tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9112439593032667008.post2935725817621768103..comments2023-04-22T12:31:37.714-07:00Comments on Blogging the Bible: July 7Kimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15063678082377147197noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9112439593032667008.post-88054004949308686712010-07-08T18:52:23.442-07:002010-07-08T18:52:23.442-07:00While I understand why your answer satisfies you, ...While I understand why your answer satisfies you, it fails to satisfy me. First because, as you point out, the reasoning is circular from a nonbeliever's point of view.<br /><br />Second because such reason could be applied to any attribute of any diety. You say it off your God's right to destroy his creation. A Muslim terrorist could say the same about what he believes to be his God's command to kill non Muslims. Reasoning that applies equally well to contradictory claims is in my mind, suspect.Erikahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16846371347200009801noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9112439593032667008.post-24981912530453273722010-07-08T05:30:52.803-07:002010-07-08T05:30:52.803-07:00To me, the different between God creating life and...To me, the different between God creating life and us "creating" life (whether through artificial intelligence or even the old fashioned way) is that we are not God. I'm sure this line of reasoning is frustrating and perhaps circular to an atheist, but if there is a God who is omnipotent, omniscient, and all together above us in every way, what makes us think that He has to play by the rules He gave US to use? Many of His rules for us (such as to not take revenge) are based on the fact that we do not know human hearts like He does. Vengeance, to continue the example, isn't our job, but His.<br /><br />Or even if He ultimately DOES play by the heart of our rules, even if His actions are ultimately loving (which I believe they are), why do we think He has to follow our rules to achieve those results? <br /><br />My point is, if there is a God who is as the Bible describes (all-powerful, all-knowing), then part of believing in Him is understanding that we will never understand everything He does, and we don't get to set His rules, based on what we think would be appropriate for humans. As God says in Isaiah 55, "My ways are not your ways, and my thoughts are not your thoughts. As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts higher than your thoughts." That's what faith is. Faith believes that God is higher than you, and all your reasoning comes from Him, and it is ultimately puny in His sight.<br /><br />Is that convenient? No, it's not. But it's what makes faith, faith.<br /><br />I have no idea if I explained my thoughts well or even adequately, but it will have to do for this morning. I do appreciate you bringing your concerns. While the purpose of this blog is certainly not apologetics (it started to help me understand Scripture more myself, definitely not to explain or defend it to the world), I appreciate that you voice your questions. When I started this blog, I was hoping to learn more about Scripture in community. I was honestly expecting more the community of my church, but I like this community, too.Kimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15063678082377147197noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9112439593032667008.post-15374796113193613452010-07-07T22:43:46.375-07:002010-07-07T22:43:46.375-07:00God has the right to take away life b/c He is the ...<i> God has the right to take away life b/c He is the one who gave the life.</i><br /><br />I have never really been able to understand this point of view. I hardly think that giving life comes with the right to take it away. <br /><br />I am a programmer, and I have thought, from time to time, about artificial intelligence and whether or not a machine could achieve real consciousness, whatever that means. I never did come to an opinion, but I did decide that if a machine could get to the point where it could convince me that it was conscious of its own being, if it could feel and judge, then I would no longer have the right to absolute power over it.<br /><br />If a being can say "I am", if it can contemplate the idea of not being, then it has some independence from its source, whatever that source may be. That source does not have a right to destroy it.Erikahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16846371347200009801noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9112439593032667008.post-18638891473313817052010-07-07T12:05:34.548-07:002010-07-07T12:05:34.548-07:00Thanks, Dr. Camp!
