Because That’s What You’ve Been Told

/in , , /by

This was a post originally published in 2021, but the content is still just as relevant today as it was back then.

Enjoy!

For the last four years, you were convinced that regardless of what President Trump accomplished or said, he was a fool and a fiend. Therefore, anything he did was suspect and could be comfortably categorized as either irrelevant or detrimental…

Because that’s what you’ve been told. His election wasn’t credible. He colluded with Russia. We spent two years and 32 million dollars investigating a claim that turned out to be untrue. But in your mind, he’s still guilty and the 2016 election wasn’t legitimate…

Because that’s what you’ve been told.

He should’ve been removed from office. He made a call to the President of the Ukraine and you sat glued to the TV watching a parade of unelected officials insist that Trump was guilty of abusing his authority. The Ukrainian President himself insisted that the call in question was devoid of any such conversation, implied or otherwise. But you still believe that Trump was guilty and the only reason he wasn’t removed from office is because the Senate refused to do their job.

Because that’s what you’ve been told.

COVID-19 has a 98% recovery rate and of those that have passed away as a result of the virus, 94% had, on the average , 2 potentially life-threatening pre-existing conditions. The CDC has said it’s not an airborne disease. Yet, you still wear a mask and support the idea of staying distant, closed and compromised and believe anyone who wants to get the vaccine and move on is reckless, selfish and even cruel.

Because that’s what you’ve been told.

There’s over 1,000 signed affidavits and sworn testimonies testifying to the fact that this past election was fraudulent. The State of Texas has a publicly accessible pdf that details why Dominion’s software is not a secure voting mechanism. President Trump delivered a speech that detailed several instances of suspicious activity. It wasn’t aired on any major network because several courts and attorneys insisted that none of what had been submitted constituted any real evidence. You’ve not read any of the testimonies yourself, you weren’t in any of the swing states to observe what went on, but you nevertheless believe that President Biden’s election was honorable and accurate.

Because that’s what you’ve been told.

President Trump said nothing that could be construed as a call to violence on January 6th. A transcript of his speech is available for public review. Anderson Cooper from CNN interviewed someone posing as a cameraman merely filming what was going on in the Capital. It turns out, however, he’s part of a BLM group and was caught on film agitating the crowd and urging people to “Burn this sh** down!” Yet, any questions pertaining to the true political convictions of those who broke into the Capital and evaluate them on an individual basis as opposed to labeling the entire crowd as insurrectionists is dismissed as pointless. This would be a healthy and logical step to take to find out how multiple peaceful rallies held both in Washington and throughout the US suddenly took a violent turn. But it doesn’t matter. You believe Trump and anyone who supports him is violent, godless, racist and a threat to Democracy…

…because that’s what you’ve been told.

Freedom of Speech is now determined by what party you support. Arguments are won not according to the substance of your content, but on the effectiveness of your methods. American interests and security concerns are prideful restrictions that only people who lack compassion would even consider. Moral Absolutes are cruel and antiquated traditions that need to give way to open dialogue and the right to be happy. And you heartily agree with all of this..

Because that’s what you’ve been told.

With few exceptions, none of us have actually worked with Trump, we’re not on a first name basis with Biden, we’re not experts in viruses and even when we attempt to google things and seek out additional information, we’re still drawn to those sources that possess a philosophical bent that leans in our preferred direction. In other words, we are what we eat and we’re hesitant to listen to anything or anyone that doesn’t agree with our worldview.

When you think of the current political climate, then, it’s not so much about what’s true as much as it’s about who we believe is telling the truth. Is it Anderson Cooper or Jesse Waters? Is it Newsmax or NBC? Are we listening to media committed to informing public opinion or are we listening to resources determined to shape public opinion?

How can we tell?

One thing that can used as a good indicator is to ask the question, “Am I being presented with a commentary on what’s being done or who’s doing it?”

For example, Moral Failings are heinous. But the public reaction to those indiscretions is bound to be different if one instance is presented as a misstep and the other situation is displayed as grounds for dismissal. If the activity is the same, but the reporting is completely different based on the personality involved, you’re not listening to “news” as much as you’re listening to a “campaign.” You’re not hearing topics as much as you’re hearing tactics, regardless of what the headline says. In that moment, you have legitimate cause for concern. Reason being is that among the strategies typically used by sinister elements who are promoting an agenda is to silence their opposition by casting them as villains. By doing so, anything that person champions is now associated with something reprehensible and whatever platform is being proposed as an option now looks far more appealing regardless of how toxic it may be.

Does this sound familiar?

