Blogging as Calling

Aug 23, 2014

The burden of proof is on everyone

<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: justify;" trbidi="on">
The legal burden of proof (Latin: onus probandi) is the imperative on a party in a trial to produce the evidence that will shift the conclusion away from the default position to one's own position. The burden of proof is often associated with the Latin maxim semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit, the best translation of which seems to be: “the necessity of proof always lies with the person who lays charges.” 
 
“The necessity of proof always lies with the person who lays charges.” For Michael Tooley, a contemporary atheist who had a debate with William Lane Craig on the existence of God claims that atheism is the default position and wins by default for lack of evidence on the existence of God.[1]   But he also said that atheism is the default state of every human (Baby). Therefore, in his words, he is also saying that, a child grows up without the knowledge of the existence of God. And as he becomes an adult, his encounter with theistic ideas made him assert that there is no God. Therefore, theist can also say that the one that lays charges is the atheist and not the theist. 
 
Failure of arguments for God's existence in no way proves that God therefore does not exist. Kai Nielsen, who is an atheist philosopher, makes this point as follows. He says, “To show that an argument is invalid or unsound is not to show that the conclusion of the argument is false. ... All the proofs of God's existence may fail, but it still may be the case that God exists. In short, to show that the proofs do not work is not enough by itself. It may still be the case that God exists.” 
 
An theist need to know this. Let says, religious book such as Bible may be established as historical facts, even then, Christian cannot bring the transcendental God in the palm and show the transcendental God as proof. This impossibility exist because He is the transcendental God and God is God. But I believe in the fullness of time, every eyes shall see.
 
 
Majority of the people in the world believe in God. Religion might have hurt some section of people. But it does mean we should abandon the search for truth. We should contribute to establish facts on the existence or non-existence of God. The burden of proof in on everyone...and nobody win by default.
 
 
<hr />
1. http://www.reasonablefaith.org/does-god-exist-the-craig-tooley-debate
</div>

The burden of proof is on everyone

The legal burden of proof (Latin: onus probandi) is the imperative on a party in a trial to produce the evidence that will shift the conclu...

Aug 1, 2014

Why do we fall? A reflection on 1 Kings 19

In the movie series, Batman, Bruce Wayne (Batman) said to Alfred his personal most loyal assistance, “I wanted to save Gotham. I’ve failed.” “Why do we fall, sir?” asked Alfred. He continued by answering his own question, “So that we can learn to pick ourselves up.” “You still haven’t given up on me?” countered Bruce Wayne.  “Never” replied Alfred.
Bruce Wayne as a child grew up with fear as he experienced and witnessed the tragic death of his parent. As he grew up and become Batman, despite his good works and mighty deeds, he encountered accusers, haters and various enemies. Just like Elijah, sometime in his life, he got depressed, and he went away to retired in a monastery in the East. There he was corrected, guided, taught and strengthened physically, spiritually and mentally.
From there he returned to Gotham city to fight the great battle ahead of him. He then has no fear, and was even ready to sacrifice himself and even took the blame of killing a politician who is behind all the evils in Gotham City. Lastly he appoints his friend (Robin) to take his place as the guardian of the city.
There goes the similarity of Batman and Elijah. Let us now reflect critically on the life of Elijah.
Elijah in the cave: 
Why Elijah is hiding in a cave? Why a prophet, a mighty man of God would be doing that? A prophet’s work is to declare the word of the Lord to the people. He should be in a public place not in a cave. The probabilities are: want of success, the corruption of his time and the fear of persecution. The Hebrew name “Elijah” is translated as “My God is Yahweh”. Here the mighty prophet of God is discouraged and depressed. He has been used mightily of the Lord and he had expected a great revival to come to the land; a revival in which the people of Israel would repent of their sins and turn back to God with all their hearts. When this didn’t happen, and when Elijah was threatened by the wicked queen Jezebel, he left as though he and his ministry were a failure. Therefore, he ran away from his position, his problem, and his people.
1. Elijah was not a wise man: In verse 17, we see Elijah questioning God in relation to the death of a child of a widow. He accused God as one who takes life? Job who is older by many generations and civilization is much wiser than Elijah. Job knew God much better than Elijah. For he said, “Shall we receive only good things from God and not bad things?” 
It  is  said  that Elijah  is  a  man led  by  God  and  obedient to  him.  Miraculously it is ravens, usually greedy (ravenous) birds that feed the hermit Elijah. Who can harm such? God’s hand was on him and therefore he could eliminate 450 Baal prophets, and he knew this. He might be serviceable to Israel at this time, and had all reason to depend upon God's protection, while doing God's work; yet he flees.  
2. Self-justifying and self-righteousness nature of Elijah: God question Elijah twice in verse 9 & 13, “What are you doing here, Elijah?” In response Elijah gives the identical lengthy self-justification regarding his own zeal in contrast to the apostasy of other Israelites, and he continued by saying “I am the only one left.” He disregarded the faithful Obadiah and the possibility that there might have been many more like him. Thus setting no value on the 100 prophets which he knew had been concealed in a cave by Obadiah. And perhaps he saw Obadiah’s position in the royal court as a sign of weakness and compromise or he was jealous of it. See how these things can be a hindrance to a successful ministry. 
A still small voice: Elijah's Meeting with God on Horeb.
On Mt. Carmel we saw Elijah the great spiritual leader, saving Israel by his faith and faithfulness. On Mt. Horeb we see him weak, mistaken and in need of God’s rebuke. As Moses  had done  before  him  (Ex  24; 33)  Elijah  hopes  to  meet  God  on Mount Horeb. He does not  appear: at least, not in impressive natural  phenomena (Verse 11-12) and  not in  demonstrations  of  violent power as were sometimes cherished in religious  arguments, and in  countless  other  examples  up to  the present day (Hindi movie).
The wind, and earthquake, and fire, did not make him cover his face, but the still voice did. Gracious souls are more affected by the tender mercies of the Lord, than by his terrors. The mild voice of Him, who speaks from the cross, or the mercy-seat, is accompanied with peculiar power in taking possession of the heart. Friends, we need to listen to this still small voice, so that we can prove ourselves worthy of our calling.
God repeated the question, what doest thou here? Then he complained of his discouragement; and whither should God's prophets go with their complaints of that kind, but to their Master? The Lord gave him an answer. He declares that the wicked house of Ahab shall be rooted out, that the people of Israel shall be punished for their sins; and he shows that Elijah was not left alone as he had supposed, and also that a helper should at once be raised up for him. Thus all his complaints are answered and provided for. God's faithful ones are often his hidden ones. The Lord knows them that are his, though we do not; he sees in secret. God's love often proves larger than man's charity, and far more extended.
1Co:13:11-12: When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things. For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
Amen!

