believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also
believe, and tremble. (James 2:)
The Body of Christ, that is the
Church is a team. On a team there are various players possessing
different skills that add to the effectiveness of the team. The more
proficient the players are at performing their particular job, the more
effective is the entire team. If just one member fails to do their job
to their utmost, the entire teams suffers. The weak link in a strong
I know I haven't told you
anything you didn't already know.
My point here is not to
complain about how well others in the Church are holding up their end;
I do that in spades elsewhere. No, my purpose here is to clarify my
position in the body of Christ.
Paul speaks of some members of the body having prestigious positions in
the Body. And he speaks about others who have "less comely" places in
This latter category, I
believe, best describes the position I have been given.
It must seem as if I rail on every church, and everyone in the
churches. It must look as if I believe I am the
only one who understands God's Word, and that everyone else is doomed
I don't see how my writings
could look any different than this to you, because that is the way they
look to me.
But such is not the case. Oh, the part of that statement directed
toward the leaders of the churches is true
enough. But for the earnest members of the churches (separating the
tares from the wheat here), this is not so. Hands do not have ears.
Shoulders (of compassion) do not have eyes. Members of the Church are
busy fulfilling their particular job in the Body.
The eyes and ears of the Church are (supposedly) given to the leaders
and instructors of the Church, who the Body is to
listen to and follow their instructions.
But when the eyes of the
Church are closed, or turned the wrong direction; and when the ears of
the leaders are dull of hearing, then the entire Church suffers.
According to the leaders, especially the Pastor, they have been given a
"calling." and supposedly that calling has come from God Himself.
I would assume you have been
given a calling as well, and that God has supplied you with a gift with
which to perform that calling. Perhaps your calling is to be "hands"
(helps), or maybe your better suited to be shoulders (comfort to the
hurting), or maybe you are called to be an encourager, or a minister of
song, or a leader of the children.
And I would assume you do
your job to the best of your ability, and perhaps even wish there were
more you could do.
While you perform your duties, you, I am quite certain, expect and
assume that others on the team are also striving to fulfill their
If a janitor or an usher
does not pull his or her weight, the consequences would not likely
cause too much of a problem for the team as a whole.
If the slackers were to be
your prayer warriors, the risk of failure raises considerably.
But what would happen to the
team if the one who fails to live up to his responsibly was the Pastor,
the Shepherd, the engineer of your train? What if the one you looked to
for guidance, for understanding of the Way, your guiding light, turned
out to be blind, or negligent, or following a wrong beacon? What would
you say the possible consequences would be in such a case? If the
church you attend was a train on the way to Paradise, and you later
found that it was in fact headed for a dilapidated bridge over a deep
ravine; what would be your reaction do you think?
Some parts of the Body of Christ are less comely than others. And some
are only noticed when they have an ailment or hurt for some reason.
The sole of the foot is one
of those unnoticed and unappreciated parts of the body.
I am a sole of the foot. I
am a thorn in the side of those who have taken it upon themselves to be
the conductor of the train to Glory. Whether they be called or no, my
job is to goad the ministers of the Body and get them back on the track
so that all those who ride with them, and depend on them will reach
their destination in proper form.
The sole of the foot is rarely noticed until it steps out of line, and
lands on a pebble or a thorn. The sole of the foot is intended to be
walked upon and remain inconspicuous and unnoticed.
And would that I could
remain quiet and ignored: if only those who are leading the way would
get back on the straight and narrow path where they belong.
I have stated, and I believe I have pretty well proven elsewhere, that
the Bible is designed to deceive those wishing to be deceived. Those
who want the Bible to say that God's purpose is to serve man will find
an abundance of evidence to support this view.
I believe I have also shown
(but certainly haven't proven) that hell is not a place of eternal
torment as is supposed. If hell were such a
place, and anybody actually believed that it were
such a place, that person would be in constant torment here on earth as
he or she dedicated their life to save all they could from such an
eternal future. And if a person believed that hell is a fiery pit of
eternal damnation and was not frantically going
about to save the world from it, then that person surely is not
one who will be avoiding such a destiny themself.
It is clear that Heaven is a place for those who love their neighbor.
Anyone who feels they can joyously float around in the clouds eating
fried chicken while their friends and neighbors are burning in a
smoldering cauldron is not what I consider a "Loving Person."
