming anyone or anything other than an event related to the Satan. And, I might add, Satan and the anti-Christ are not the same.

These kind of things would be funny if it were not for the fact that many people take them seriously. Do I think BHO is the anti-Christ? No.  Is he acting like an anti-Christ? I tend to think so.  Does his personal faith, which he says is Christian, influence his policy? I’m of the opinion that it does not. In fact, if it were not for his admission to faith, I would suspect he is agnostic. And, I suspect, like the many others who have come before him, labeled as the anti-Christ, he will come and go – hopefully after one term.

Do the facts support Christ naming the anti-Christ. I don’t believe so. Just like contorting the numbers 666 to assign them to the name of Hitler or other characters of history. People in the faith must do better than this.