How many times have you seen a person been excoriated for their behavior while their political counterpart isn’t even criticized? How many times has a particular issue been promoted by implying that anyone who doesn’t agree doesn’t just have a different opinion, but they are immoral? Truth is not how certain facts are manipulated, it’s how all the facts are evaluated. And you don’t arrive at the truth without seeking both sides of an issue and dismissing those accounts that are focused more on personality than principle.

We’re at a point where we can no longer allow our convictions to be dictated by media outlets that are focused more on who said something as opposed to what was actually said. We’re all dependent on the headlines to some extent. But we can choose who to listen to. We can seek out second opinions and we can resolve to filter out those voices that are more preoccupied with assaulting someone’s character than objectively examining their content. You’ve got to be like the Bereans that Paul talks about in Acts 17 – people who examined what was being said to find out if it was true and not let the personality speaking be more of a priority than the point they’re making. That’s how you arrive at a legitimate bottom line.

Now, you may not agree with any of this and if you’re determined to trade truth for accuracy and gossip for substance, chances are you’re doing so because you’re convinced that any news or information coming from anything or anyone other than those who share your worldview are bogus.

And why do you feel that way?

Because that’s what you’ve been told.

The Fundamental Dispute

/in , , /by

People who see themselves as their own bottom line define truth as whatever they want to believe in that moment. Anyone who disagrees can then be logically labeled a liar who needs to be silenced.

Executive Summary:

I) The fundamental dispute is what triggers all of the tension we see in our society today. It all comes down to the way you answer the question, “What is truth?”

II) You’re going to answer it in one of two ways: Truth is defined according to what is real, or truth is defined according to how I feel. Those who define it according to the way they feel see truth as whatever the individual wants to believe.

III) You can’t disagree with someone who sees truth according to what they prefer because, in that moment, you’re not speaking the “truth” and you can be logically categorized as a liar. If that’s the case, you’re not merely mistaken, you’re immoral. You’re not just wrong, you are evil. If you’re a politician, you’re not a leader, you’re a tyrant. Those who support tyrants aren’t voters, they’re Nazis. This is how Liberals are able to silence their political opponents.

IV) At some point the authentic truth becomes impossible to ignore and the Liberal can’t champion their approach without sounding both selfish and foolish. But you don’t have to get people to agree with you, if you can get them to feel sorry for you. Every major Left wing talking point is framed in the context of a victim because you can’t criticize someone who’s in pain without immediately being categorized as cruel and hateful.

V) Regardless of how compelling your case may be, as far being able to demonstrate the flaws in a Liberal’s logic, you have to remember that when you’re contending with someone who sees themselves as their own absolute, they are processing your perspective the same way they perceive themselves. If truth is nothing more than what an individual wants to believe, you’re not correcting them as much as you oppressing them by forcing your beliefs on them.

VI) Ultimately, you’re not questioning their logic, as much as you are challenging their authority to dictate the difference between right and wrong. The only way you’re going to make an impact is to allow them the opportunity to function according to the same standards they would impose on everyone else. The moment they’re inclined to say, “That’s not fair,” they’re appealing to a Standard that exists independently of the way a person thinks or feels – a concept they want to say doesn’t exist. At that point, even if they’re willing to concede that you have a point, those who are listening to your conversation will recognize the unsustainable characteristic of the Liberal’s platform.

I) The Fundamental Dispute

Why Resisting Authoritarianism Matters…!

That’s the title of a recent Rachel Maddow broadcast.

What is it that Maddow and people who think like her justifies referring to President Trump as a tyrant that needs to be resisted?

And of course, she’s not only referring to the Oval Office, but also to everyone who voted for him, which includes the majority of the country.

Why does she see a President that has already delivered a substantial portion of the platform he ran on as a problem that needs to be solved and a threat that needs to be addressed?

People who see themselves as their own bottom line define truth as whatever they want to believe in that moment. Anyone who disagrees can then be logically labeled a liar who needs to be silenced. This is how Liberals are able to introduce toxic policies into the marketplace while at the same time justify destroying those that oppose them.

Anytime you refer to someone as a tyrant or an authoritarian, you’re implying they can now be disposed of in the same way that dictators have been eliminated in the past. You can’t champion that kind of approach without sounding morally reprehensible, but you don’t have to get people to agree with you if you can get them to feel sorry for you.

By positioning yourself as a victim, you’re not evaluated as much as you’re accommodated. No one is paying attention to what’s real and accurate when people are rushing to avoid being labeled cruel and hateful.

