So Where Were You When God Called You into the Belief---I mean Truth?

So Where Were You When God Called You into the Belief-I mean Truth?


"I don't know anything that gives me greater pleasure, or profit either, than talking or listening to philosophy. But when it comes to ordinary conversation, such as the stuff you talk about financiers and the money market, well, I find it pretty tiresome personally, and I feel sorry that my friends should think they're being very busy when they're really doing absolutely nothing. Of course, I know your idea of me: you think I'm just a poor unfortunate, and I shouldn't wonder if your right. But then I don't THINK that you're unfortunate - I know you are."
(Plato)

"The difference between a man who is led by opinion or emotion and one who is led by reason. The former, whether he will or not, performs things of which he is entirely ignorant; the latter is subordinate to no one, and only does those things which he knows to be of primary importance in his life, and which on that account he desires the most; and therefore I call the former a slave, but the latter free."
(David Hume, 1737)

What happens when one is faced with the reality that ones truth is not really true? What do Christians, of all types, do when their truth turns out to be merely a belief that has been found wanting?

Years ago I gave a sermon using the then new and fascinating 3D art form where one had to practically go into a trance, release the fixation on the wavy pattern of nonsensical forms and let the mind sense another way of looking before one could see that, indeed, there was a 3D picture of ships and sharks staring you right in the face. I had this picture on a tripod by the lectern during the sermon which was on "Can you see it?" I suppose the point at the time was seeing the truth etc. What was fascinating was the crowd that gathered around the picture after the sermon to try and see what I saw and indeed, was there to be seen.

Some saw it right away and gave themselves a big pat on the back and acted like it was no big deal. They became the instant experts at helping others "see" it too. They pontificated on how to look, how to stand, how to relax ones eyes etc, and to their dismay, most could not do it with the pressure they were putting on them to "see it." The one or two who did received a great congratulations which was really the zealot congratulating himself for being such a good teacher.

Others were quiet, not needing help, nor wanting it. They would figure it out. Some quietly did and some did not and just wandered away perhaps feeling a bit dumb for not being able to see it or wondering if everyone that did see it was nuts. Some rejoiced when they finally could see the ships and sharks and some got mad when they couldn't and never did. It was fascinating and I learned more about how we see the truth of something after the sermon than I did in giving the sermon.

The fact is that a belief is just that and not necessarily a truth or the truth. We all have believed many things that turned out not to be so true from the not so reality of Santa Claus to the idea that perhaps I was not a part of the one really really true, only and exclusive Church of God. But belief goes further than that and mere belief in something does not make it truth by any means, or there would not be so much disagreement, for example on the doctrines, history, meaning and intent of God, the Prophets, Jesus, the Disciples, Paul, and all the so called "early Church (which Church?) Fathers.

Other impediments to the truth are the following beliefs. It should not be such a threat to question these core beliefs, but in fact, one might never come to see anymore truth if one gets stuck in these erroneous beliefs.
The Bible says it, I believe it, that does it for me"

To which we might add. "Darwin said it, I believe it, that settles it." If you think this is a silly reason for accepting evolution, you know why "The Bible says it, I believe it, that settles it" is a silly reason for accepting Creationism. But the evolution side does not use that argument: the Theory of Evolution is based on evidence, not Darwin's authority.

The Bible is literally true

To which we might add...There are many things in the Bible that are not literally true or did not literally happen. Yet to even hint at this is to raise the ire of fundamentalists. Joshua did not really raise his arms and stop the earth from rotating which is what stopping the sun from going down for "about a whole day" really is all about. Yet we struggle with thinking we simply have to believe that is literally true or God will be angry at us and label us as weak in the faith. Ok, well it won't really be God letting you know that, but it might be your Pastor.

