Incredibly, the church victimized had an armed security guard. An armed security guard at a church in the United States!
...Dr. John A. Bertsche
Normal
So you would have preferred the alternative?
Monday, December 17, 2007
Anything BUT Normal
So you would have preferred the alternative?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
"Must we all become armed, fearful of each other, before we have the courage to act?"
Sounds like the good Doctor is already fearful of everybody. "Courage to act" my ass.
I can't make this Phd's type of tho't process work in my mind. A killer comes to kill and someone, using a gun, stops him. So we need to limit the ability of people to defend themselves? Is that the same logic as- Thieves are stealing cars so we need fewer cars available? Everybody knows just one more addition to our 20K+ gun laws will be the magic bullet that stops all criminal activity. Why is death by "X" different from death by "Y" if we say we are so concerned about all the deaths? Is someone less dead when stabbed rather than shot? Car wreck than shot? Do these (#&$*($ idiots not see what is happening in the UK, Australia, Japan? Don't tell me you're concerned about all the deaths when talking about guns, just be honest with me and with yourself and tell me you want guns taken away from law-abiding citizens so you can further your crappy little socialist agenda.
Once again more proof that most doctorates in this country are unearned. Whatever he is a doctor of, it is not history or he would have known that guns in church is traditional, and in fact used to be required by law, with punishments for failing to arrive at meeting without arms and ammunition.
But, of course, this man is a doctor, which means he cannot read, reason, or survive in reality.
Him and his horse.
Scroll down the comments and read what Crotalus offered the "good doctor" Pretty much nailed it. Good One Crotalus!
Whether anyone likes it or not, going armed into the House of God is profaning the House, and the LORD does not look upon that lightly. The shedding of blood, or the carrying of arms into the House of God is forbidden by the LORD. The Lord made that expressly clear through His prophets. In the following passages, we are first shown that the shedding of blood in the House of God is expressly not allowed.
And when Athaliah heard the noise of the guard and of the people, she came to the people into the temple of the LORD. And when she looked, behold, the king stood by a pillar, as the manner was, and the princes and the trumpeters by the king, and all the people of the land rejoiced, and blew with trumpets: and Athaliah rent her clothes, and cried, Treason, Treason. But Jehoiada the priest commanded the captains of the hundreds, the officers of the host, and said unto them, Have her forth without the ranges: and him that followeth her kill with the sword. For the priest had said, Let her not be slain in the house of the LORD. And they laid hands on her; and she went by the way by the which the horses came into the king’s house: and there was she slain (2 Kings 11:13-16)
And in this passage, King David, a prophet of God, is very express that, due to his shedding of blood, he is not allowed to construct the House of God.
Then he called for Solomon his son, and charged him to build an house for the LORD God of Israel. And David said to Solomon, My son, as for me, it was in my mind to build an house unto the name of the LORD my God: But the word of the LORD came to me, saying, Thou hast shed blood abundantly, and hast made great wars: thou shalt not build an house unto my name, because thou hast shed much blood upon the earth in my sight. (1 Chronicles 22:6-8)
Now, it is very plain that there exists no understanding that the LORD God will superintend His House, and will watch over it for good or ill, after all, He does own it as is made clear in Acts, chapter 20:
Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. (Acts 20:28)
Now, in case you doubt, the New Testament church is indeed the House of God. It simply replaced Israel as the house of witness on this earth. The apostle Paul was express about this in his letter to Timothy. Please note that there is a proper behavior in the House of God.
These things write I unto thee, hoping to come unto thee shortly: But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth. (1 Timothy 3:14-15)
What has been missed is this:
What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us? He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things? Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God’s elect? It is God that justifieth. Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us. Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter. Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us. For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans 8:31-39)
It is obvious by the statements given that the treasure of most, if not all, is of this world, which will perish. As for the “church” in Colorado, obviously they do not trust the LORD God of Heaven and earth to watch over them. Neither do they believe in the sovereignty of God, who will not allow one sparrow to fall to the ground without His express permission.
And I say unto you my friends, Be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do. But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear: Fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear him. Are not five sparrows sold for two farthings, and not one of them is forgotten before God? But even the very hairs of your head are all numbered. Fear not therefore: ye are of more value than many sparrows. (Luke 12:4-7)
What I see here is an ignorance of the true situation, from the Doctor and his letter, and all those who responded. What is clear is that no one wants to talk about the fact of what kind of “church” decides to depend upon the things of this world for its defense. The way the church is supposed to fight is expressed in the following passage of Scripture:
For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh: (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;) Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ; And having in a readiness to revenge all disobedience, when your obedience is fulfilled. (II Corinthians 10:3-6)
I think a lot of people are going to hear very much what Job and the Sadducees heard:
Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said, Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge? Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me. (Job 38:1-3)
Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. (Matthew 22:29)
Indeed, there are quite a number of folk here who do err, not knowing the power of God, nor the kingdom of God, nor the Scriptures. If they had, they would not have hid the truth with their words.