You can’t adjust the perspective of someone who believes that there’s nothing to correct. All the boundaries otherwise established by logic, common sense, historical truths, the rule of law, and medical realities are non-existent in the absence of a fixed point of reference. You are never guilty or mistaken if you can say the truth is just someone else’s opinion.

While it’s not always obvious you’re talking to someone who sees themselves as the gauge by which all things are measured, you can tell simply by asking them some revealing questions.

For example, what is a woman?

This is a portion of a speech given by Katherine Maher, President and CEO of NPR. In it she elaborates on how Wikipedia doesn’t pursue the truth as a bottom line, as much as it looks for a positive consensus. At one point, she uses the phrase “minimum viable truth” to describe an approach that sets aside bigger belief systems and instead focuses on what appeals to the majority. It translates to a nonsensical contradiction in that while she says truth needs to be processed as something that’s different for everyone, she then goes on to say that, “…the truth of the matter is…” As though what she is saying now transcends the definition of truth she just articulated.

Now, that is not to say that the truth doesn’t exist, nor is it to say that the truth isn’t important. Clearly, the search for the truth has led us to do great things, to learn great things. But I think if I were to really ask you to think about this, one of the things that we could all acknowledge is that part of the reason we have such glorious chronicles to the human experience and all forms of culture is because we acknowledge there are many different truths.

And so in the spirit of that, I’m certain that the truth exists for you and probably for the person sitting next to you. But this may not be the same truth. This is because the truth of the matter is very often, for many people, what happens when we merge facts about the world with our beliefs about the world. So we all have different truths. They’re based on things like where we come from, how we were raised, and how other people perceive us.And so in the spirit of that, I’m certain that the truth exists for you and probably for the person sitting next to you. But this may not be the same truth. This is because the truth of the matter is very often, for many people, what happens when we merge facts about the world with our beliefs about the world. So we all have different truths. They’re based on things like where we come from, how we were raised, and how other people perceive us. (Katherine Maher)

However obvious defining a woman may by in terms of their anatomy, their chromosomes, and their ability to bear children – because defining a woman in those terms implies a reality that exists independently of the way a person thinks or feels – that question is never answered directly. Rather, as Dr. Michelle Forcier says, “It can be many things to many people.”

II) What is Real of How You Feel?

In other words, the truth about the way in which you define a woman is whatever you want to believe.

Truth is whatever you want to believe…

This is why Liberals hate President Trump, this is why movie stars are willing to endorse same sex marriage, even if they’re not homosexual themselves. This is why Charlie Kirk was murdered, this is why Socialism is embraced as a superior alternative to Capitalism, and this is why Rachel Maddow says that our democracy is right now consolidating into a would be authoritarian state at the hands of a would be dictator.

III) Let Them be Revealed by Their Own Logic

Any reference to a transcendent bottom line has to be demonized in order to distract from the lack of substance and positive results that characterizes the Liberal mindset.

While you can’t reason with someone who’s unreasonable, you can still make an impact by holding the Liberal to their own standard and let their reaction prove your point (Prov 26:5).

  • If truth is whatever it is I want to believe, than I can call you a liar and not be wrong.
  • Katherine Maher, in a speech she made at a Ted conference said that truth is based on many things and for that reason cannot be restricted to a singular viewpoint. But then she goes to say that, “…the truth of the matter is…” How can she believe that what she’s about to say at that point in her presentation has any credibility if she’s just declared that there is no definitive truth? It’s similar to what happens when you say there are no Absolutes. That statement, in and of itself, is an absolute, so it’s a self-refuting statement. If truth is relative, how can I trust anything you say?
  • If you’ve been charged with a crime, who do you want for your jury? People who define the truth of your innocence according to what actually happened, or whatever they want to believe?

IV) Silence is Golden…and Necessary

The Left has no recourse once the falsehood of their victimized status becomes evident. Their attempts to establish themselves as people who need to be pitied begin by labeling everyone who disagrees with them as being nonsensical. They’re restricted by the ignorance of those that surround them. When doesn’t work, they proceed to refer to their opponent as unethical. They’re immoral, they’re hypocrites, they’re lying. Now the Liberal is perceived as being the victim of morally corrupt behavior on the part of ignorant degenerates.

When that fails to vindicate the cause of the Left, they resort to referring to their opposition as tyrannical. Trump is an authoritarian, a tyrant, and all those who support a tyrant are then logically categorized as dangerous, fascists, and Nazis.

Notice how each of these tactics focuses on the intelligence and the character of the one who’s speaking as opposed to the substance of what’s being said. That’s what you do when you can’t compete with the credibility of an individual’s platform. Silence is golden and absolutely necessary when you can’t defend what you believe and why you believe it without sounding selfish and foolish. When you reach that point, you stop focusing your attention on what’s being said. Instead, you attack the individual.