Nor do I see Heaven a place (where those who prove themselves
acceptable to attain a place of Eternal Bliss) up in the stratosphere
somewhere. Nor do I see it on some other planet circling this globe. As
I read the Bible, Heaven is going to be right here on earth. And those
who make it to Heaven are not going to be served, as they hope to be,
but they will be earnestly and anxiously serving God and their fellow
man, seeking little or no reward for their endeavor.
And I believe that Heaven is
not the place where such people will begin their
efforts to serve, but rather those who do not begin their
self-sacrificial serving here and now
will not be the ones chosen to be serving the Lord in Heaven for
Does this mean I don't believe that people who have not made a
commitment to serve the Lord here in this life will not be saved for
the next? No, I believe that there will be many
"saved." But I also believe that "Saved," in other words, receiving
Eternal life is not what it is taught in the churches. I see it as much
different. Just what Heaven and Saved is I am not
prepared to describe, as it has not been fully explained to me as yet.
I have only been given glimpses of the Truth over the years, and the
Lord has not as yet seen fit to have me do such a study. And without
His leading, such a study would be worthless at best.
Hell is destruction. Eternal life is just that, living eternally
(whatever that might be to God who created eternity as it applies to
Heaven is living a life of
servitude, in full association with God.
Saved is just that - saved.
I do not want to be "saved." I have prayed often that I will not
be amongst those who are "saved." If I am not one of those who are
chosen to be a servant of the Lord: if I have failed to live up to what
is expected of me here on earth during my allotted time: then I want to
be destroyed with all the others who have failed. If I can't be with
the Lord, then I want nothing at all. If I can't have it all, then I
want nothing at all.
It may seem as if I believe I am one of the few destined for high
position in the Kingdom to come. This is far from the truth. I can't
see how I can possibly attain to that which I
ascribe as needed in order to be with the Lord. I think of myself as
the Unprofitable Servant who has been given a little, and has failed to
do with that little what is expected of me. The only advantage I can
see I might have above what others possess is a
willingness to surrender to the Lord (but without the full ability
for full surrender), and the knowledge of the Truth, given by the Holy
So many others, it seems,
who appear to be "serving the Lord" are in reality serving man and his
attempt to serve himself, and are bound by ties of doctrine that keep
them from seeking the Truth if they really wanted
to find Truth.
MUSIC & DOCTRINE
When I first became aware of the confusing aspects of doctrine was not
when I studied the Bible, but when I studied music. "Doctrine and
music? How do they fit together?" Just wait a
minute and I'll tell you.
This morning as I was practicing on the steel guitar I became conscious
of the metal picks on my fingers. Three metal
picks plus one thumb pick.
I had just purchased a book
of tabs for the Dobro, and I was looking at the instructions. The book
said to pick such-and-such a string with this -and-that finger or thumb.
Whoops! This-or-that finger
doesn't work for me because I wear three picks,
not two as the book was instructing me to use.
Now, what do I do?? Do I
throw away the book and hope I can find one that tells me how to use three
fingers? Or do I disregard all the many months I have been practicing
to use three fingers and just use two?
Of course what I did was
disregard completely all the instructions and notations that instructed
me on which finger to use on what string at whichever time it told me
to play it.
And that is exactly what I do when I study the Bible: I disregard all
the notes at the bottom (except to read them for amusement), and I let
God instruct me as to what He meant when He wrote such-and-such a
When I studied music (many different instruments at one time - I'm a
masochist) I discovered that every teacher had a different way they
expected their students to learn. This is never more true than with
stringed instruments. Each book I read seemed to say: "Not that
way, you fool! This way!" And, of course, one
"fool's way" was just the opposite of another "fool's Way," depending
on the instructor. In great confusion, I finally decided to completely
disregard all instruction and develop my own
way, and then I was finally able to learn to play any
instrument I attempted.
Again: what has learning music got to do with doctrine? Everything.
In music, the worst you can experience by following the instruction of
one teacher over another is to be called a "fool." In the churches, the
worst you can be told is that you'll go to hell and burn alive forever
for not following the doctrines of the church. And, again, one doctrine
is completely the opposite of the doctrine of another church. And since
fire is a lot more powerful of a deterrent than name-calling, churches
are much more able to keep their "students" from following the
instructions of another teacher (even the Holy Ghost) or discovering
Truth on their own.
For nearly 2,000 years the
church kept people in line by keeping them ignorant, not allowing them
to read for themselves what the Bible says. Now, with Bibles so
prevalent and so accessible, it is not possible to keep the people
ignorant: they must keep themselves ignorant by
either (or/or) not reading the Bible, or reading into it exactly what
the doctrine of the churches teaches while disregarding anything that
contradicts that doctrine.
