Make Par While the Sun Shines

09/11/2008, 10:24 am -- by David | No Comments

What is it with golfers? I can’t tell you how many times I have been watching the ESPN ticker thing and see stuff like BELLSOUTH PGA INVITATIONAL….Singh (-3)…Leonard (-1)…suspendedÂ on account of darkness… Like it was a surprise that the sun went down! They didn’t know it was going to get dark when they started?

Bible Discussion — Acts 8

09/10/2008, 1:00 pm -- by Bweinh | No Comments

This week, Bweinh.com heads on to the next chapter of Acts.

PREVIOUS DISCUSSIONS:
Genesis: 1-4 | 5-9 | 10-14 | 15-18 | 19-22 | 23-26
27-29 | 30-32 | 33-36 | 37-39 | 40-43 | 44-46 | 47-50
Exodus: 1-4 | 5-8 | 9-11 | 12-14 | 15-18
19-22 | 23-26 | 27-30 | 31-34 | 35-40
Romans: Ch. 1 | Ch. 2 | Ch. 3 | Ch. 4 | Ch. 5 | Ch. 6 | Ch. 7 | Ch. 8 (I)
Ch. 8 (II) | Ch. 9 | Ch. 10 | Ch. 11 | Ch. 12 | Ch. 13 | Ch. 14 | Ch. 15-16
Luke: 1:1-38 | 1:39-2:40 | 2:41-3:38 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10
11 | 12 | 13 | 14-15 | 16-17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24
Esther: 1-2 | 3-5 | 6-8 | 9-10
Acts: 1 | 2 | 3-4 | 5 | 6-7

INTRODUCTION:
David:
An expanded translation of Saul\’s participation in the martyrdom of Stephen says, “And Saul was together with the others approving of his death, taking pleasure in his death, and applauding it.” This chapter gives us a glimpse of the rest of his short career persecuting the church of God.

SOMETHING YOU’D NEVER NOTICED BEFORE:
Steve:
Advertising was kind of lame ’round the turn of the AD, no? Simon says he’s “someone great,” fires off a few magic tricks, and suddenly the crowd is all, “This man is the divine power known as the Great Power!” Imagine how scruffy old David Blaine could have done back then.

BEST BAND NAME FROM THE PASSAGE:
David: Make Havoc
Steve: Someone Great
Josh: Havoc

Continued here!

The Christian Stoic

09/5/2008, 3:00 pm -- by David | No Comments

Acts 17:18 — “Then certain. . . Stoic philosophers. . . “

Once while studying the text above, I found that the Stoics believed in something called “suspended judgment.” They did not believe in responding to things immediately, and saw no value in forming opinions about, or reacting to, everything that happened around them — hence, our concept of the stoic, unemotional person.

I like that idea. I think people have too many opinions. Maybe it\’s just my natural laziness, but I have no interest in pursuing things outside my realm of concern. It\’s a waste of time and energy. Forming an opinion is hard work — or at least it should be — and doing so about a subject that doesn’t concern me is like voluntarily writing a 50,000-word essay for a class I’m not in, just to get in on the discussion.

Several years ago in New York, our senior pastor suddenly left the church, taking about one-tenth of the people with him to start another church in the same town. It was a painful and confusing time for all of us. Around that time, one of the young men from the church came to our house for lunch; as we sat around talking, he asked me my opinion of the man who had left.

I said, “I don\’t have one.” He said, “What? Are you sure?”

I remember searching my heart for a few seconds, then responding, slightly embarrassed, that I honestly had no opinion of the man and his recent actions.

After a pause, he said, “You\’re the youth pastor…you\’re part of the leadership! How can you not have an opinion?” After thinking again, I remember shrugging my shoulders. “Because I don\’t have to?”

The truth is that God had called me to that church, and while that man was there, he was my pastor. But after he left, he was no longer my pastor, and ceased to hold any interest for me in that regard. I loved him, I prayed for him, but I didn\’t feel any need to judge him, examine his actions, or form an opinion about him. Other people in positions of authority might have had to form opinions and deal with him on a disciplinary level but — thank God — I was not one of them.