V) Conclusion

While Liberals are incredibly talented when it comes to generating a lot of noisy distractions, after a while the authentic truth becomes impossible to ignore, regardless of the tactics used to focus the attention away from the fundamental dispute.

It’s not Racism, it’s not the economy, illegal immigration or same sex marriage.

How do you define Truth?

The way you answer that question is the foundation upon which all of the tension in our society is based.

John Adams said:

Because We have no Government armed with Power capable of contending with human Passions unbridled by morality and Religion. Avarice, Ambition, Revenge or Galantry, would break the strongest Cords of our Constitution as a Whale goes through a Net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious People. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. (From John Adams to Massachusetts Militia, 11 October 1798)

Pete Buttigieg says that Democrats have been slow in understanding how people get their information. North Carolina Senate minority leader Sydney Batch said, “The Republicans are much better at branding and messaging than we are,” she said. “We will sit here and give you 150 words where we probably should have only used five.”

Regardless of how the Democrats want to communicate or what they want to say, if their message remains grounded in the idea that Truth is whatever an individual wants to believe, they are assuming a country that is distinct from the one for which the Constitution was designed. The extent to which they succeed or fail depends entirely on the resolve of those who see the issues facing our nation, not as positions held by a specific party or reinforced by judiciously selected data, but as a contest between those who see the human experience in terms of principles, and those who dismiss the existence of any reality that doesn’t line up with their preferences.

How do you define Truth?

That is the fundamental dispute.

Senator Van Hollen and Secretary Rubio

/in , , /by

Senator Van Hollen recently spoke before a committee where he confronted Secretary Rubio and said that he regretted having voted for him for Secretary of State. His comments were insulting, but, at the same time, they reveal the underlying problem that serves as the source for the tension that exists in our society today.

The problem is the way in which you define truth.

If you see yourself as the gauge by which all things are measured, then truth is whatever it is you want to believe in that moment. Should someone disagree with you, they’re not speaking the “truth,” so they can then be logically labeled a “liar.”

If they’re a “liar,” then they’re not merely mistaken, they’re immoral. If that person is a politician, they’re not a leader, they’re a tyrant. And those that support a tyrant aren’t voters, they’re Nazis.

This is the source of all the tension that exists in our society today. It’s not about USAID or Illegal Immigration or the Oval Office. Those are topics, but the tension is the way in which you define truth.

If you are you own bottom line, then you can dismiss the evidence that conclusively proves you to be wrong simply by declaring it to be irrelevant. Not because it’s anything less than conclusive, but simply because it makes you feel uncomfortable.

You have that power because you’ve authorized yourself to replace principles with preferences and reduced every incontrovertible fact to a situation where someone is forcing their beliefs on you.

You don’t want people to be fair, you want people to be quiet. You have to talk over your opponent because you don’t want the audience to hear what you can’t dispute. The great thing about the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth is that it can be verified. Your corrupted version can only be allowed.

In this clip, Senator Van Hollen begins by declaring himself a victim. He’s disappointed and feels betrayed. By positioning yourself as someone who’s wounded, you’re able to get people to feel sorry for you which helps distract from the fact that you’re never going to get people to agree with you.

When Secretary Rubio referenced gang members being deported to El Salvador, Van Hollen did his best to talk over the Secretary insisting that what was being said was “unsubstantiated.” This goes back to the way in which you define truth. If you’re determined to force the world to function according to the way you feel as opposed to what is real, you will refer to anything you don’t want to hear as a lie, or, in this case, “unsubstantiated.”

Same sex marriage, Socialism, Abortion, Illegal Immigration…

These are not controversial issues. The “controversy” is embedded in the way you define you define truth.

To read more about the legal bottom lines that characterize the deportation of Albrego Garcia, click here.

My Imaginary Conversation with Oprah

/in , , /by

Oprah has been quoted as having said that her view of God was changed after hearing her pastor refer to God as “jealous.” This is an imaginary conversation between Oprah and myself where I suggest that “jealousy,” when processed from a perspective that accommodates the Hebrew language, isn’t a reason to doubt the Character of God, rather it’s another reason to appreciate the Love of God.

Bruce: Oprah! How are you doing? Man, it’s a treat to be talking with you.

Oprah: Bruce, I’m doing great! What’s on your mind?