Why do we fall? A reflection on 1 Kings 19

In the movie series, Batman, Bruce Wayne (Batman) said to Alfred his personal most loyal assistance, “I wanted to save Gotham. I’ve failed.”...

Jul 18, 2014

Jesus on Religion

<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: justify;" trbidi="on">
Are you frustrated of the religiosity of Christianity? I see in many young Christians today – a passionate faith, a focus on Jesus, a love for grace, and a hatred for self-righteous. And some hated religion so much to the extent that they started to say that Jesus came to abolish religion. Jesus was a Jew. He went to services at the synagogue. He observed Jewish holy days. He did not come to abolish the Law or the Prophets, but to fulfill them (Matt. 5:17). He founded the church (Matt. 16:18). He established church discipline (Matt. 18:15-20). He instituted a ritual meal (Matt. 26:26-28). He told his disciples to baptize people and to teach others to obey everything he commanded (Matt. 28:19-20). He insisted that people believe in him and believe certain things about him (John 3:16-18; 8:24). If religion is characterized by doctrine, commands, rituals, and structure, then Jesus is not your go-to guy for hating religion. 
 
The word “religion” occurs five times in English Standard Version of the Bible. It is, by itself, an entirely neutral word. Religion can refer to Judaism (Acts 26:5) or the Jewish-Christian faith (Acts 25:19). Religion can be bad when it is self-made (Col. 2:23) or fails to tame the tongue (James 1:26). But religion can also be good when it cares for widows and orphans and practices moral purity (James 1:27). Unless we define the word to suit our purposes, there is simply no biblical grounds for saying Jesus hated religion. What might be gained by using such language will, without a careful explanation and caveats, be outweighed by what is lost when we give the impression that religion is the alloy that corrupts a relationship with Jesus. 
 
However, the Christian Faith stands alone, peculiar and different from the religions of the world. In fact the Christian Faith is not a religion but a way of life to God (Eph. 2:10). Some people who call themselves religious will not like to hear this, but being religious doesn't require faith. It requires discipline. Anyone can learn rules and will themselves to adhere to them – or at least try to adhere to them. With all due respect to those who have committed their lives to teaching religion and theology to their followers: theology, biblical knowledge, catechism and apologetics are extremely important but they are only one part of the equation of faith. We must simply recognize at the outset that religion and faith are not inextricably linked and in fact, the two can be quite separate. 
 
One truth stands still between the Christian Faith and world religion – the message of the gospel. World religion propagates works whereas the Christian Faith propagates grace. If one goes back to the Old Testament, you will find that God was no more in favour of the ritualistic sacrificial offerings.  And God knew that humans can never come to the standard of holiness required to attain their salvation. That is why God sent Jesus to pay the price on the cross. Now we see the conflict and contraction between religiosity and the Christian Faith. 
 
Religion is between man and man but faith exists between God and human beings. Certainly God created rules for men and women, but following rules could never substitute for a vibrant faith. Religion isn't always personal, but faith always is. We can talk about what faith is and how it should be enacted, but when the day is done, only the believer knows the true state of her faith. It can't be used to show off, nor can it be used to compete with another. It is too raw, too much of a secret, I suppose that's what if find so attractive about it. Religion is about adopting a set of beliefs about God, but faith is a decision to receive something from him. Much as children get love, affection, and sustenance from their parents, mothers forget that they are children too. We give and give, but faith requires us to be still and “get from God.”
</div>

Jesus on Religion

Are you frustrated of the religiosity of Christianity? I see in many young Christians today – a passionate faith, a focus on Jesus, a love ...

Feb 4, 2014

How the four gospels do portrays Jesus Christ?

<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: justify;" trbidi="on">
The Four Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) work together to provide a complete testimony of Jesus, a beautiful portrait of the God-Man. Although the Gospels differ slightly in theme, the central Subject is the same. Each of the Gospels has its own emphasis on Jesus Christ and His ministry. Matthew, writing to a Jewish audience, emphasizes Jesus’ fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy, proving that He is the long-awaited Messiah or the ideal King. Mark writes a fast-paced, condensed account, portraying Jesus as the ideal Servant, even obedient unto death. Luke emphasizes His perfect humanity and portrays Jesus as the ideal man. John emphasizes Jesus’ deity by selecting many conversations and sayings of Jesus on the subject and also including “signs” that prove He is the Son of God- the ideal God.
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhkmzM08R0x4CNhV2sHTOWWWjDBQfIXX40NxpZaTTQE63BJIFJEUOeKBY7XWe6gIBr5ygZd3zWEMRfqlggEOP0rtzYBm7ia-POcdtPmPeN4IHSX5D2v87S58EqW_tBzLBg70zeAKDeJyw8/s1600/marc-latest.png" imageanchor="1"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhkmzM08R0x4CNhV2sHTOWWWjDBQfIXX40NxpZaTTQE63BJIFJEUOeKBY7XWe6gIBr5ygZd3zWEMRfqlggEOP0rtzYBm7ia-POcdtPmPeN4IHSX5D2v87S58EqW_tBzLBg70zeAKDeJyw8/s1600/marc-latest.png" /></a>
</div>

How the four gospels do portrays Jesus Christ?