The Bible says it is true

To Which we might add the Bible also calls a bat a bird which we know is not true or that snakes and donkeys can talk at times and do. It tells us humans can survive ovens, Fiery Chariots pick up the good guys so they can skip death, iron floats, fish deliver loose change and hundreds of other things that it is not my intention to remind us of, but you know them well. It also says women come from men and not men from women and I KNOW you don't believe that..at least not literally.

Prophecies prove the accuracy of the Bible.

To Which we might add that both Ezekiel and Isaiah prophesied different fates for the City of Tyre and neither one of them came true and Tyre stands to this day. Prophecies about Egypt also failed to materialize and adjustments to reality are obvious in much of what Ezekiel writes about. The idea that many "prophecies" in Daniel are so accurate because they were written after the fact never crosses the readers mind and enrages the fundamentalist and apologist.

The Bible must be accurate because archaeology supports it.

To which we might add that archaeology also does not verify Biblical stories as well. No evidence has ever been found in the Sinai of millions of people having passed through specific places in the wilderness, not with ground nor satellite surveys. And many never think that real place names can be used to tell stories that are not literally true as well. The literally true place name does not make the story true. The Angel Moroni gave Joseph Smith the Gold Plates, now conveniently unavailable, to start the Mormon faith at Hill Comorah in NY. I have been to the literally real Smith farm in NY and grew up where this literally false story took place and on which millions of Mormons base their literal beliefs.

Bible's accuracy on other scientific points shows overall accuracy.

To which we can add that the Bible makes some very big blunders in scientific observation. The sun does not rise in the east nor really go down in the west as we know even though a modern apologist would insist that is only an explanation of an apparent truth just as we today know it is the earth that rotates. Well, the inspired Bible did not know that back then. To the bible characters, the earth was indeed flat. The "circle of the earth" was not a ball, it was their idea of a round plate 360 degrees around them, not a sphere. Its what they saw when they turned in a circle , not what they knew was beneath their feet. Satan could show Jesus all the Kingdoms of earth because the earth was flat and they could be "seen" from a "high mountain."

The 29,000 feet high Himalayas were not covered by flood waters and did exist a mere 4000 years ago no matter what apologetic geo-creationists come up with. That much water would drain no where and only penguins and polar bears would survive the adventure on the ark if they could breath.

The Bible is harmonious in it's presentation

To which we could say it absolutely is not. I challenge anyone to sit down with the Gospels and try to put together a coherent account of what happened at Jesus birth or death from the "harmony of the Gospels." If you think it will be easy, or can be done with the proper approach, you are kidding yourself. If you think you can explain why Jesus chased the money changers out of the temple at the beginning of his ministry in John but at the end of his ministry everywhere else, go ahead. You'd have to say he did it twice. If you think you can reconcile Luke's account of Paul's conversion in Acts, and Paul's account in Galatians, go for it. You won't the first nor come up with a satisfactory solution. Of course, some, who need the belief of inerrancy to be true will satisfy themselves but it still will not be true.

It is not my purpose to prove these points one way or the other. It is merely my point to show how these ideas are what hold a belief in place that perhaps is not, in fact, the truth of the matter. There are hundreds of sites dedicated to both the defense of the Bible as literally true and sites showing how this is not really the case. I happen to be of the "not really the case" persuasion after spending decades sincerely developing a belief that I thought was true and was found wanting...for me. In reality, I consider it neither my business nor responsibility to any longer convince anyone of anything they simply are neither willing to consider nor able to "see."
For me, the joy is in the search for meaning and, yes, I still want to know the truth as it really is. That path has never changed in me and it began when I was a very young and precocious kid.