Bruce: I wanted to ask you about something I saw on the internet where you were apparently put off a little bit by your pastor referring to God as a “jealous” God. Here’s what I heard:

Years ago I went faithfully, 8 o’clock service, 12 o’clock service. I was a tither. I was making 227 dollars a week, and I tithed 22 dollars and 70 cents every week. But after Jim Jones led the mass suicide in Guyana, I started to feel differently. The church I went to had a really charismatic pastor—you had to show up early to get a seat—and I remember sitting there one Sunday while he was preaching about how “the Lord thy God is a jealous God, the Lord thy God will punish you for your sins.” I looked around and thought, “Why would God be jealous? What does that even mean?” And I’m looking at the people in the church, and everybody’s up, shouting. And I started wondering how many of these people—including myself—would be led to do whatever this preacher said. That’s when I started exploring taking God out of the box, out of the pew. And eventually I got to where I was able to see God in other people and in all things—in graciousness and kindness and generosity and the spirit of things1. Read more

Why Can’t I Share My Opinion?

/in , , /by

On occasion, I’ll see a question posted in Quora and I’ll feel compelled to respond, just because the comments and responses are often devoid of any real attempt to push back against what amounts to a bogus conclusion.

Here’s an example…

Why can’t I share my opinion as a Christian about your sin when it is what I believe?

That was the question. Here’s one of the answers that got a number of positive “upvotes…”

No one is stopping you. Now lets talk about your sin. Yup we can do that.

Your problem is that you believe as a Christian you get to lecture other people and no one can respond in kind. Sorry it doesn’t work that way.

I would add sin is a religious concept, I don’t believe in religious concepts and I sure as heck am not required to follow your faiths views.

My response…

This, right here…

“I would add sin is a religious concept, I don’t believe in religious concepts and I sure as heck am not required to follow your faiths views.”

And what makes you think that I need to dismiss every historical reference to Christ, God, Providence, and the Supreme Judge of the Universe just because you want to be your own bottom line and you’re offended by the prospect of being accountable to something greater than yourself?

Anytime you hear someone say, “You can’t force your beliefs on me…” you’re hearing someone who wants to pretend that the world is nothing more than a collection of personal preferences and truth is whatever it is you want to believe.

Is the tomb empty?

If it isn’t, than it doesn’t matter. But if it is…

Then nothing else matters.

All your whinin’ about Christians being hypocrites – they didn’t die for your sins.

And stop looking at distortions of Christianity and labeling them expressions of Christ when you know that they’re not.

And drop that garbage about all religions being the same. They’re not. Every religion gives you the ability to earn your “salvation,” however you want to define it. Christianity says you’re a spiritual corpse and the only thing you contribute to your salvation is the sin that makes it necessary.

And stop thinking you’re making your point by being vulgar or sarcastic. Look, however the Resurrection resonates with you, you need to remember that when you sneer at it, you’re not just rolling your eyes at the church down the street or some posts you saw on social media. You’re spitting on the single greatest act of compassion in human history – God loving you so much that they actually invented a word to capture the physical, emotional, and psychological agony of the cross – excruciating (literally “of the cross”).

That’s what He did for you.

If you want to believe yourself to be a lucky accident just so you make up your own rules and insist that you’re a victim of a totalitarian system anytime someone points to the Bible or the Declaration of Independence or the motto on the back of our currency – that’s your baggage.

You’re not looking for the Truth, you’re looking for an excuse. And remember this: Anytime you say something stupid like, “What’s true for you isn’t true for me,” if that’s the case, according to your own logic, I can call you a liar and not be wrong.

Bottom line: In your mind, truth is what you want to believe, no one can force their beliefs on you, and you don’t want people to be fair, you want them to be quiet.

But…

That’s not the way the universe works, that’s not the testimony of history, and you don’t have a point, you have a problem.

Pack. Don’t Predict.

/in , , /by

Why Did Jesus Walk On Water?Did He Say That?

25 Shortly before dawn Jesus went out to them, walking on the lake. 26 When the disciples saw him walking on the lake, they were terrified. “It’s a ghost,” they said, and cried out in fear.

27 But Jesus immediately said to them: “Take courage! It is I. Don’t be afraid.”

28 “Lord, if it’s you,” Peter replied, “tell me to come to you on the water.”

29 “Come,” he said. (Matt 14:25-29)

Take a minute and try to think of all the reasons why Peter might’ve hesitated in leaving the boat.

  • Did Jesus just tell me it was OK to leave the boat?
  • Did He actually say that, or am I just hearing what I want Him to say?
  • Do I want to walk on the water because I want to please Him, or am I being prideful?
  • Is He aware that there’s a storm happening right now?