The Four Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) work together to provide a complete testimony of Jesus, a beautiful portrait of the God-Man...

Jan 30, 2014

S.J. Samartha on inter-faith Dialogue

<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Introduction: 
Stanley Jedidiah Samartha was the first director of the World Council of Churches (WCC) sub-unit on Dialogue with People of Living Faiths and Ideologies from 1970-1981. He was born in the year 1920 and died in the year 2001. He was an Indian theologian and a participant in inter-religious dialogue. , Samartha studied at Madras University, United Theological College in Bangalore, Union Theological Seminary in New York and the Hartford Seminary Foundation. He also did post-graduate studies at the University of Basel. In addition to his work as lecturer, professor and principal, he was the author of a number of books, including The Courage for Dialogue (WCC, 1981) and Between Two Cultures: Ecumenical Ministry in a Pluralist World (WCC, 1996).
 
 
S.J. Samartha on religious plurality: 
The impressive phenomenon of religious plurality, according to Samartha, is a clear indication that religions are different responses to the Ultimate Mystery. The nature of this mystery provides the ontological basis for the empirical fact of religious plurality. Hence the nature, and in particular the distinctiveness of every religious tradition should be studied within such a philosophico-theological framework. Only then can the importance of religious pluralism be understood and appreciated. In a religiously plural world, Samartha considers religions as different responses to God or the Truth. He advances three reasons for the plurality of religious traditions.

First, since human beings respond to the Ultimate Reality from diverse chronological, geographical, historical, cultural, existential and other conditions, the responses to the Ultimate are bound to be plural. Second, religious traditions are human expressions of experiences of the Divine or Truth. “How can so great a Mystery be experienced in only one way and expressed through only one set of symbols? Religious plurality, therefore, is the homage which the finite mind pays to the inexhaustibility of the infinite.” Third, an ontological basis for the phenomenon of religious plurality is, as Samartha suggests, the pluralistic nature of reality: “Diversity is in the heart of Being itself.” The numerous religious traditions may therefore be understood as varied expressions of the heterogeneous essential characteristics of the nature of reality. However the diversities within the being of Mystery need not be interpreted as perpetually separate entities; rather they are all inter-related, constituting a complex whole, an advaitic reality.
 
 
Thus Samartha recognizes religions as traditions which have responded differently to the mystery of the Ultimate. Furthermore the mysterious ontological basis of Truth gives all religions a relative and interim character. Divine truth is received and preserved in earthen vessels. “No one who is part of a particular community of faith, shaped by linguistic, social and historical factors, can escape this cultural relativity.” Being so conditioned, no particular religion can claim absolute significance for all people and for all times. In other words, any particular religion can have decisive but only relative significance.

S.J. Samartha on inter-faith Dialogue: 
For Samartha the context of religious plurality demands a life style that would render philosophical, theological, ethical and empirical justice to every religious tradition as well as promote mutual critical appreciation and edification, thereby enhancing the quality of life on the globe. Samartha advocates the dialogical way of life among people of different faiths. While enumerating different reasons for dialogue, Samartha is also aware of several obstacles in the way of dialogue, but he is hopeful that many of them could be overcome in due course of time. Samartha understands dialogue as:
 
A mood, a spirit, an attitude of love and respect towards neighbours of other faiths. It regards partners as persons, not as statistics. Understood and practiced as an intentional lifestyle, it goes far beyond a sterile co-existence or uncritical friendliness. It does not avoid controversies; it does not emphasize only points of general agreement; it recognizes difficulties in relationships as well. It is not a gathering of porcupines; neither is it a get together of jellyfish.

For Samartha, dialogue is not mere conversation. It is a serious engagement with neighbours of other faiths as all people go through the trials and responsibilities, joys and sorrows, quests and discoveries of existence on earth. It is not a superficial fellowship but a critical cooperative venture, a pilgrimage towards Truth in love, respect and human solidarity.

Samartha cites several important reasons for dialogue – historical, socioeconomic, and political, empirical, human and theological. Countries which had been under colonial rule for long have experienced a general renaissance giving birth to several socio-economic, political, and religiocultural movements. The pluralistic heritage of the peoples of Asia and Africa has been brought into sharper focus during the post-colonial years of political independence. In such a situation “where religions divide people into different communities and where political alignments tend to follow religious affiliations it is felt that inter-religious dialogues can help to bring people closer together.”
 
As many countries have become independent since the middle of the twentieth century, national development has become an urgent priority in those countries. In this endeavour there are certain human concerns which are common to people of all faiths. Inter-religious dialogues can prove to be helpful in this task of nation-building by pooling together the different perspectives and resources of the many religious traditions in addressing some of the common problems.
 
 
Then again, many people in secularized, scientifically and technologically advanced countries have become alarmed with the adverse effects of their so-called materialistic progress on society. Hence the earnest quest for authentic, relevant and mystical spirituality which can give purpose and direction to life as well as transform it. Inter-religious dialogues assume essential significance in such a quest.

