Thursday, September 21, 2006

"There's the rub"

So here's the "rub" (problem), how do you tell people the truth? 1st when they really don't want to hear the truth, 2nd because they think they know the truth, and 3rd because they think truth is subjective (basic relativism, your truth may be right for you, but mine is right for me).

Right now I’m speaking particularly about witnessing to others, but this is a universal problem with even simple issues. Do we put too much emphasis on opinion making it more important than truth? I mean just because we have the right to an opinion doesn’t make that opinion right, and without clear moral guidelines and reasoning’s for that opinion shouldn’t we question it?

In “A few good men” with Jack Nicholson (Jessep) and Tom Cruise (Kaffee), Kaffee says “I want the truth” and Jessep responds “You can’t handle the truth!” But in reality it is just the opposite. It’s not that we can’t handle the truth, but that we really don’t want to hear it because it may mean that we don’t have it as “all together” as we thought we did. Or it may even go as far as meaning we might have been wrong.

This means as Christians we have to know what we believe, and why we believe it to be an effective witness. But even deeper how can we relate it to those around us that may have little or no Biblical knowledge (thereby having no frame of reference to understand the Scriptures) without coming off sounding like a “religious nut”?

The rub here is twofold; 1st Christians need to realize that we are no different than the people we are trying to bring the truth to. (If you didn’t get it, we are ALL sinners and deserve death! So we need to understand that no matter who it is, except for Christ as man, they are our equals!) 2nd we have to be able to relate to those outside Christian circles by understanding the world they live in. (In other words get our heads out of the sand of “Christianese” and start living in the world! Now be careful, I said IN not OF. We don’t have to accept the loose moralities of the world, but if we don’t understand where people of the world are coming from we have no frame of reference to know how to witness to them.)

But back to my first question, how do you tell the truth to those that don’t want to hear it? Do we just accept them as lost? Maybe we hope that some day they may see the benefits of a Christian life lived before them? Or do we go on banging away at them with the potential of making Christianity look pushy? I really don’t know the answer to this one, because there is no pat answer for it.

I often feel that some Christians evangelize because they see it as their job, or as some way of racking up points in heaven. I also feel they lose site of what is truly important in evangelism too, Love. God loved us enough to give His Son to save us from our sins, and Christ told us to love our neighbours. We need to be witnessing because we love people and don’t want to see them lost to hell, not only because we were given the task of spreading the Gospel.

This is where relationships come in. If we are in relationship with the people we are trying to witness to, we have more insight to how to witness to them, and even more importantly a reason TO witness to them, LOVE. Don’t mistake me here, I don’t believe we are called to witness to only those we can love or agree with; but we are called to love everyone, however we don’t love everyone we meet or know because our values and/or opinions may differ enough to cause this division. It’s a matter of differentiating the values or morals we find inappropriate or offensive from that person, and then loving the person even though they hold them. (Easier said than done I find; I know I still struggle with this. I even struggle with this with other Christians, especially with the touchy feely, wishy washy Hyper Charismatic ones. No offense intended.)

I think one of the saddest and hardest things for me lately was when my neighbour said “I don’t need to be saved from anything”. This is a nice guy, and it is apparent that although he lives a life in the world, he tries to live by a higher set of ethics. So to hear him say this made me very sad for him, because he really doesn’t understand that there are consequences at the end of this life (and I got the distinct impression that my neighbour has been pushed at by "religious nuts" in the past). Mainly I see the reason behind this attitude as not wanting to be accountable to anyone but themselves, and when they are only accountable to themselves they can’t understand that there will be consequences no matter how good a life we try to lead. So my reason behind this post is really to work out how to witness to him in a way that he would find accepting, and until I know him better I won’t know how to do it (and maybe to help someone else work through the same or similar issue.)


Tuesday, September 19, 2006

homonazi's new propoganda war.

It never ceases to amaze me how supposedly rational people can accept an irrational act like homosexuality enough to add it into a school curriculum as a "viable alternative lifestyle". What a crock of bull manure. For more information on the book in question, visit Lifesite news at their website. Simply put this is just another attempt by homosexual activists to promote (and recruit to) that lifestyle. However I won’t lengthen this post any more than necessary by quoting the article, but I encourage you to read it for yourself. I think the thing that bothered me most in this article was even the possibility that my tax dollars may be funding something I find so morally abhorrent.

I went on to read another article which featured a pro life individual being arrested in Lodz, Poland. This reminded me of WWII, and of hearing about the “Lodz ghetto” which I believe I heard was reserved for Jews. However the cross thinking of these two situations did not end there, and brought back a term I had once heard; “homonazi’s” (as pertaining to radical militant individuals bent on global acceptance of the homosexual lifestyle). But this isn’t the extent of it; it also made me look at the similarities and differences between the two groups.