There are always reasons to doubt and that’s why, regardless of the decision you’re getting ready to make, to some extent, you’re going to have to trust in Him.

And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him. (Heb 11:6)

And while decisions are pretty easy to make, other decisions represent life altering consequences. But regardless of what’s at stake, the principle is always the same: If you’re going to walk on water, you’ve got to trust in Him.

You’re Never Going to Know

Some want to be able to take an inventory of their motives and ensure their intentions are pure…

The heart is deceitful above all thing and beyond cure. Who can understand it? (Jer 17:9 [see also Ps 51:5])

Some don’t want to move forward without being able to know all of what’s getting ready to happen…

Can any one of you by worrying add a single hour to your life…Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own. (Matt 7:27, 34)

Some want to be able to have complete confidence in discerning God’s direction for their lives…

21 So I find this law at work: Although I want to do good, evil is right there with me. 22 For in my inner being I delight in God’s law; 23 but I see another law at work in me, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within me. 24 What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body that is subject to death? 25 Thanks be to God, who delivers me through Jesus Christ our Lord! (Rom 7:21-25)

Neither your intellect nor your intentions are immune to the influence of sin. That’s why faith is so important because it’s only His Voice and His Strength that’s going to prove be both dependable and accurate.

You have God’s “Word” that He will guide your thoughts and your actions…

Let the morning bring me word of your unfailing love, for I have put my trust in you. Show me the way I should go, for to you I entrust my life. (Ps 143:8)

Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding; in all your ways submit to him, and he will make your paths straight. (Prov 3:5-6)

The mind governed by the flesh is death, but the mind governed by the Spirit is life and peace. (Rom 8:6)

Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will. (Rom 12:1-2)

Pack, Don’t Predict

Imagine you’re getting ready to go to the beach for a long weekend. You’re going to pack based on the amount of time you’re going to be there and the things you plan to do.

If you try to anticipate everything that might happen, not only do you wind up with an outrageous amount of luggage, but there’s a chance you may never leave your house because of your inability to predict all that may occur while you’re gone.

God asks us to pack (Prov 11:14). He never asks us to predict.

He’s always willing to give us direction (Jas 1:5), but He rarely gives us a full description of all that we can expect. He didn’t tell Abraham where he was headed, He didn’t tell Moses how the Red Sea was going to part, He didn’t tell Gideon how he was going to defeat the Midianites, and He didn’t tell Joseph that this son would be born in a stable.

He just told them to pack.

You Always Have a Reason

As long as you’re a part of the human race, you will have both the capacity and the inclination to doubt. You’re never going to be able to remove every question mark. As certain as you may be, or as obvious as the situation may appear, there will always be something to justify a reason to stop, wait, hesitate, or doubt.

Even a burning bush wasn’t enough to convince Moses that he would succeed (Ex 4:13). Paul had seen Christ alive, but was still able to feel completely overwhelmed by circumstance that appeared hopeless (2 For 1:8-10).

And Peter had heard Jesus say it was alright to step out of the boat. But the moment he was able to take a logical inventory of his surroundings, he found all kinds of reasons to second guess his decision.

You will always have a reason to doubt, but, more importantly, you will always, have a reason to trust in Him.

It’s wise to confirm God’s Direction in your life (1 Jn 4:1). But if you’re ever going to walk on water – if you’re going to be obedient and realize God’s Purpose for whatever lies on the other side the decision you need to make – that first step is going to require some faith.

Too often we get distracted by the default uncertainty that accompanies our attempts to answer the question “How do I know?”

Perhaps the question you need to be asking yourself is, “Why do I doubt?”

Pack.

Don’t Predict.

Saturday, August 23rd

/in /by

Muscular Christianity Workout

  • Date: Saturday, August 23rd
  • Time: 7:00 am- 8:00 am
  • Place: C Building, Thompsons Station Church |2604 Thompson’s Station Road East | Thompson’s Station, Tennessee 37179

No charge, no commitment!

This is a workout featuring military grade calisthenics as they’re typically at Parris Island, South Carolina.

Headed up by a nine year veteran of the USMC and a Certified Group Fitness Instructor, this is a great workout that will last for about 45 minutes and conclude with a short Bible study taken from the “Muscular Christianity: 90 Day Workout Plan.”

Text Bruce Gust at 615.618.2059 to confirm your seat!

See you then!

Click here for more information about the “Muscular Christianity” Bible Study being offered at TSC!

Jesus Was a Liberal…?

/in , , , /by

There was a question posed on Quora that asked, “Jesus is coming back and He hates what liberals are doing. Do you think liberals will be able to stand against Jesus?”