Similarly the importance of personal relationships is being increasingly recognized in pluralistic societies. Religions cannot be known through academic studies of creeds and doctrines. While such knowledge has its value, it cannot compare with the significance of inter-faith personal relationships. “Informed understanding, critical appreciation and balanced judgment – these cannot arise except where people meet in friendliness and trust, in openness and commitment.” Furthermore in a world of increasing cruelty and violence there is need for ecumenical religious communities as ‘islands of hope in an ocean of despair.’ It is dialogue which facilitates the birth of such cross-religious communities.

Samartha presents three theological reasons for justifying dialogue. Firstly, God has entered into a dialogical relationship with all humanity in a very special way through incarnation. Therefore to follow a dialogical lifestyle is to be part of God’s continuing work among human beings. Secondly, the gospel of forgiveness, reconciliation and new creation is full of the promise of the formation of a true ecumenical community in which all barriers are broken down and bonds of love are made stronger. The offer of such a gospel unavoidably depends on dialogue. Thirdly, truth in the Bible is not propositional but a relational concept. One experiences truth in dynamic personal relationships between God and human beings, and among human beings. Thus dialogue becomes a methodological channel in the search for truth.

There are however several obstacles to dialogue. In his writings, Samartha identifies some of them: lack of courage for dialogue; the fear that it dilutes Christian faith commitment and betrays Christian mission; the fear that it leads to religious relativism and syncretism; bitter memories of past relationships among people of different faiths; the presence of evil elements in religious traditions and human encounters; the apprehension of people of other faiths that dialogue is a disguised method of Christian mission to convert people; the perspective that the framework of dialogue is western; and the practical problems of communication in the dialogical relationship.

Conclusion: 
Samartha is of the opinion that most of the obstacles to inter-religious dialogue are based on unjustified fears and lack of proper understanding about the nature and method of dialogue. He emphasizes that interreligious dialogue can take place meaningfully only when all the partners are genuinely committed to their respective faiths and yet maintain a receptive openness to the spiritualities of other people. It should however be kept in mind that there can be no such thing as pure religious dialogues. Politicoeconomic and socio-cultural factors also can influence inter-religious relationships. So also there can be no single approach to dialogue, because the partners hail from diverse cultural backgrounds and different historical situations and have developed highly complex attitudes towards the basic questions of life. For instance, some may enter into dialogue as they feel the urgency of cooperation on issues of common human concern, while others may seek dialogue to discover spiritual resources to edify human life and to ward off the ill-effects of secularization. There could be several other approaches to dialogue. Samartha hopes that some of the conceptual and methodological problems would be resolved in the course of the dialogical relationship itself. One way by which some of the barriers to dialogue could be removed is by building a sound theology of dialogue. It is in this area that Samartha has made a significant contribution. His paradigm for inter-religious relationships could be entitled as “A Theocentric Christo-Pneumatological Model.”
<hr />
You can request me for proper footnote format. 
Bibliography: 
Samartha. Dialogue as a Quest for New Relationships, Journal of the Chair in Christianity, Vol. I, No.1. Geneva: WCC, 1989.
Samartha. Courage for Dialogue: Ecumenical Issues in Inter-Religious Relationships. Geneva: WCC, 1981.
Samartha, One Christ – Many Religions: Toward a Revised Christology. Bangalore: SATHRI, 1992.
Samartha. The Progress and Promise of Inter-Religious Dialogues. Journal of Ecumenical Studies, Vol. IX, No.3. Philadelphia: N.P, 1972.
Aprem, Mar. Indian Christian who is who. Bombay: Bombay Parish Church of the East, 1983.
http://archive.wfn.org/2001/07/msg00231.html. (24/01/2014).

</div>

S.J. Samartha on inter-faith Dialogue

Introduction: Stanley Jedidiah Samartha was the first director of the World Council of Churches (WCC) sub-unit on Dialogue with People of ...

Nov 9, 2013

Haipou Jadonang and Heraka Movement

<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Haipou Jadonang was born in the Zeliangrong community in 1905 at Kambiron village, British India (present-day Tamenglong district of Manipur) and died on August 29, 1931 in Imphal. He was born to Thindai and Tabonliu in a Rongmei family. He was youngest of the couple's three sons, and his father died when he was around one year old.

From his childhood he was mild, most truthful, peaceful, hardworking and helpful. Jadonang was a divine soul born out of Tingwang’s wish to redeem Naga society from the events and ills of the community. He was a fortune-teller, a divine leader, a saint, spiritual leader, social reformer, lover of indigenous religion and culture, a successful organizer and extensive traveller and a bold military commander, all rolled into one person called Haipou Jadonang. He preached teachings and lessons to masses, constructed a temple of God Bishnu in his Kambiron village and another at Binnakandi on Cachar district. 
 
 
He abolished many taboos and superstitions and established a reformed cult-Heraka, which means ‘Pure’. Jadonang led a pilgrimage to Bhuvan cave where he preached spirituality and ideals of divine life. He was a strict follower of discipline. The young Gaidinliu assisted him in this divine work. He evolved scientific military training and military caution. He composed patriotic songs to be sung during military adventures. He composed hymns and devotional songs, which are very popular among Zeliangrong people particularly the Heraka followers. He innovated and invented different dance forms. 
 