The only way for me to learn music is to forget everything I have been
taught. And the only way to learn the Bible is to discount everything
commentaries and doctrines try to force down my throat.
It has been said: "Get all
the education you can; then get over it."
That takes guts, ambition
and thinking. Schools are not designed to produce thinkers, but
followers. And as Adam and Eve has shown: it is human nature to follow anything
that caters to our lazy and self-centered nature.
9Thou believest that there is one God;
thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. (James 2:)
It has only been a couple weeks since I posted: Lucifer, the
making of a Doctrine." And almost daily new thoughts on that
subject cross my mind. I thought I would add some of those thoughts
We are told that the best way to open oneself up to demons is to not
believe they exist. And this is true of Satan as well. But short of not
believing that the devil exists, is to believe he was once a wonderful
creature, and even on our side, and misunderstood (and harshly
punished) by God.
I got to thinking: what do Satanists and other such devil followers and
worshipers think of Satan? So I did a little investigating.
One thing I found is that
they, too, believe, like all the churches, that Satan was once a
beautiful angel called Lucifer. From this point on doctrines run the
gamut. There are, as one would expect, those in the extreme corner who
believe in following the evil nature of Satan, even to human sacrifice.
Others in the middle range are followers of Satan in the sense that it
allows them to satisfy their own desires, unabated by religious or
moral teaching (kind of like our schools and society in general
nowadays. Consider the popularity of witchcraft). In this form Satan
worship is very similar to many of the churches, especially the modern
churches and the increasingly-popular ecumenical movements to which all
the churches are moving toward. (Not yours? Just watch.)
Then, to the far extreme we
have Satanists who are part of the Christian community who believe
Satan to be a misunderstood angel who will, along with all mankind,
eventually be reconciled to God, everything forgiven and forgotten.
On to the church views.
I have come across
literature from churches and sermons that strike me as coming straight
out of Satanic literature. It is doctrine based on a fantasy and
enhanced by twisting Scripture to fit. Of course, in my mind, this is
what all church doctrine is today, but when the base
of the twisted Scripture is a fantasy: and it is to glorify
To begin with (referring
back to Lucifer, Making of a Doctrine), Satan is
considered to be the "Covering Cherub," that is, one of the angels
that's portrayed by the angels that covered the Mercy Seat in the Holy
of Holies. Also because of this belief, there are some who teach that
Satan is the angel that man was created a little lower than in Psalm
As an added twist to this
glorification of Satan, there are some (many in fact) who believe that
Satan, Jesus, and Michael are brothers, related, and because Jesus is
God, that all three of them are God as well.
The extremes we will go in
order to keep our thirst for fantasy entertained.
Satan, not content with
corrupting the purity of 1/3 of the angels, it is believed, worked with
success to corrupt God's first creation, that is Adam and Eve. I find
it rather intriguing that an all-knowing, all-seeing God could not have
been aware that casting this great deceiver into the midst of His pure,
innocent creation (oh, pardon me - re creation),
could lead to nothing but utter catastrophe.
It is distressing when someone you find who holds to much truth falls
off the Truth wagon. This is precisely what has happened to me several
times. I think I found someone who has the fortitude to step out of
tradition and listen to the Lord, only to discover there are areas
where their doctrine ventures into the absurd. Here I will semi-quote
some statements and add my comment to each. Of course these statements
could have been made my a variety of people since some of them are
commenly expressed from the pulpit.
"One of these created angels was Lucifer, the cherub who covered and
protected the very throne of God (Ezekiel 28:12-16)."
Now what could possibly be wrong with this
staement, you might ask. Well, for one, as I have said elsewhere, there
is no clue whatever that Ezekiel is talking about Satan. And for
another, if Satan is created, then how can he be related to Jesus who
was not created. (Belief that Satan was related
to Jesus is not an issue in this commentator's
view, but it is in some.)
In reaction to Lucifer being sentenced to the pit of fire (as is
"The other angels were amazed. This was something they had never
witnessed before. Never before had God judged anyone."
"The angels were amazed." Please find that in
Scripture. It's a small thing I am pointing out here but it is
something so commonly done: commentary expressed as fact. This problem
exists also in the movies where people believe what Hollywood says
because they don't know the Bible version of the incident. Of course
using movies and comic books for instruction and to quote them as fast
is being "willfully ignorant." But when such "Hollywood statements" are
made from the pulpit or by commentators of the Bible, this compounds
the problem because we are supposed to believe
what our "shepherds" tell us.