Although Hitler wanted to rule the world, he at least wanted to have a surviving society (what he called “the master race”). Whereas homosexuality doesn’t even leave room for furtherance of the human race, as homosexuality does not propagate any species but is purely for the gratification of the individual. (This makes me wonder why homosexuals believe they should be able to adopt children; beside the fact that they cannot conceive their own children through the homosexual relationships they pursue, they should also not expect to have children outside a relationship designed for the purpose of having children.) Ask yourself this, if homosexuality is normal and/or natural, how would the human race survive? In the same way I disagree with Hitler’s attempt at ethnic cleansing, I also disagree with the homosexual agenda to promote and recruit to the acceptance of an abhorrent lifestyle.

But they both have some startling similarities; Like both being militant about a view not consistent to the well being of all people, both are militant that their opinions be accepted without any tolerance toward the opposite viewpoint, and they both believe that they are doing what’s right.

Is it scary? Yes!
Is it surprising? No.


Sunday, September 17, 2006

Islam vs Pope Benedict.

I guess my question would be this; if Muslims don't want to be seen as violent threats to other religions, why would they react violently over a speech they felt was defamatory? Wouldn't it have strengthened their position to rationally approach the Vatican and ask for a public apology, rather than burn a "crude effigy" of the Pope? Consequently the response of the muslim community has only strengthened the view that many muslims are violent extremists ready to go overboard at the drop of a hat.


Wednesday, September 06, 2006

The Crocidile Hunter; Steve Irwin.

With everything that has alread been said about The crocidile hunter there is not much left for me to say, except that I hope he knew and accepted Jesus Christ as his Saviour. As any Christian knows; just because we are good people does not mean we will go to Heaven, and this is why I hope that Steve Irwin accepted Christ.

My heart and condolences go out to the Irwin family, and especially Terri, Bindi Sue and Bob, who I know will miss him greatly.


Tuesday, September 05, 2006

5 Canadians killed in Afghanistan.

So does this mean that the Canadian military should turn tail and run like cowards? HECK NO!! (FYI; Jack Layton is one of these people that would bring our troops home and sacrifice the Afghani people to the Taliban regime, rather than support our troops already there.) These men should be honoured for the contribution they put in for the freedom of a nation, and remain there to finish the job they started!

Here's the thing, If we were to leave Afghanistan now the previous tyrants which ruled over this Country would be back in power faster than you could shake a stick at. The problem with this is the group we are talking about were muslim extremists with no value for human life, and this means a very bad situation for not only women and children but every average Afghani citizen. Afghanistan would become another safe haven for terrorists, and a threat to North America in the future. What we are doing there now is really securing our own safety by encouraging a democratic and reasonable Government for their people.

As for the people out there that say "oh Canadians are dying... we better bring them home", I say GET A GRIP! These are Canada's military and they knew they may be called to serve in a military capacity, and now that they are we have people saying they were wrong for choosing this work? This is not a draft in which people were forced to fight, but these brave men and women signed up for this task. I also say stop demeaning the nature of their work and SUPPORT THEM; and instead of questioning why they are there, tell the world that they died for a noble and righteous cause... FREEDOM.

Do I like the fact that these men died? Absolutely not.
Do I think they died in vain? Absolutely not.
Do I support the military initiative in the middle east? ABSOLUTELY!

Maybe we need to stick our heads out of our turtle shells here in Canada and realize that many other nations do not have the freedoms we have, and it is our responsibility as a member of a global community to help these other nations enjoy these same freedoms we take for granted.

Stepping off my soapbox,


When my pain is bad I often find myself thinking of unusual things, tonight being no exception I was trying to fall asleep when John Merrick came to mind (for those who don't know John Merrick, and I'm not sure if I spelled his name correctly or not but, he was called the elephant man due to rare physical deformities). I went through some of the scenes in the movie, and I think I came to understand what people were afraid of beyond simply his appearance. I believe that generally people were also afraid of his possible actions or reactions, which they were unsure whether they would conform to normal socially acceptable standards. This, of course, was purely base on a preliminary judgement from appearance, but at the same time may have been true due to lack of social skills training due to that same affliction.

I was wondering why this was going on in my head when I remembered an incident in the public pool last week which involved a mentally challenged man coming to close to my arm. The situation was really very benign, the young man was simply saying hello physically instead of verbally, none the less it was still a slightly uncomfortable situation for me. I'm not saying I couldn't have physically stopped this man from touching my arm, but how would I communicate to him that he can't touch a specific appendage? I understood that he was not being aggresive, and I neither felt threatened or upset by the incident, however I did feel confused at how to express my needs in a way that would not offend or upset him.

I am really not sure what meaning or insight I am supposed to get from this yet, but I thought I should put it into words for later reflection. Right now it is a confusing jumble of social skills and graces, warped perceptions and a need for me to be actually heard when I explain what I am going through. It's not a matter of sympathy, but empathy through real understanding. I realize that people know I have some pain, but I also know they don't understand the magnitude of it. Furthermore I know now that pain is much harder to understand than I thought it was before the onset of RSD/CRPS.