Most of the responses insisted that Christ was a Liberal and anyone who disagrees with the Liberal platform opposes Christ and the gospel.

Here’s my response…

Here’s the problem…

Truth.

You want to believe that unless a Christian is giving money or giving in, they’re either a hypocrite or cruel and hateful.

That’s not how it works.

Any virtue deployed in the absence of Truth is nothing more than a vice disguised as a courtesy. Charity is a subsidy, diversity is contamination, justice is favoritism, and love is pure selfishness.

That’s a hard pill to swallow for someone who’s been conditioned to see themselves as their own absolute, especially if they like to perceive themselves as sophisticated and compassionate.

And you can do that when you are the gauge by which all things are measured. There are no Principles, only Preferences, which is why anytime you try to push back against their narrative they feel completely justified in saying, “You can’t force your beliefs on me.”

Jesus was very vocal in talking about how you are to take care of the orphans and widows (Jas 1:27). He talks about when you feed the hungry and give the thirsty something to drink, you’re doing that as unto Him (Matt 25:35–40).

But He also talks about the wise and the foolish builders (Matt 7:24–27), as well as the importance of hard work (Matt 25: 14–30). He also talks about shooting yourself in the foot and then trying to blame your pain on the person or principle that told you not to pull the trigger to begin with (Gal 6:7).

Liberals applaud people who drive on the wrong side of the road because of the way it allows them to ignore the flow of traffic themselves. Any notion of being accountable to Someone greater than themselves is demonized as legalistic and narrow minded. Their image of Christ is Someone Who smiles at what put Him on the cross and what puts people in hell.

Again, that’s not the way it works (Matt 7:23; Rom 6:23).

The question isn’t whether or not God loves you. Rather, it’s whether or not you love God (Jn 14:21). And just like there’s a difference between loving your enemy and enabling them, there’s also a distinction between Christian charity and destructive subsidies.

And what is that difference?

Truth (Prov 1:7; 2 Thess 2:10–12).

How Do You Know?

/in , , , , /by

If you were asked, “How do you know that Jesus really did die and come back to life?” how would you respond, if you couldn’t point to the Bible as a Resource?

It’s Current

We wouldn’t still be talking about the Resurrection today unless it really happened.

Simon Ben Kosiba is one of a handful of “counterfeit” Jewish Messiahs that were revered as fulfillments of Old Testament prophecy, but we don’t hear about them today because…

…they’re dead.

It works.

You live your life according to biblical principles, you benefit. If you opt to ignore those same principles, you have to deal with the consequences.

Some may respond by saying, “Well, it works for you…” While that’s not always the case, more often than not, that response comes from a mindset that wants to reduce the world to a collection of personal preferences in order to justify maintaining themselves as their own bottom line.

If you’re not sinning, then you’re not lying, you’re not stealing, and you’re loving your neighbor as yourself. You’re on a much better path than if you were doing things differently and that applies to everyone.

It makes sense.

Every “religion” empowers the individual with the ability to facilitate their own salvation. After a while, that starts to sound a little suspicious in that the focus is more on you and what you’re capable of despite the obvious limitations of the human condition.  As a Christian, the only thing you contribute to your salvation is the sin that makes it necessary. That makes more sense in that the emphasis is now more on God – Who He is and what He’s capable of rather than on the individual and what they’re obviously not able to do.

For further reading, check out COEXIST.

What Does It Mean to be Saved?

/in /by

Being “saved” sometimes resonates as something illusive. You hear terms like “evangelical,” “born again,” “redeemed…”

But what does it mean and how does one make it happen?

First of all, let’s look at a couple of questions and scenarios that will help rule out some things that can be distracting otherwise.

You and Your Typical Demon

Imagine two individuals—one is a demon the other is a believer. Try to determine which one is which based on the way they might answer the following questions:

Question #1: Do you believe in God?  

James 2:19 says:

You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder. (Jas 2:19)

Based on that passage, what do you think the demon would say?

Question #2: Do you believe that Jesus is God’s Son?

In Matthew 8:29, several demons see Jesus coming and they say:

“What do you want with us, Son of God?” they shouted. “Have you come here to torture us before the appointed time?”  (Matt 8:29)

Obviously the believer would answer yes, but how do you think the demon will reply based on the verse we just read?

Question #3: Do you believe that Jesus rose from the grave?

Again, the believer is going to answer yes. What’s the demon’s answer going to be?