... it's quite true that the best of the philosophers are of no use to their fellows; but that he should blame, not the philosophers, but those who fail to make use of them. (Plato, 380BC)

And isn't it a bad thing to be deceived about the truth, and a good thing to know what the truth is? For I assume that by knowing the truth you mean knowing things as they really are. (Plato)

A human being is part of the whole called by us universe, a part limited in time and space. We experience ourselves, our thoughts and feelings as something separate from the rest. A kind of optical delusion of consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from the prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty. The true value of a human being is determined by the measure and the sense in which they have obtained liberation from the self. We shall require a substantially new manner of thinking if humanity is to survive. (Albert Einstein)

'... I have a right to ask for a rational explanation of religious faith.' (Cicero)

So, how's the journey going for you personally in looking for "the truth." Is it not like that 3D confused patterned art in which someone managed to place a beautiful picture if only one could see it . Some will insist there is only that one true and obvious confused picture and there is nothing more to understand about it. Some will catch a glimpse only to have it fade and never be able to see it again. Some will see past the pattern to the 3D picture that really really is there and be amazed they didn't see it before. And of course some will just get angry and stay mad that they can't see it and that you and I are idiots for thinking we do.

Never confuse mere belief in ideas for the truth of the matter....

This is a lifelong process and we are all here to learn.

 

Dennis Diehl

DennisCDiehl@aol.com

UCG Philippines Ministry Now Starting to Resign 1/8/2011

New COGaWA Locomotive Is Barreling Out of the Station!

January 7, 2011 – Today Feast Coordinators, camp directors and youth corps administrators met to consider the needs of the members of the Church of God, a Worldwide Association in these respective areas. While the number of members needing these services is still undetermined, potential Feast of Tabernacles sites, youth camps and international service projects were considered.

Yesterday several committees met to work on assignments. The interim governance committee chaired by Dave Baker met to refine three options it will present to the ministry on how to function until a permanent form of governance and leadership is selected.
The immediate administrative needs committee chaired by Dave Johnson also met on Thursday to work on the recommendations it will give to the interim leadership team that will be selected by the end of the conference. Of particular focus was the financial need of congregations, ministers and the organization.

The pre-conference leadership team also met yesterday and asked an international attendee, Andre Van Belkum of New Zealand, to give the closing address to the elders and guests on Tuesday.

As for yesterday's meeting of the long-term governance committee, Chairman Bruce Gore explained that the committee created a mission statement for itself and discussed the pros and cons of centralized and decentralized governance. This committee's job entails reviewing biblical guidelines for governance and recommending governance options to the elders. Although specifics have not been determined, consensus is building among members of the committee for recommending a centralized structure that will seek to be inclusive of members and minimize politics.

The mission statement of the long-term governance committee is: "Our mission is to recommend a structure founded upon biblical principles by which this new organization will be administered and to propose to the elders this structure for their consideration."

A Man Walks Into A Bar And Starts A New Church

No, this is not some UCG splinter church, even though they do love their alcohol.....

Read the article here: Star Tribune Article 
and here: Parliament of Religions.org

"Father, thank you for this time we can share on Sunday morning with new friends," prayed Chris Fletcher, an emergency medical technician, part-time bartender and seminary student who has led this service every Sunday morning at Dunnigan's Pub & Grub since last summer. "We're getting to know you, and getting to know each other better."

Spending Sunday mornings in a bar sounds like an activity for those running from God. For this small group in a watering hole in Twin Harbors, about 160 miles northeast of Minneapolis, it's about chasing God. It's one unconventional place of worship around the country fostered by an evangelical movement known as "the emerging church."

"I feel closer to God here than I do at a conventional church," said Nelson, 56, a lifelong churchgoer who until recently could be found every Sunday morning in the pews at First Baptist Church nearby. "Jesus said we're supposed to be a light to the world. What better place to do that than at a bar?"

After the opening prayer, Fletcher read a brief passage from the Bible before opening the floor to a group discussion. Gene Shank, a 68-year-old retired police officer making his first visit after reading a notice Fletcher put in the local newspaper, confessed to a bit of discomfort.

"I'm a reality person, and I'm finding a little too much established religion here to be honest," Shank said. "I believe, I pray — but I don't like structured religion."

Fletcher responded that, while he wants to be as informal as possible, the main goal is still "creating an open space for Jesus to come into our lives, then he does the transforming work."