Ten years after this, while I re-read The Pilgrim’s Regress by C.S. Lewis, I ran across a passage (reprinted below) that I first read around that same time. I guess it must have sunk down deep, because although I had no specific recollection of reading it before, it perfectly summarized a chief foundation stone in my personal philosophy: I refuse to force myself to have an opinion on everything that crosses my line of sight.

I read once that worry is a “bevy of inefficient thoughts whirling around a point of fear.” I wonder how much of our examination of people and events springs from worry. How many of our opinions are produced by inefficient thoughts that surround the fear in our lives? How much sweeter it is to find that point of fear and remove it, so that your thoughts can work on something that does require your attention. I hope you take a minute to read this passage below, and that you find it as liberating as I have.

The main character, John, is speaking with a character named Reason, trying to determine if the island he seeks is real or imagined. This passage begins with a question from Reason.

Who told you that the island was an imagination of yours?
Well, you would not assure me that it was anything real.
Nor that it was not.
But I must think that it is one or the other.
By my father’s soul, you must not — until you have some evidence. Can you not remain in doubt?
I don\’t know that I have ever tried.
You must learn to if you are to come far with me. It is not hard to do it. In Eschropolis, indeed, it is impossible, for the people who live there have to give an opinion once a week, or once a day, or else Mr. Mammon would soon cut off their food. But out here in the country you can walk all day, and all the next day, with an unanswered question in your head; you need never speak until you have made up your mind.
But if a man wanted to know so badly that he would die unless the question was decided — and no more evidence turned up?
Then he would die, that would be all.

Sarah Palin or Plain Sarah

09/4/2008, 10:34 am -- by David | 1 Comment

Do you know what I love about Sarah Palin (among many other things)?Â All those liberals who like to paint right-wing Christians as knuckle-dragging barbarians who think women belong barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen should all be eating their words about now. I have not been so excited about a candidate since Reagan — and every Christian man I know down here in Alabama feels the same way.

Bible Discussion — Acts 6-7

09/3/2008, 1:00 pm -- by Bweinh | No Comments

This week, Bweinh.com progresses to the next two chapters of Acts.

INTRODUCTION:
Connie:
Believers continued to be made in staggering numbers until there was just too much daily work for the apostles to handle. When it became overwhelming they took a page from Moses and started to raise up new leadership. These two chapters tell the story of the leader of those leaders, Stephen, namesake of our own fearless leader here at Bweinh…

David:
There\’s trouble in paradise, as the Jewish converts who accepted Greek customs begin to feel discriminated against by the conservative Jewish Christians. The disciples call “the multitude” together, leaving the selection process of deacons to the body, while ordination rests (literally) in the hands of the Apostles.

SOMETHING YOU’D NEVER NOTICED BEFORE:
Josh:
Stephen refers to those who sold Joseph as “the patriarchs” (7:9) — which they were, but it’s certainly not how I think of Joseph’s brothers in that story.

Chloe:
It was as if the men of the Sanhedrin were literally blind. They saw that Stephen\’s face was like that of an angel (6:15), and yet it had absolutely no impact on them.

Steve:
Stephen’s sermon was rhetorically brilliant in a few ways, but I noticed this time the way that he subtly and repeatedly identifies himself with his accusers. “Our father Abraham,” “our people,” “our fathers.” It makes me wonder if he would have been released, had he not chosen to twist the knife with his last three verses.

Connie:
As in all things, there are some jobs no one wants to do…or at least ones that sometimes get neglected. And there were seven men chosen, including Stephen, but I bet no one remembers the names of more than two of them…

BEST BAND NAME FROM THE PASSAGE:
Josh: Stoning Stephen
David: Three Score and Fifteen Souls
Chloe: This Fellow
Steve: Proselyte
Connie: The Patriarchs

Continued here!

Best of David: The Two Wells

09/2/2008, 1:00 pm -- by David | No Comments

Originally published on June 28, 2007.

As long as I’ve been a Christian, I’ve always loved the balance between the Old and New Testament, and I’ve always found a fullness in reading both on a regular basis. One of the best examples of what comes from this dual exposure is found in the stories of Genesis 24 and John 4.