"We are told in the Bible that following his fall into sin, Lucifer
became the DEVIL."
Where in the Bible does it say "Lucifer" became the devil?? As I said
before, there is no evidence that Lucifer (not a name anyway, but an
adjective, a description of the king of Tyrus) became the devil; then
to add to this fanciful misconception something that is not even hinted
at in the Bible! (Of course advocates of the fall have verses they have
wrenched into compliance to fit this fallacy, but their distortions are
clearly visible to all who want to see them.)
"The word "devil" means "THE ACCUSER." It is not
unreasonable to say that the devil accused God of being
unfair and unjust before the other angels. You can just
imagine the accusation that Satan hurled at the Creator:
"how can a loving god send one of his creatures to hell? That''s not
Again, here we have typical doctrine in the making, one method used by
churches and all other groups or individuals who wish to coerce their
readers into accepting their view. "It is not
unreasonable to say..." Or: "Any fool can see...." And other such
statements to which you dare not disagree. I, for one, would say it is very
unreasonable to say that anything out of
Scripture has been said or done. This is especially
so when such statements are based on a failed supposition, and when it
leads trusting followers into false doctrine.
"Apparently Satan managed to convince one third of the angels that God
was unloving and unfair (Revelation 12:4) and by doubting the character
of God, they too fell into this terrible sin. These fallen angels are
also called demons or unclean spirits or Satan''s angels."
Is that so? Let's look at Revelation 12:4 and watch for ourselves these
angels being told that God is unloving:
Rev 12: 4And
his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them
to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to
be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.
Did you catch it? Did you
see anything about Satan convincing the angels that God is unfair? Did
this look to you like it was taking place thousands (or millions) of
years ago? Or would it appear to you to be a future event? If you
caught what this commentator is talking about, you're doing a lot
better than me, because I missed it altogether.
"Even though God had prepared the lake of fire for the devil and his
angels (Matt. 25:41), we are amazed to learn that He did not send them
there immediately. God wanted to first teach all the angels something. God
wanted to vindicate His character and prove once and for all that He
was a Just God and also a loving God. It was as if God
were saying to all the heavenly host, "I will show you how holy and
just I am (how much I hate sin and how I must judge sin) and yet I will
also show you how loving and gracious I am. Just watch what I am about
to do." The angels are very curious as to what God is about to do!"
God trying to prove Himself to His created beings? Really? Amazing.
This is not the God I've been reading about and
Also, how "fair and loving"
would God be to us if He dumped this powerful,
wicked creature down here on us to fight against:
and if we fail, we have to spend eternity in a blazing fire along with
No, I suspect there must be
some other view of God and His purposes than that
of His trying to Vindicate Himself.
"Thus it was at the cross that Satan was defeated and God''s character
was vindicated. Satan''s charges were once and for all proven to be
Is that why Jesus died on the cross?? I always
believed it was His love for mankind and for the making it possible for
us to join God in Paradise that Jesus died on the cross: not to
What I have done above I do not
like to do; that is to criticize specifically the teaching of a
particular person, their preaching, or any particular church. This
stands particularly true with this person's
preaching (even though you do not know who it is that has said these
words) because I have read a great deal of his writings, and I have
learned much from him. I also believe he is led by the Spirit into much
of his writings, but I also believe he, as well as so many others I
respect, has fallen into preaching doctrine (expressing opinion and
fantasy as fact) instead of sticking to what the Holy Spirit is telling
him to say.
I find this temptation
myself, to express what I think might be so. But
before I write anything, I research every facet of the subject, trying
to make sure I follow the Holy Spirit's direction to completion, before
I print it.
This does not
mean I always succeed!! I am just as prone to error as
anyone else, maybe even more so. And I do not have the education or the
experience that so many others have. This is both a detriment to me as
well as a boon. It is a boon because I do not have the many years of
indoctrination others who grew up in the church must
overcome, but refuse to.
My lack of Biblical
knowledge, and my ability to express my ego instead of God's Word is
why I say, as I have often done before: DON'T GO BY
ANYTHING I SAY!!! Check out every little thing for
yourself, insisting of yourself that you follow the leading of the Holy
Spirit in your search!