He quickly adds that anyone who questions the way he's running the service has come to the right place.
"We're all messed up," he said. "We're all screwed up some way."

Fletcher, a stocky, balding 43-year-old with a bristly goatee, is his own first example. The native of Sudbury, Ontario, grew up in the Worldwide Church of God, a small evangelical sect he described as "almost cult-like." He left religion behind as a young man, but was drawn back as he was hitting 40 and experiencing a series of personal crises: the death of a close friend in an auto accident and the dissolution of his marriage.

Mammas Don't Let Your Babies Grow Up To Be Pastors

I Know you Are, But What Am I?---No one is ever WRONG

I have met a lot of people who are never wrong. They never take back that which they spoke which proved to be either stupid, inane or simply wrong. They waffle, redefine and deny, but they are never wrong. These people are incapable of saying "oops," much less, "I'm sorry," You find them everywhere. They might be a pastor, a politician, a CEO or a President. They might be your mother- in-law, father-in-law, dad, mom, brother or sister. Of course, it could be you, but you won't notice that. One common thing they share is that they are NEVER wrong. Of course they are wrong, misinformed or just plain stupid in the way they view and filter their world, but they are never wrong in fact. Their inability to say "I am sorry," or "I was wrong," is legendary in the family, the church, the office or the government and the damage inflicted on those that fall victim of these people can be humorous, mildly annoying or catastrophic.

Politicians who call people names and then say they didn't, or knew it was an insult but claim being oblivious to the fact, are this kind of which I speak. Men who can't come up with anything better to say than "she's ugly" and then waffle around trying to come up with another reason as to why they say such stupid things fit the bill too. "Im sorry, I was rude and wrong," will do just fine. After years of being told we are going to "stay the course," we now are being told that never meant this or that when it did as it was thrown back in the faces of those that asked about rethinking the course.

The average American is not stupid when they hear the answers given to questions by those that really don't want to give the answer. We even mostly know the answer before we ask the question and we certainly can tell when the answer given is not the real answer. How many "oops, sorry about that," have we heard after these great observations and declarations? How many White House press briefings can you listen to before you realize either, "the guy is lying," waffeling or they must think we are absolutely brain dead and stupid.

Let's have some fun seeing where "I'm sorry, I was mistaken," never seems to reveal it's graceful presence.

"Now that the combat phase of the war in Iraq is officially over, what begins is a debate throughout the entire U.S. government over America's unrivaled power and how best to use it."
(CBS reporter Joie Chen, 5/4/03)

"Congress returns to Washington this week to a world very different from the one members left two weeks ago. The war in Iraq is essentially over and domestic issues are regaining attention."
(NPR's Bob Edwards, 4/28/03)

"Tommy Franks and the coalition forces have demonstrated the old axiom that boldness on the battlefield produces swift and relatively bloodless victory. The three-week swing through Iraq has utterly shattered skeptics' complaints."
(Fox News Channel's Tony Snow, 4/27/03) I think we can see why Tony may have gotten the job White Press Secretary...

"The only people who think this wasn't a victory are Upper Westside liberals, and a few people here in Washington."
(Charles Krauthammer, Inside Washington, WUSA-TV, 4/19/03)

"The war was the hard part. The hard part was putting together a coalition, getting 300,000 troops over there and all their equipment and winning. And it gets easier. I mean, setting up a democracy is hard, but it is not as hard as winning a war."
(Fox News Channel's Fred Barnes, 4/10/03)

"The war winds down, politics heats up.... Picture perfect. Part Spider-Man, part Tom Cruise, part Ronald Reagan. The president seizes the moment on an aircraft carrier in the Pacific."
(PBS's Gwen Ifill, 5/2/03, on George W. Bush's "Mission Accomplished" speech)