Thinking it over, the exegesis ...Thanks, Dr. Camp!<br /><br />Thinking it over, the exegesis angle is probably my biggest complaint. The passage is simple too obscure to attempt to apply it so directly and specifically to everyone's life. We simply know nothing about the man. I'm not even entirely sure how we figured he was in pain. Yes, his mother said that, "I gave birth to him in pain," but as a mother myself, who has twice experienced natural childbirth, my only answer was, "You think?" If we all named our babies based on our feelings during the birth process, they would all be called, Jabez (or a lot worse)! And it says that Jabez cried out to God, but in my mind, you can use the phrasing of crying out simply to convey his earnestness.<br /><br />Whatever. I'm sure Bruce Wilkinson researched the nuances of the Hebrew text more thoroughly, but my point is, the more I read the text, the less I see any DEFINITE info about Jabez in there. Two verses, people!Kimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15063678082377147197noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9112439593032667008.post-18284074236410956072010-07-07T11:57:30.513-07:002010-07-07T11:57:30.513-07:00Dr. Camp, one of my Bible professors from Lipscomb...Dr. Camp, one of my Bible professors from Lipscomb, wrote me after reading today's blog and volunteered to send me his own critique of the "Prayer of Jabez" trend. I told him that it was most likely going to end up as a comment, and I'm assuming the fact that he sent it anyway to be tacit permission to share it on this blog:<br /><br />The book "The Prayer of Jabez" has created such a sensation, in my opinion, largely because it promises a prayer guaranteed to work. While I agree prayer "works," the way many understand this book is that God will answer the prayer in a way they would like him to. The book is by a man named Bruce Wilkinson, who claims that he "discovered" this obscure prayer from 1 Chron 4:9-10, and since he has begun praying it, God has sent blessings. He suggests praying the prayer every day is the key to receiving God's blessings. While it is right to ask God to bless us, we do so in order to share those blessings with others and so bring glory to God.<br /><br />I heard the author on television explaining how he discovered the power of this prayer. He said that he was asking God to show him how to be honorable. While I would have thought the answer would be, “Look to Jesus,” the answer was instead found in this obscure little prayer.<br /><br />To be fair to Wilkinson, he speaks of blessings mostly in terms of ministry opportunities. However, others have taken it to mean personal, material blessings. Once the book caught on, it created its own industry so that there are now Prayer of Jabez books for all ages, study guides, t-shirts, mugs, etc. This marketing aspect is itself troubling to me, since prayer for some has becomes a means to literally profit.<br /> <br />Basically, what Wilkinson does is spiritualize each line of the prayer. The things he suggests praying for are largely good ideas, but they don't really come from that text. He also imaginatively recreates a life for Jabez, which has little support in the text.<br /> <br />Some of my basic problems with the book are:<br /> <br />1. It has a magical view of prayer. That is, say the right words (the prayer of Jabez) and get guaranteed results. This, in my opinion, attempts to manipulate God.<br /> <br />2. The point of the book IS NOT praying in general, but praying this obscure prayer. Why not a more prominent one--like the Lord's model prayer?<br /> <br />3. Although not Wilkinson's intent, many are looking for materialistic, selfish answers to prayers. One need only look at the testimonials on the Prayer of Jabez web site to see this.<br /> <br />4. The prayer is that of a man in pain, and may be appropriate for some today who suffer. But overall we are the richest people in the world, so it seems somewhat inappropriate to pray this prayer. One could ask where does cross-bearing and persecution, which is promised for those who want to lead a godly life, fit in?<br /> <br />5. I am a little suspicious that it took over 2000 years for someone to discover the power of this particular prayer. It never had a prominent place in Judaism or Christianity before Wilkerson rediscovered it for us.<br /> <br />6. This book represents really bad exegesis (biblical interpretation). It does so both by its recreation of Jabez's life from only a few verses and by spiritualizing the text. Even if the intent is good and perhaps harmless, such a use of the text may encourage inappropriate use of other texts, which will be harmful.<br /> <br />7. The focus to me seems very individualistic and opportunistic. The prayer, it seems to me, has very little potential to sustain the Christian life in the long run or to edify the community.<br /> <br />8. I am inherently suspicious of fads.<br /><br />9. This book appeals to our culture's desire for quick fixes and immediate answers. Anyone who has struggled with a real crisis in life (or even with the discipline of prayer itself) knows that the answers are not always immediate and the solutions are not always those we would chose (see Paul on his thorn in the flesh in 2 Cor 12).Kimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15063678082377147197noreply@blogger.com