 
He was a freedom-loving spiritual leader and wished his people to live peacefully free from foreign yoke. That is why he established a Naga army to protect his people from British rule. He visualized a kingdom (Makam Gwangdi) of his people, which British described as Naga Raj. The Britishers wanted to remove this obstacle called Jadonang from their path for smooth expansion of colonial rule. They fabricated a case of murder of four Manipuri traders and falsely implicated him in these murder cases. 
 
 
Haipou Jadonang founded the Heraka (or Haraka, "Pure") religious movement, variously described as a reform movement or a cult. Heraka derives from an ancestral Naga practices known as "Paupaise", and is also influenced by Hinduism and Christianity. It is also known as the "Gaidinliu movement", Periese ("old practice"), Kelumse ("prayer practice") and Ranise ("Rani's practice"). Khampai is a pejorative term for the movement. It has also been described as "Naga renaissance".[4]
Jadonang encouraged the Heraka followers to worship and make sacrifices to the creator god Tingwang. In accordance with the Rongmei tradition, which states that the humans first emerged from a primeval cave, Jadonang established a cave temple at the Bhuvan cave.
 
 
Jadonang was arrested at Tamenglong in December 1928, after he prophesized the end of the British Raj. J. C. Higgins, the Political Agent of Manipur State, arrested him on February 1931 at Cachar. A month later, he was taken to Imphal and imprisoned there. On 29 August, the British hanged him on the banks of the Nambul River, for the murder of four Manipuri traders. According to the British government, he and his followers had sacrificed the traders to the deity in a temple near Nungkao. According to his supporters, the case was fabricated by the British and Jadonang was falsely implicated.
 
 
British invaders hanged him in Imphal on 29th August 1931.He preferred to die than to sacrifice his religion, culture and above all the freedom of his people. People throughout the world are generally found having pride in the history of their forefathers. The divine revolutionaries Haipou Jadonang and spiritual lady Rani Ma Gaidinliu sacrificed their lives for us. They laid their lives for our better tomorrow and through their untiring deeds the cultural identity of Zeliangrong people could be kept intact.
 
 
Haipou Jadonang was a Rongmei Naga religious leader, social reformer, a freedom fighter and symbol of Naga unity from Manipur, British India. He established the Heraka religious movement, and declared himself to be the "messiah king" of the Nagas. His movement was widespread in the Zeliangrong territory before the switch to Christianity. He also envisaged an independent Naga kingdom ("Makam Gwangdi" or "Naga Raj"), which brought him in conflict with the British rulers of India. He was hanged by the British in 1931, and succeeded by his cousin Rani Gaidinliu.
</div>

Haipou Jadonang and Heraka Movement

Haipou Jadonang was born in the Zeliangrong community in 1905 at Kambiron village, British India (present-day Tamenglong district of Manipu...

Oct 28, 2013

The Doctrine of God

<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: justify;" trbidi="on">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Doctrine of God:
A body of beliefs about God, man, Christ, the church, and other related concepts considered authoritative and thus worthy of acceptance by all members of the community of faith.
</blockquote>
The creator and sustainer of the universe who has provided humankind with a revelation of Himself through the natural world and through His Son, Jesus Christ. 
 
The Bible does not seek to prove the existence of God; it simply affirms His existence by declaring, "In the beginning God..." (Gen 1:1). God has revealed Himself through the physical universe (Ps 19:1; Rom 1:19-20). By observing the universe, one can find positive indications of God's existence. Creation reveals the results of a universal mind that devised a master plan and executed it. It makes more sense to accept the idea of God as Creator of the universe than to assume that our orderly universe came into existence apart from a divine being. 
 
The greatest revelation of God, however, comes through the Bible. Through the inspired written record, both the existence of God and the nature of God are revealed in and through Jesus Christ. Jesus stated, "He that has seen me, has seen the Father" (John 14:9). 
 
Although the full revelation of God was in Jesus Christ, the human mind cannot fully understand God. One reason for this is that Scripture does not record all the actions and teachings of Jesus (John 21:25). Another reason is the limitation of the human mind. How can man's finite mind understand the infinity of God? It is not possible. 
 
Although we cannot fully understand God, we still can know Him. We know Him through a personal relationship of faith and through a study of what the Bible teaches about His nature. 
 
God may be described in terms of attributes. An attribute is an inherent characteristic of a person or being. While we cannot describe God in a comprehensive way, we can learn about Him by examining His attributes as revealed in the Bible. 
 
The first group is known as the natural attributes of God. 
 
God Is Spirit. Jesus taught that "God is Spirit" (John 4:24). God has no body, no physical or measurable form. Thus, God is invisible. He became visible in human form in the person of Jesus Christ, but His essence is invisible. 
 
God Is Changeless. Progress and change may characterize some of His works, but God Himself remains unchanged (Heb 1:12). He does not change; otherwise, He would not be perfect. Thus, what we know of God can be known with certainty. He is not different from one time to another. 
 
God Is All Powerful. God's power is unlimited. He can do anything that is not inconsistent with His nature, character, and purpose (Gen 17:1; 18:14). The only limitations on God's power are imposed by Himself (Gen 18:25). "Impossible" is not in God's vocabulary. God creates and sustains all things; yet He never grows weary (Isa 40:27-31). 
 
God Is All Knowing. God possesses all knowledge (Job 38:39; Rom 11:33-36). Because God is everywhere at one and the same time, He knows everything simultaneously. That God has the power to know the thoughts and motives of every heart is evident from many Scripture passages, notably Job 37:16; Ps 147:5, and Heb 3:13. 
 
God Is Everywhere. God is not confined to any part of the universe but is present in all His power at every point in space and every moment in time (Ps 139:7-12). Thus, God does not belong to any one nation or generation. He is the God of all the earth (Gen 18:25). 
 