"We're proud of our president. Americans love having a guy as president, a guy who has a little swagger, who's physical, who's not a complicated guy like Clinton or even like Dukakis or Mondale, all those guys, McGovern. They want a guy who's president. Women like a guy who's president. Check it out. The women like this war. I think we like having a hero as our president. It's simple. We're not like the Brits."
(MSNBC's Chris Matthews, 5/1/03)

"If image is everything, how can the Democratic presidential hopefuls compete with a president fresh from a war victory?"
(CNN's Judy Woodruff, 5/5/03)

"It is amazing how thorough the victory in Iraq really was in the broadest context..... And the silence, I think, is that it's clear that nobody can do anything about it. There isn't anybody who can stop him. The Democrats can't oppose--cannot oppose him politically."
(Washington Post reporter Jeff Birnbaum-- Fox News Channel, 5/2/03)

Often those who find it difficult to say "I was wrong," or "I am sorry," are very quick to accuse everyone else of that inability, only to later have to eat the proverbially crow, though it still always tastes like steak to them.

"I'm waiting to hear the words 'I was wrong' from some of the world's most elite journalists, politicians and Hollywood types.... I just wonder, who's going to be the first elitist to show the character to say: 'Hey, America, guess what? I was wrong'? Maybe the White House will get an apology, first, from the New York Times' Maureen Dowd. Now, Ms. Dowd mocked the morality of this war....

"Do you all remember Scott Ritter, you know, the former chief U.N. weapons inspector who played chief stooge for Saddam Hussein? Well, Mr. Ritter actually told a French radio network that -- quote, "The United States is going to leave Baghdad with its tail between its legs, defeated." Sorry, Scott. I think you've been chasing the wrong tail, again."

And we're waiting to hear a few words of apology from a few people as well... It's always good for those given to high fiveing themselves before the time to think before they speak and remember that labeling people for their caution, disagreements, observations, intuitive and gut feelings about that which no one else seems to be thinking about, can come back to haunt them. Too much enthusiasm for "see, see, we're right, you're wrong," and all the backbiting that goes along with it has a way of showing up again to challenge the braggarts. We all have done it and we all do it, but when the stakes are as high as they are these days for all of us, the inability to say, "I am sorry," I was wrong," or "I made a mistake," is no statesman like quality. It can lead to everything from economic disaster to death, and it was not necessary.

"Over the next couple of weeks when we find the chemical weapons this guy was amassing, the fact that this war was attacked by the left and so the right was so vindicated, I think, really means that the left is going to have to hang its head for three or four more years."
(Fox News Channel's Dick Morris, 4/9/03)

"This has been a tough war for commentators on the American left. To hope for defeat meant cheering for Saddam Hussein. To hope for victory meant cheering for President Bush. The toppling of Mr. Hussein, or at least a statue of him, has made their arguments even harder to defend. Liberal writers for ideologically driven magazines like The Nation and for less overtly political ones like The New Yorker did not predict a defeat, but the terrible consequences many warned of have not happened. Now liberal commentators must address the victory at hand and confront an ascendant conservative juggernaut that asserts United States might can set the world right."
(New York Times reporter David Carr, 4/16/03)

"Well, the hot story of the week is victory.... The Tommy Franks-Don Rumsfeld battle plan, war plan, worked brilliantly, a three-week war with mercifully few American deaths or Iraqi civilian deaths.... There is a lot of work yet to do, but all the naysayers have been humiliated so far.... The final word on this is, hooray."
(Fox News Channel's Morton Kondracke, 4/12/03)
Oops...Can we all give a collective Homer Simpson " Doh!".

"This will be no war -- there will be a fairly brief and ruthless military intervention.... The president will give an order. [The attack] will be rapid, accurate and dazzling.... It will be greeted by the majority of the Iraqi people as an emancipation. And I say, bring it on."
(Christopher Hitchens, in a 1/28/03 debate-- cited in the Observer,
3/30/03)

I'm sure some of these commentators have since admitted to having been a bit prematurely enthusiastic for that which, to date, has proven to be one the biggest miscalculations in American history. The "V" word has even been spoken by the man who we may have hoped had learned something from his generations experience with Vietnam. Of course most of us are not privy to other agendas besides spreading freedom around the world.