Colossians 2:15 says: 

“And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he (Jesus) made a public spectacle of them (Satan and demons), triumphing over them by the cross.” (Col 2:15)

Based on those two verses, how do you think the demons would answer? What do you think? Is there a difference in the way our two individuals answered the questions? Let’s take a minute and review what was asked:

  • Do you believe in God?
  • Do you believe that Jesus is God’s Son?
  • Do you believe that Jesus rose from the grave?

There’s no difference between these two individuals based on the questions that were asked. Both answered in exactly the same way. James 2:19 indicates that demons believe in God. Matthew 8:29 quotes a demon as accurately referring to Jesus as God’s Son, and it’s evident from the other Scriptures we looked at that the devil and those who serve him are very aware of the defeat that was dealt them when Jesus rose from the grave.

Do you smell that?

That’s the aroma of reality.

The fact is, demons “believe” that Jesus is God’s Son and that He rose from the grave. So, there’s got to be something else besides just a willingness to acknowledge Jesus as a historical figure with some theological substance attached to Him.

But what?

Believing With Your Heart

When you believe something in your mind, it changes the way you think. But when you believe something in your heart, it changes the way you live. You see that idea expressed in Proverbs 4:23:

“Above all else, guard your heart, for everything you do flows from it” (Prov. 4:23)

It’s significant that Scripture references the heart as what constitutes the source of who you are rather than the mind. Some maintain that if you can change a person’s mind, you can change who they are, but who someone is as a person is determined by more than mere facts. Two people can be confronted with the exact same scenario and be presented with the exact same set of information yet process it differently because who you are determines the way you think.

With that in mind, take a look at Romans 10:9-10:

“That is you confess with your mouth, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved” (Rom. 10:9-10).

“It’s with your heart that you believe.” It’s comparable to that situation where someone agrees that diet and exercise are healthy habits. But it’s the one who actually engages those habits that demonstrates a belief that resides in his heart.

So, Jesus isn’t just “the” Messiah, He’s “my” Messiah. He’s not just King of kings, He’s “my” King. He’s my Creator, He’s my Redeemer, He is my Lord.

A Complete Transformation

Your belief doesn’t merely qualify you as morally perfect before God – which is what happens when you accept God’s gift of grace.1 It also facilitates a complete transformation of who you are.

 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, the new creation has come: The old has gone, the new is here! (2 Cor 5:17)

When you make the Reality of Christ your reality – when you’re recognizing that what He did on the cross was for you in the most direct and personal way possible – at that point, you’re no longer respecting a Nativity scene or a crucifix, you’re now sitting down with the Son of God as your Savior and not just a lifeless idea.2 In that moment, you go from being a spiritual corpse to having a spiritual pulse.3 Your membership into the Kingdom of God is now guaranteed,4, but you’re also operating according to an entirely new internal paradigm in that God’s Spirit is living in you.

“And you also were included in Christ when you heard that word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit” (Eph. 1:13). [See also Jn. 14:17; Gal. 4:7.]

It’s His Spirit that’s now providing a Voice that, up to now, wasn’t even available (see Eph 2:1). This Voice is now guiding you and giving you a new kind of desire for doing the right thing at the right time in the right way for all the right reasons.5

Conclusion

Let’s go back to the Q/A session with two individuals we were envisioning at the beginning of our discussion. Let’s imagine that they have to answer one more question, and here it is:

Does the Spirit of Christ live in you?

Romans 8:9 says:

“You, however, are not in the realm of the flesh but are in the realm of the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ.” (Rom 8:9)

What would the demon say, what would the believer say?

What would you say?

According to Romans 8:9, that is the determining factor. That is what distinguishes the believer from the demon in our scenario.

There are many who go through life having convinced themselves that they’re believers—thinking that a mental acknowledgment of Christ’s reality equates to the saving belief referenced in Scripture. It’s not an uncommon fallacy, but it is nevertheless a departure from God’s Word that is both tragic and lethal.

On the other hand, the belief that comes from the heart that manifests itself as a personal conviction and not just a mental acknowledgement opens the door to a relationship with the One Who put the stars in their place and gives you, not only a guarantee of an eternity spent with Him, but a life that’s truly worth living as long as you’re walking this earth.

That’s what it means to be saved!

The Billy Graham Association has a great piece that will walk you through the verses and the subsequent steps you need to take to make Christ your personal Savior and not just a mental picture. Click here to read more.

1. 1 Corinthians 15:22; Titus 3:5; Hebrew 10:15-18
2. Revelation 3:20
3. Ephesians 2:1; 2:3-5
4. John 1:12; 14:3
5. Romans 12:1-2; 1 Corinthians 2:12; ; Philippians 2:13; Colossians 1:29; 1 Peter 1:15-16