Genesis 24 recounts the story of Isaac and Rebekah. I have heard it preached as the ultimate love story between God and His beloved — father Abraham (God) sending his servant to bring a bride for his only son Isaac (Jesus). The criteria are set and the woman must pass the test. She must, at Abraham’s request, be pure, of the right lineage and race. She must, to fulfill Eliezer’s prayer, be kind and have the heart of a servant, to not only give him water when asked, but also offer it for all his camels. She must be a virgin and fair to look upon.

It’s a lot to ask, but God leads Eliezer to the perfect choice, and she returns with him. Isaac is meditating out in the field and when he sees her, he takes her as his wife. Moreover, we are told that he loves her. It is truly a beautiful story.

If you’re like me, though, your story was a little different. Perhaps it’s a bit more like John 4, in the New Testament. In this love story, everything has gone wrong. God the Father has sent His servants repeatedly to draw His beloved, but they have been stoned, sawn asunder, persecuted and killed. At last He sends His only Son.

He finds the woman at the well, but she is not pure at all. She is not even Jewish. She’s a Samaritan, of mixed race and idolatrous religion, despised by the Jews. But Jesus uses the same test of character anyway, asking her for a drink. She answers with sarcasm and smart remarks, questioning His motives and arguing about religion. And not only is she not a virgin, she’s had five husbands and is currently living in sin with yet another man. There is no mention of physical beauty.

But she is the one — and He loves her! She receives the fullness of all He has reserved for His beloved. Jesus told the Pharisees, when they questioned His penchant for hanging around publicans and sinners: “I have not come for the whole, but for the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.”

This is the true love story. The Old Testament story was the way God wanted it to be. The New Testament story is the way it is. For all of us.

How can pride exist under such circumstances? Not one of us can meet the criteria of the Rebekah story. And how can any of us deny the love of a God who sees us as we are, chooses to love us, and then makes us worthy of that love?

Bible Discussion — Acts 5

08/27/2008, 1:00 pm -- by Bweinh | 3 Comments

This week, Bweinh.com progresses to the next chapter of Acts.

INTRODUCTION:
Steve:
Much like Mike refers to in his reprinted article today, this time in the growth of the early church was dangerous — and exciting. The disciples had just seen with their own eyes the powerful example of the only One worth giving their lives for, and they were prepared to take whatever risks were necessary to tell the world.

SOMETHING YOU’D NEVER NOTICED BEFORE:
David:
For the first time I began to think about the motives of Ananias and Sapphira. Why sell the land, keep back part of the price — then give the rest to the church? How does the song go? “Say a prayer but let the good times roll — in case God doesn’t show.”

What if this doesn\’t work out? What if I don\’t love God’s people, or they don\’t love me? I need something to fall back on. Maybe this was not about the couple’s greed as much as it was being unwilling to sell out completely and throw their lot in with God’s people.

Maybe it\’s less about money and more about keeping your options open.

Chloe:
Perhaps this is an obvious point I\’ve just failed to notice, but I find it very interesting that the passage does not say that anyone killed Ananias and Sapphira. They simply fell down and died.

Steve:
Gamaliel’s argument is a little odd. He gave examples of two men who tried to lead revolts and were killed as a result — I’m not sure why the other members of the Sanhedrin didn’t just say, “Uh, yeah, why don’t we kill these guys too?”

Connie:
When Gamaliel gave his advice about leaving the apostles alone to see how things would work out in the long run, he mentioned Judas of Galilee from the days of the census, as an example of someone who amounted to nothing.

Did anyone else just automatically change that to Jesus of Galilee, keep reading, then say, “Hey, wait, what did he just say? Who the blinkers is Judas of Galilee?” To which Gamaliel would’ve replied: “Exactly!”

BEST BAND NAME FROM THE PASSAGE:
Chloe: Fallen Shadow
Steve: Colonnade
David: Healing Shadow
Josh: Jailbreak
Connie: Peter’s Shadow

Continued here!