Ministers are not above the inability to say I am sorry or I was wrong either. I pastored in a denomination that was never wrong from the top down, but always wrong from the bottom up. Come to think of it, that sounds like the government too at the moment or maybe all moments. Countless, and I mean countless ministers have predicted the exact time that Jesus would return and have been wrong, oh let's say...100% of the time.

Whole denominations have mislead the faithful on a myriad of topics but to say "We're sorry, we were wrong," is just not something even the humble in Jesus can come up with very often. Saying one is sorry is usually something that occurs only after one is caught or trapped. It's has taken over 400 years to absolve the then heretic Galileo from thinking the earth revolved around the sun and that the sun, not the earth, was the center of the solar system, but maybe not the universe. Churches hold on to their fables and apologies way beyond what most normal institutions do. How long will it take to apologize when Church officials decide that Limbo is not the place where the unsaved babies go, like they know, when they announce this reality to the faithful? You can bet you will hear things like, "It was never a doctrine," or "It never was an official teaching," but you won't get away with that kind of "we're sorry," with the average person who was either tormented or only mildly comforted by this when they lost a child prior to the arrival of the sprinklers. Too many ministers have the subconscious belief that if they are wrong, God will correct them and, of course, any apologies or admissions of wrongness will be spoke privately to the deity. They will, however, announce to you that they have done this, but you will never really know. Ministers need to apologize to people for it is people they offend at times.

Some of us can't say we are sorry or we were wrong because we falsely believe that somehow it a weakness to admit such things. More than one psychologist has noted that "Fool me once..shame, shame...on...you," is not so much a gaff as the deeply psychological inability to say "shame on me," which is another way of not being able to admit to being wrong or a committing a misstep. To choke on the words expressing shame, sorrow, apology or being mistaken is not a good sign when we are talking about mature leadership. To come across as anything less than human is not going to win points with the not as stupid as one might think average church goer or American.
We lie when we can't admit we are wrong, mistaken or perhaps have another agenda that we do not wish disturbed. I think Americans are beginning to believe that this last reason is more the case with Iraq and perhaps Iran. Even church goers are beginning to question the motives of those that demand too much of their money for the Lord and remind you that you can be "dismembered" when you ask uncomfortable questions about doctrine or the Bible itself. "Just trust me," is no longer going to work among the informed. Lie Snickers, the Internet is a gift from God Himself.

We live in a time where Presidents, Politicians and Pastors who have the inability to say that they have been misguided, unguided, mistaken and plainly wrong is endangering not only our intellectual health, but our lives on the planet. Suck it up guys. Just say it when it dawns on you. Allow it to dawn on you from time to time. "I was wrong, I am sorry."

When was the last time you heard your executive, judicial, senatorial, congressional or pastoral leaders say "I was wrong," "We were wrong," "I am sorry"? From "I did not have sex with that woman," to "those weapons of mass destruction must be around here somewhere," just saying "I'm sorry," seems the hardest thing to do. Give it a try anyway before you kill us all.

Dennis Diehl
DennisCDiehl@aol.com

Today's UCG Resignations 1/7/2011

Resignations from the ministry of UCG seem to be slowing down at the moment.  Many think it is that more are waiting to see what decisions are made at the COGaWA conference that is happening this weekend. 

Depending on how it structures it's self, and how it responds to UCG HQ's backtracking on the Sabbath issue there will certainly be same heated discussions this weekend. 

Unfortunately there are probably too many burned bridges for many of these men to go back to UCG now.  Frank's certainly would not have a place waiting for him.  Because of that many expect COGaWA to certify it's self as a legitimate COG ministry and start pulling members from UCG. 

Many members of UCG are also sitting on the fence waiting to see what happens in the meetings.  More fun times are certainly ahead!