God Is Eternal. Eternity refers to God's relation to time. Past, present, and future are known equally to Him (2 Peter 3:8; Rev 1:8). Time is like a parade that man sees only a segment at a time. But God sees time in its entirety. 
 
The second group of attributes is called moral attributes. These refer to God's character, His essential nature. 
 
God Is Holy. The word holy comes from a root word that means "to separate." Thus, it refers to God as separated from or exalted above other things (Isa 6:1-3). Holiness refers to God's moral excellence. Being holy, God demands holiness in His own children. And what He demands, He supplies. Holiness is God's gift that we receive by faith through His Son, Jesus Christ (Eph 4:24). 
 
God Is Righteous. Righteousness as applied to God refers to His affirmation of what is right as opposed to what is wrong. The righteousness of God refers to His moral laws laid down to guide the conduct of humankind, as in the Ten Commandments. Righteousness also refers to God's administration of justice. He brings punishment upon the disobedient (Gen 18:25; Deut 32:4; Rom 2:6-16). Finally, God's righteousness is redemptive. In the Book of Romans the righteousness of God refers to God declaring the believer to be in a state of righteousness as though he had never been unrighteous (Rom 1:16-17; 3:24-26). This is possible because of the sacrificial death of Jesus on our behalf. 
 
God Is Love. Love is the essential, self-giving nature of God. God's love for man seeks to awaken a responsive love of man for God. Divine love runs like a golden thread through the entire Bible. Nature is eloquent with the skill, wisdom, and power of God. Only in the Bible, however, do we discover God giving Himself and all He possesses to His creatures, in order to win their response and to possess them for Himself. 
God loved and gave; He loved and sought-just as a shepherd seeks his sheep. God loved and suffered, providing His love by giving His all on the cross for the redemption of humanity. God, in His love, wills good for all His creatures (Gen 1:31; Ps 145:9; Mark 10:18). 
 
God Is Truth. All truth, whether natural, physical, or religious, is grounded in God. Thus, any seemingly inconsistent teaching between natural and physical sciences and God's revelation of Himself is more apparent than real. Truth is magnified in an absolute way through God's revelation. 
 
 
God Is Wisdom. God's wisdom is revealed in His doing the best thing, in the best way, at the best time for the best purpose. 
 
Some people have knowledge, but little wisdom, while the most wise at times have little knowledge. But God is "the only wise God" (1 Tim 1:17). In creation, history, human lives, redemption, and Christ, His divine wisdom is revealed. Man, lacking wisdom, can claim God's wisdom simply by asking (1 Kings 3:9; James 1:5). 
 
The believer's understanding of God continues to increase throughout his earthly pilgrimage. It will finally be complete in eternity when he stands in the presence of God. 
 
(from Nelson's Illustrated Bible Dictionary, Copyright © 1986, Thomas Nelson Publishers)</div>

The Doctrine of God

Doctrine of God: A body of beliefs about God, man, Christ, the church, and other related concepts considered authoritative and thus worth...

Oct 13, 2013

Christian Origin: Social, Political, Cultural and Religious background

<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: justify;" trbidi="on">
Christian Origin: Social, Political, Cultural and Religious background of the origin of Christianity in Roman Palestine: 
Christianity developed out of Judaism in the 1st century C.E in Roman-occupied Palestine, a Jewish province of the Roman Empire. It is founded on the life, teachings, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ, and those who follow him are called "Christians." Christianity has many different branches and forms with accompanying variety in beliefs and practices. 
 
The three major branches of Christianity are Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, and Protestantism, with numerous subcategories within each of these branches.
The first century of the Common Era was a time of political instability, insurgency, and suffering. Poverty, taxation, famine, and epidemics of disease had made life intolerable for many. In the year of Jesus' birth, the Roman authorities had punished an armed uprising by crucifying approximately 2,000 people. 
 
Christianity grew from a 1st-century Jewish following to a religion that existed across the entire Greco-Roman world and beyond. Early Christianity may be divided into 2 distinct phases: 
1. the apostolic period, when the first apostles were alive and led the Church, 
2. and the post-apostolic period, when an early episcopal structure developed, and persecution was periodically intense. 
 
The Roman persecution of Christians ended in AD 313 when Constantine the Great adopted the religion, and who in 325 instituted it as the Roman Empire's state religion following the First Council of Nicaea, the beginning of the period of the First seven Ecumenical Councils.

</div>

Christian Origin: Social, Political, Cultural and Religious background

Christian Origin: Social, Political, Cultural and Religious background of the origin of Christianity in Roman Palestine: Christianity deve...

The Crusades

<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: justify;" trbidi="on">
Crusades are military expeditions, beginning in the late 11th century, that were organized by Western Christians in response to centuries of Muslim wars of expansion. Their objectives were to check the spread of Islam, to retake control of the Holy Land, to conquer pagan areas, and to recapture formerly Christian territories; they were seen by many of their participants as a means of redemption and expiation for sins. 
 
Etymology 
From Middle French croisade (“marked by the Cross”), from Medieval Latin cruciata, past participle of cruciare (“to mark with a cross”), from Latin crux (“cross”). 
 
First Crusade (1095–1099) 
The First Crusade (1096–1099) started as a widespread pilgrimage (France and Germany) and ended as a military expedition by Roman Catholic Europe to regain the Holy Lands taken in the Muslim conquests of the Levant (632–661), ultimately resulting in the recapture of Jerusalem in 1099. It was launched on 27 November 1095 by Pope Urban II with the primary goal of responding to an appeal from Byzantine Emperor Alexios I Komnenos, who requested that western volunteers come to his aid and help to repel the invading Seljuq Turks from Anatolia. An additional goal soon became the principal objective—the Christian reconquest of the sacred city of Jerusalem and the Holy Land and the freeing of the Eastern Christians from Islamic rule. 
 