Road Armor Under Investigation

08/22/2008, 12:00 pm -- by David | No Comments

–WASHINGTON, D.C.

The Office of the Attorney General announced today that a Texas company is being investigated after their products failed another series of federal safety testing. San Antonio’s ROAD ARMOR, which specializes in marketing protective armor to “at-risk” animals like opossums, once again received the lowest safety rating available.

“This company has repeatedly preyed on these poor animals, promising them a level of protection on today\’s highways that, frankly, they do not and cannot attain,” said spokesman Ronald Fletcher. “It\’s high time someone stood up for these animals, and we are the ones to do it.”

Studies have shown that the use of “armor” by opossums may actually increase fatalities, as many become careless and prone to high-risk behavior such as crossing an interstate at rush hour.

ROAD ARMOR spokesman Lilly Matthews disagreed, pointing to the company’s disclaimer warning animals of the risks and limitations of their product. “Everything that we do is designed to make these little critters safer and happier, and we succeed at that. End of story.”

Bible Discussion — Acts 3-4

08/21/2008, 9:30 am -- by Bweinh | No Comments

This week, Bweinh.com moves on to the next two chapters of Acts.

INTRODUCTION:
David:
God pours out His Holy Spirit, and a “notable miracle” happens. By the end of chapter 4, the disciples were asking for miracles to continue to accompany the preaching of the Gospel to the unsaved world as signs and wonders.

Too many Christians today doubt that miracles occur — because they want to use them to entertain the church. That is not what signs and wonders were designed for. Go out and preach to the lost, begin to pray for miracles, and I guarantee you will see them.

SOMETHING YOU’D NEVER NOTICED BEFORE:
Steve:
It was after Peter’s sermon that the rulers, elders, and teachers came to realize that he and John were “unschooled, ordinary men.” Guess they didn’t like the message.

Connie:
Either the 5000 conversions came as Peter and John were being arrested, or the passage mentions that they were arrested, and then throws in the 5000 conversions as an afterthought. The Sadducees and government officials were lucky those 5000 didn’t turn on them when they took Peter and John away.

BEST BAND NAME FROM THE PASSAGE:
Josh: Unschooled
David: Manifest
Steve: Annas and the Sanhedrin
Connie: Nation’s Rage

Continued here!

Response to an Atheist

08/15/2008, 2:00 pm -- by David | No Comments

From a letter to my newspaper’s editor this week.

Listening to an atheist comment on the Bible is like having an illiterate man read you the evening newspaper; there may be some imagery he can grasp through the photographs, but the mass of content and nuance is certainly lost on him, and will only lead him into erroneous inferences about the meaning. The Bible is a spiritual book, and makes the case itself that it can only be rightly understood by those who have received God’s Spirit through their faith in Jesus Christ and His atoning sacrifice.

The latest atheist to comment on the Bible here in the newspaper argued that the Bible is not a fit source for morality because so many Bible characters exhibited immoral behavior in their lives. The erroneous assumption here is that Bible characters were superhuman beings, designed to model perfection for the human race. They were not. They were human beings who, like any Christian today, were meant to model grace, mercy and redemption to the world.

If God had seen fit to whitewash the lives of the saints depicted in Scripture, He could have done so, but where would our hope be? Our hope is in the fact that a sinful person can be reconciled to God through his Son, then participate with Him in the great work of redeeming lost souls. The Bible is the right source of morality for the human race because God has deigned it to be so, not because we, as human beings, have found that it fits our idea of morality.

Clash of the Titans LXXXVII: Unions

08/15/2008, 11:30 am -- by Bweinh | No Comments

In this corner, defending unions, is Erin!

And in this corner, opposing them, is David!

Unions are not the answer to everything, this I readily concede. Often, the face of a union is its representative to the union members, and the encounters with such representatives go something like this:

Enter a discontent, overweight (and overpaid) union representative to Place of Work. She has come to announce a change in appeals policy to union members at said Place of Work.

Lights come up, fluorescent and harsh.

Union rep: Blah blah blah, blah blah, change change, blah blah blah.

Narrator: What she\’s basically saying is, “Work, you poor saps, because by paying your dues, you get security you can\’t get on your own.”