I find it interesting that
those who oppose the gap theory (almost nobody does so, and those who
do, still believe Lucifer is Satan) spend a great
deal of effort in order to contradict something
that is the thinnest thread of possibility (non-existent in fact) while
still holding to the very fallacy that
caused the need for such controversy in the first
The above is not all there
is to the Satan issue. All this will be placed together in the study of
Satan at a later date.
Today I heard a preacher talking about prayer. And like so many
preachers I hear, he was getting down and dirty, telling it like it is
as the saying goes. Prayer, he says is not something you do for a
couple minutes at bed time, or the few words said over a meal, but it
is something you do throughout the day - while you drive, while you're
in the bathroom.
Very good, I thought; and
right on. But there is a point missed, I believe. First and foremost,
which the preacher made a strong effort to emphasize, is not only how often
you pray, but to whom you are praying as well.
Praying to the wrong person might get you what you want, which is why
most people pray at all, but it won't get you what most preachers say
you will get when it's all over and done but the unmasking.
Who you pray to is probably
first and foremost in the life of prayer.
However what you pray for
I think sits right up there near the top of the ladder of importance
when it comes to prayer. That is to say, are you praying for something
good to come your way? Or are you praying to
intercede for someone who is in desperate need. Or perhaps your prayer
is in the direction of giving thanks for something that has come to
you, or for a prayer that has been answered.
These prayers are certainly good prayers to offer to God, barring
perhaps the first, selfish prayer. But I believe there is more to
prayer than what is commonly accepted by the majority of prayer
To me prayer is much more
than the words we say, or even why we say them. In fact the Greek word
interpreted "prayer" means to "worship," and it is taken from a word
that means to "be directed toward, to draw near, along side."
Jesus, in His letters to the
Churches in Revelation speaks of leaving one's first love. And if you
are more than six years old, and past the "cootie" stage, I suspect you
know what it feels like to have a "first love." and if you have had a
first love, then you quite likely know what it means to "worship"
Prayer is worship. And worship is not a selfish thing. At least it is
not supposed to be directed toward one's self.
When we worship someone there is nothing we won't do for them. And
doing for them is almost all we want to do.
We want more than anything
to be a slave to that one we worship, and we feel bad when we are told
there is nothing that person wants or need from us.
This, I believe, is precisely what Jesus wants from us. He doesn't want
an occasional half-hearted stream of sentences tossed toward Him out of
a sense of obligation. Nor does He want batch of requests that we want
fulfilled as if He was Daddy Warbucks or Santa Clause. God wants from
us the very same thing He gave to us: everything.
The Bible says we were a slave to sin before Jesus made a way to
overcome sin in our lives. We were sentenced to death, and this we still
are, not for Adams sin, but for our own: unless
we draw near to Him and remain under the cover of Jesus' bloodstained
Prayer becomes the most intense when we feel great need. When we are
distressed beyond our ability to cope. This is the time our prayers can
not express what we are feelings, and this is the time the Holy Spirit
prays for us because all we can do is cry out and
moan (Mat 8:26).
We are told that the prayers
of the righteous avails much (James 5:16). And we are told that the
prayers of sinners are not even heard (Zech 7:13; Micah 3:4; Heb 12:14;
Mat 7:23; John 9:31). If we are to have our prayers heard, we must
strive toward perfection in order to be given the robe of righteousness
God has waiting for His own.
Our prayers should be
intense, heart felt, and as full of love and selflessness as we are
able to offer.
If we are able to pray through the Spirit as we are told to, then our
prayers will be as the thoughts of one madly in love. Our thoughts will
be constantly on that one we love. The words that overwhelm our mind
will be constantly on that person we love, and will be directed to
that person as if they were attentive to our every thought.
We should be praying,
worshiping, and giving thanks constantly, every moment, day and night.
When we sing we sing to that
person we love.
When we plan our day, we
plan it around the person we love.
When we work or play, we
wish for that person we love to be right there by our side.
And whether we are near that
person we love, of far away from them, we spend much of our time
learning all we can about that person,. And should someone make a
negative comment about that person, we refuse to accept the accusation,
defend the person of our heart, and we will very likely become angry at
the person who made such an accusation.
This is what we experience in the natural. Does this sound like
something the One who created us might expect from His creation? Or do
you think God is going to give His ultimate reward to half-hearted,
self centered pew warmers?
If you were God (and this
should be an especially easy question to answer if you are a parent),
what would you expect from your creation? Do you fulfill that
expectation? And if you feel you don't live up to
your own expectations, just what are you going to do