Second Crusade (1147–1149) 
The Second Crusade (1145–1149) was the second major crusade launched from Europe. The Second Crusade was started in response to the fall of the County of Edessa the previous year to the forces of Zengi. The county had been founded during the First Crusade (1096–1099) by Baldwin of Boulogne in 1098. While it was the first Crusader state to be founded, it was also the first to fall. 
 
The Second Crusade was announced by Pope Eugene III, and was the first of the crusades to be led by European kings, namely Louis VII of France and Conrad III of Germany, with help from a number of other European nobles. The armies of the two kings marched separately across Europe. After crossing Byzantine territory into Anatolia, both armies were separately defeated by the Seljuq Turks. 
 
Third Crusade (1187–1192) 
The Third Crusade (1189–1192), also known as the Kings' Crusade, was an attempt by European leaders to reconquer the Holy Land from Saladin (Ṣalāḥ ad-Dīn Yūsuf ibn Ayyūb). It was largely successful, capturing Acre, Jaffa, and reversing most of Saladin's conquests, but failed to capture Jerusalem, which was the emotional and spiritual fixation of the Crusade. 
 
After the failure of the Second Crusade, the Zengid dynasty controlled a unified Syria and engaged in a conflict with the Fatimid rulers of Egypt, which ultimately resulted in the unification of Egyptian and Syrian forces under the command of Saladin, who employed them to reduce the Christian states and to recapture Jerusalem in 1187. Spurred by religious zeal, Henry II of England and Philip II of France ended their conflict with each other to lead a new crusade. Henry's death in 1189, however, meant that the English contingent came under the command of his successor Richard I of England (known as Richard the Lionheart, in French Cœur de Lion). The elderly Holy Roman Emperor Frederick Barbarossa responded to the call to arms, and led a massive army across Anatolia, but drowned in a river in Asia Minor on June 10, 1190, before reaching the Holy Land. His death caused the greatest grief among the German Crusaders. Most of his discouraged troops left to go home. 
 
After driving the Muslims from Acre, Frederick's successor Leopold V of Austria and Philip left the Holy Land in August 1191. Saladin failed to defeat Richard in any military engagements, and Richard secured several more key coastal cities. Nevertheless, on September 2, 1192, Richard finalized a treaty with Saladin by which Jerusalem would remain under Muslim control, but which also allowed unarmed Christian pilgrims and merchants to visit the city. Richard departed the Holy Land on October 9. The successes of the Third Crusade would allow the Crusaders to maintain a considerable kingdom based in Cyprus and the Syrian coast. However, its failure to recapture Jerusalem would lead to the call for a Fourth Crusade six years later. 
 
Fourth Crusade (1202–1204) 
The Fourth Crusade (1202–1204) was originally intended to conquer Muslim-controlled Jerusalem by means of an invasion through Egypt. Instead, in April 1204, the Crusaders of Western Europe invaded and sacked the Christian (Eastern Orthodox) city of Constantinople, capital of the Byzantine Empire. This is seen as one of the final acts in the Great Schism between the Eastern Orthodox Church and Roman Catholic Church, and a key turning point in the decline of the empire and of Christianity in the Near East. 
 
The crusaders established the Latin Empire (1204–1261) and other "Latin" states in the Byzantine lands they conquered. Byzantine resistance in unconquered sections of the empire such as Nicaea, Trebizond, and Epirus ultimately liberated the capital and overthrew the crusader states. 
 
Fifth Crusade (1217–1221) 
The Fifth Crusade (1213–1221) was an attempt by Catholic Europeans to reacquire Jerusalem and the rest of the Holy Land by first conquering the powerful Ayyubid state in Egypt. 
 
Pope Innocent III and his successor Pope Honorius III organized crusading armies led by King Andrew II of Hungary and Duke Leopold VI of Austria, and a foray against Jerusalem ultimately left the city in Muslim hands. Later in 1218, a German army led by Oliver of Cologne, and a mixed army of Dutch, Flemish and Frisian soldiers led by William I, Count of Holland joined the crusade. In order to attack Damietta in Egypt, they allied in Anatolia with the Seljuk Sultanate of Rûm which attacked the Ayyubids in Syria in an attempt to free the Crusaders from fighting on two fronts. 
 
After occupying the port of Damietta, the Crusaders marched south towards Cairo in July 1221, but were turned back after their dwindling supplies led to a forced retreat. A nighttime attack by Sultan Al-Kamil resulted in a great number of crusader losses, and eventually in the surrender of the army. Al-Kamil agreed to an eight-year peace agreement with Europe. 
 
Sixth Crusade (1228–1229) 
The Sixth Crusade started in 1228 as an attempt to regain Jerusalem. It began seven years after the failure of the Fifth Crusade. It involved very little actual fighting. The diplomatic maneuvering of the Holy Roman Emperor, Frederick II resulted in the Kingdom of Jerusalem regaining control of Jerusalem and other areas for fifteen years. 
 