Yes, many would say that unions do little more than whine for better pay, better conditions, and (often in my area) for the political casting-out-to-where-there-will-be-weeping-and-gnashing-of-teeth of any and all Republicans.

I ask only that the reader would consider for the moment the things that unions still do. They offer an alternative to an expensive (and truthfully, often wasted) college education, instead providing marketable skills, the model of a good work ethic, and a group of people who not only lobby for their needs, but also form a community.

I have seen teachers\’ unions work to get better books for their students and keep their jobs (taking pay cuts to do it); I have seen electricians’ unions work to ensure higher safety standards on industrial and residential jobs (would you like to have someone electrocuted while they install the power lines for your future plasma TV?); I have seen pipefitters’ unions work against the flow of dying industry to keep jobs within an 800-mile radius of their homes, in an effort not to have to resort to taking jobs in California, Alaska, or Iraq.

This summer I attended a union picnic, where I was introduced to at least two dozen men and women I probably will not meet again nor remember very long. But what stuck with me was the overwhelming sense that these people were there for each other: on the worksite and in each other\’s lives. And if that means nothing, yes, I guess unions are out of date.

“To everything there is a season, and a time to every purpose under heaven.” — Ecclesiastes 3:1

There was a time when this nation needed unions, when they served an important purpose, protecting the poor. Women, children and immigrants were all exploited by employers with no compassion and virtually no government oversight. Children as young as eight or nine slaved away in factories, 16 hours at a time, for poor pay in unsafe conditions. Immigrants were forced to live in ramshackle housing, with exorbitant charges deducted from their meager pay to cover the cost of their food and housing — rendering them little more than slaves.

Those days are gone, yet the unions remain.

It reminds me of the story of the Chinese emperor who invited Mongols into his country to help vanquish foes from the South — only to find that when the war ended, the Mongols chose to settle down and stay, exacting their own methods of exploitation to lighten the purses of the Chinese people. Sometimes the cure brings with it the seeds of the next disease.

I don\’t know many people who would argue the US government does not do enough to micromanage small and large business owners these days. There are 30 different agencies listed on the US Department of Labor website that monitor the various employment practices and environments of American businesses, using nearly 18,000 employees to accomplish this noble task. We are well-regulated.

So what purpose do unions serve now? They are parasites. Unions have become bloated, self-serving political organizations used to control the actions, assets, and politics of the poor schmucks unlucky enough to trapped by them. That\’s all. They hold wages at an artificially high level and stifle productivity, while often protecting workers who are unmotivated, yet militantly committed to protecting their own livelihood.

[poll id=”5″]

The Tortoise and the Hare

08/8/2008, 10:30 am -- by David | No Comments

Once upon a time the animals of the forest decided to hold an election to see who would be their president. After a grueling primary season, the two sides nominated their candidates: Tortoise McCain and Hare Obama.

The news spread like wildfire through the forest, and all the news reporters showed up to watch Obama train.

“Mr. Obama,” said the CNN correspondent, “how fast can you run to Washington?”

“Washington!” scoffed Obama. “Watch this!!”

And with that, he disappeared in a blaze over the horizon. Before the reporters could even take a breath, he reappeared with souvenirs from Europe.

“I got this for you in Berlin,” he said to one reporter. “This came from Paris for you.”

“McCain,” said the NBC reporter, “where can you go to show us your speed?”

“Um, uh… does anyone want some French fries from Burger King or a bratwurst from German Town?” he replied.

The reporters broke out into hysterical laughter, and silly old Mr. McCain retreated to his house to train for the big day.

To be continued — this could actually end well for McCain, if you believe in fairy tales…

Bible Discussion — Acts 1

08/6/2008, 9:00 pm -- by Bweinh | 1 Comment

This week, Bweinh.com begins discussing a new book: the first chapter of Acts!

INTRODUCTION:
David:
Matthew, Mark and John offer valuable Gospel narratives, but only Luke follows it up with a second volume that goes beyond what “Jesus began both to do and teach,” recording the Acts of the Apostles who founded the Christian church.