Seventh Crusade (1248–1254) 
The Seventh Crusade was a crusade led by Louis IX of France from 1248 to 1254. Approximately 800,000 bezants were paid in ransom for King Louis who, along with thousands of his troops, were defeated and captured by the Egyptian army led by the Ayyubid Sultan Turanshah supported by the Bahariyya Mamluks led by Faris ad-Din Aktai, Baibars al-Bunduqdari, Qutuz, Aybak and Qalawun. 
Louis was disturbed by events in Syria, where the Mamluk sultan Baibars had been attacking the remnant of the Crusader states. Baibars had seized the opportunity after a war pitting the cities of Venice and Genoa against each other (1256–1260) had exhausted the Syrian ports that the two cities controlled. By 1265 Baibars had captured Nazareth, Haifa, Toron, and Arsuf. Hugh III of Cyprus, nominal king of Jerusalem, landed in Acre to defend that city, while Baibars marched as far north as Armenia, which was at that time under Mongol control. 
 
These events led to Louis' call for a new crusade in 1267, although there was little support this time; Jean de Joinville, the chronicler who accompanied Louis on the Seventh Crusade, refused to go. Louis was soon convinced by his brother Charles of Anjou to attack Tunis first, which would give them a strong base for attacking Egypt, the focus of Louis' previous crusade as well as the Fifth Crusade before him, both of which had been defeated there. Charles, as King of Sicily, also had his own interests in this area of the Mediterranean. The Khalif of Tunis, Muhammad I al-Mustansir, also had connections with Christian Spain and was considered a good candidate for conversion. In 1270 Louis landed on the African coast in July, a very unfavourable season for landing. Much of the army became sick because of poor drinking water, his Damietta born son John Sorrow died on August 3 and on August 25 Louis himself died from a "flux in the stomach", one day after the arrival of Charles. His dying word was "Jerusalem." Charles proclaimed Louis' son Philip III the new king, but because of his youth Charles became the actual leader of the crusade. 
 
Because of further diseases the siege of Tunis was abandoned on October 30 by an agreement with the sultan. In this agreement the Christians gained free trade with Tunis, and residence for monks and priests in the city was guaranteed, so the crusade could be regarded as a partial success. After hearing of the death of Louis and the evacuation of the crusaders from Tunis, Sultan Baibars of Egypt cancelled his plan to send Egyptian troops to fight Louis in Tunis.[2] Charles now allied himself with Prince Edward of England, who had arrived in the meantime. When Charles called off the attack on Tunis, Edward continued on to Acre, the last crusader outpost in Syria. His time spent there is often called the Ninth Crusade. 
 
Eighth and Ninth Crusade (1270–1272) 
The Eighth Crusade was a crusade launched by Louis IX, King of France, in 1270. The Eighth Crusade is sometimes counted as the Seventh, if the Fifth and Sixth Crusades of Frederick II are counted as a single crusade. The Ninth Crusade is sometimes also counted as part of the Eighth. Louis was disturbed by events in Syria, where the Mamluk sultan Baibars had been attacking the remnant of the Crusader states. Baibars had seized the opportunity after a war pitting the cities of Venice and Genoa against each other (1256–1260) had exhausted the Syrian ports that the two cities controlled. By 1265 Baibars had captured Nazareth, Haifa, Toron, and Arsuf. Hugh III of Cyprus, nominal king of Jerusalem, landed in Acre to defend that city, while Baibars marched as far north as Armenia, which was at that time under Mongol control. 
 
Louis IX of France's failure to capture Tunis in the Eighth Crusade led Prince Edward of England to sail to Acre in what is known as the Ninth Crusade. The Ninth Crusade saw several impressive victories for Edward over Baibars. Ultimately the Crusade did not so much fail as withdraw, since Edward had pressing concerns at home and felt unable to resolve the internal conflicts within the remnant Outremer territories. It is arguable that the Crusading spirit was nearly "extinct," by this period as well. It also foreshadowed the imminent collapse of the last remaining crusader strongholds along the Mediterranean coast.</div>

The Crusades

Crusades are military expeditions, beginning in the late 11th century, that were organized by Western Christians in response to centuries o...

Oct 9, 2013

How to Make Money Blogging:1

<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
It's got to be Google AdSense. Google AdSense Program is a revenue-sharing opportunity for small, medium and large web sites that places ads for goods and services that are relevant to the content of your site, targeted to the people who frequent your pages. In turn, you get paid a small amount when the ad is either displayed on your page, or clicked on. We'll show you some good ideas that will help increase your AdSense revenue. You can sign up from <a href="http://google.com/adsense" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">here</a>.
 
 
Learn how AdSense works
AdSense automatically sends ads to your site based on a few different criteria:</div>
<ul>
<li>
Contextual targeting. AdSense crawlers scan your page, analyze your content, and serve up ads designed match your content. They do this using keyword analysis, word frequency, font size, and the link structure of the web.<div class="clearall" style="clear: both; height: 0px; line-height: 0; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">
</div>
</li>
<li>Placement targeting. 
This allows advertisers to choose to run their ads on specific subsections of a publisher's website. If your website matches an advertisers criteria, their ad will appear on your page.
</li>
<li>
Interest-based advertising. 
This lets advertisers reach users based on their interests and the user's previous interactions with them, such as a visit to their website. Google's Ads Preferences Manager allows users themselves to choose their interest categories, which further helps advertisers focus their ad campaigns. This method is good for monetizing your site more efficiently, as it increases the value for advertisers and provides a more relevant experience for users.</li>
</ul>
Traffic. First and formost, in order to generate any kind of revenue from AdSense you must have people clicking on your ads. In order for this to happen, you need to have people on your site, reading your content! Whether you have a business website, or a personal blog, the rule is the same: Get the word out! But beware Google can ban you permanently for fraudulent or invalid click.
 
 
</div>

How to Make Money Blogging:1

It's got to be Google AdSense. Google AdSense Program is a revenue-sharing opportunity for small, medium and large web sites that plac...