Connie:
Background and preparation is what this chapter is all about. And just in case you thought we were done with gambling, we have another round of casting lots in order to determine the new 12th disciple.

SOMETHING YOU’D NEVER NOTICED BEFORE:
David:
I saw anew the naivetÃ© of the disciples who wanted to jump to the conclusion immediately — thinking the conclusion was restoration of the kingdom to Israel (v. 6). They didn\’t have a clue what was coming.

Steve:
Already the disciples had expanded tenfold — with another drastic expansion on the horizon.

BEST BAND NAME FROM THE PASSAGE:
Josh: Vacancy
Connie: Akel Dama
David: The Promise
Steve: By the Mouth

Continued here!

My Own Terms

08/1/2008, 10:00 am -- by David | No Comments

I have been called a cynic. I have been called a pessimist. I have been called a skeptic. And I don\’t mind being called these things, as long as I can define the terms myself.

If by “cynic,” you mean Oscar Wilde’s definition — “someone who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing” — then I am not that man. I know the value of things, but I also know there is a vast difference between gross and net value. Even something good is never quite as good as it seems to be. A man never gets a thousand dollars from life, no matter what he does; he gets $677.50 after taxes, and lives with the disappointing list of deductions accompanying the payout — if the check is even good.

When I say that I am a cynic, I mean that I am old enough to know I don’t have to order before midnight. The commercial will be on again tomorrow. And what they”˜re advertising today as “Not Available in Stores!” will be on the rack at Wal*Mart tomorrow, under the banner “As Seen on TV!”

When I say I am a pessimist, I mean that I have resolved the age-old question to my satisfaction, and believe that the glass is definitely half-empty. Any moron can tell you that a glass, left to its own devices, never again fills up. It’s constantly emptied, by consumption or evaporation, and indeed could only have been filled to be emptied. The natural state of the glass is dissipation: the occasional break during a trip to the dishwasher, storage in the cupboard, and eventually another foray into emptiness.

Pessimism gives me the greatest chance at happiness. If you always expect things to go poorly, you will either get what you expected or be pleasantly surprised. But if you expect good things to happen all the time, what then? Either life turns out the way you thought it would (no big deal), or you\’re disappointed, because it didn\’t.

And a skeptic? All that means is that I subscribe to the ancient philosophy of “suspended judgment.” I like to think about things before I put my weight on them. This world could use a little more of that — with the way we jump on the latest bandwagons, use the freshest buzzwords, and buy the newest fashions, all to make us feel hip and wise.

So, yes: cynic, pessimist, and skeptic I am. But on my own terms.

Bible Discussion — Esther 9-10

07/30/2008, 1:00 pm -- by Bweinh | 1 Comment

This week, Bweinh.com finishes our discussion of Esther by addressing its last two chapters!

INTRODUCTION:
David:
Ecclesiastes tells us that there is a time “to gather stones together and a time to cast stones away,” meaning a time to commemorate events and a time to let things slip away into obscurity and be forgotten. This great deliverance of the Jews is to be commemorated and celebrated forever.

Connie:
It’s showtime. All the preparations were made to the best of everyone’s ability, but the actual battles still had to be fought.

SOMETHING YOU’D NEVER NOTICED BEFORE:
Chloe:
It says repeatedly that the Jews did not lay hands on the plunder of the men they killed. This harks back to Deuteronomy, when God told the Israelites to destroy the towns of the people living in Canaan, taking no plunder so that they might remain ceremoniously clean. In other words, what the Jews committed in Esther was not a massacre, but a holy cleansing.

Connie:
Just like in the other battles the Jews had waged, part of the victory was in the reaction of the enemy to God’s movement on their behalf. 9:3 says that the Jews were helped by government officials during these battles, because the fear of Mordecai fell upon them.

David:
The king’s garrisons in each province helped the Jews.

BEST BAND NAME FROM THE PASSAGE:
Steve: Can’t Touch Plunder
Connie: Casting Pur
Chloe: Distant Shore
David: The 10 Sons of Haman

Continued here!

« Previous Page — Next Page »