Do you suppose, that if the shooter had actually had his heart changed in hearing the Word of God, he would have ever contemplated doing what he did? You know, obedience to the gospel of Christ does actually change the heart of the person who repents and believes.
Perhaps the “church” in Colorado ought to focus more on insuring that its members are actually changed at salvation, instead of just claiming that they are.
In Christ
Paul W. Davis
Paul, I'll cede this to you: you are positive you are right, whereas I only strongly believe you are wrong. That's because ultimately, I admit I don't KNOW the will of God in this and other instances, whereas you are sure that you do.
I'm not going to even try to engage in a scriptural debate with you, as that is not my calling, it is yours. I can only address the reality that laws and aberrations of nature do not end at the physical threshhold of any church in this world.
It was Jesus who counselled his unarmed flock to sell their robes and buy a sword if they be unarmed.
God's most precious gift to us is life on this earth, we are instructed to protect it.
David,
This is where there is confusion between the kingdom of God and the kingdom of this world. Now, before I continue, you know full well that I strongly believe that the right to keep and bear arms is an absolute right that was secured, or recognized by the Second Amendment. Moreover, that all our rights are granted by the LORD God and they are unalienable. Please, make no mistake about this. Do not doubt this at all (If you do, write Wayne Fincher and ask him. He will confirm where I stand.)
That stated, there is a rule for interpreting Scripture that comes from Scripture itself, and it demonstrates why Straightarrow is incorrect in his assertion.
For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.
We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. (II Peter 1:16-21)
The above passage is one of the strongest statements in Scripture as to how we are to look at the word of God, which is the Scripture. The portion I wish to call to your attention to is bolded, which is:
Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
What this means is that there are no “one verse” doctrines in Scripture anywhere. Straightarrow’s reference to the Lord Jesus Christ’s command to do the following,
Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. (Luke 22:36)
sits in a certain context that is not generally applicable. As can be seen by the rest of passage, it sits in the context of the Lord Jesus’ upcoming sacrifice for our sins on the cross. This passage begins in verse 21 of Luke, chapter 22, and ends with verse 38. For the sake of brevity, I will quote from verse 35 on:
And he said unto them, When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye any thing? And they said, Nothing. Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end. And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough. (Luke 22:35-38)
Don’t you think it odd if the church of the Living God is to be armed that he told the 11 (Judas Iscariot left during this period of time) that two swords were sufficient for all of them? Of course, we find later that night Peter was very rash in employing the sword he carried and was rebuked for it by the Lord Jesus Himself.
And, behold, one of them which were with Jesus stretched out his hand, and drew his sword, and struck a servant of the high priest’s, and smote off his ear. Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword. (Matthew 26:51-52)
Then Simon Peter having a sword drew it, and smote the high priest’s servant, and cut off his right ear. The servant’s name was Malchus. Then said Jesus unto Peter, Put up thy sword into the sheath: the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it? (John 18:10-11)
Hardly a sound basis for a doctrine that states the Lord’s church is to be armed. In fact, what the Lord Jesus Christ told Pilate is a more sound basis for the doctrine that the Lord’s church is to be unarmed:
Then Pilate entered into the judgment hall again, and called Jesus, and said unto him, Art thou the King of the Jews? Jesus answered him, Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell it thee of me? Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the chief priests have delivered thee unto me: what hast thou done? Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence. (John 18:33-36)
The reason it is a more sound statement to lean upon is due to the following from Hebrews, chapter 11:
These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth. For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country. And truly, if they had been mindful of that country from whence they came out, they might have had opportunity to have returned. But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city. (Hebrews 11:13-16)
Thus, the New Testament church is not about the things of this world. Rather, it is about the things of the Kingdom of God, which is far more important than the things of this world.
Now, that you may understand further concerning the Romans 8:36 statement about the LORD’s children being “sheep for the slaughter.” It is a quote from Psalm 44 which applies to the children of Israel. But when the apostle Paul was given it by the Holy Ghost to set in a letter to the church at Rome, it made it applicable to the New Testament church as well. The applicable part of Psalm 44 states:
All this is come upon us; yet have we not forgotten thee, neither have we dealt falsely in thy covenant. Our heart is not turned back, neither have our steps declined from thy way; Though thou hast sore broken us in the place of dragons, and covered us with the shadow of death. If we have forgotten the name of our God, or stretched out our hands to a strange god; Shall not God search this out? for he knoweth the secrets of the heart. Yea, for thy sake are we killed all the day long; we are counted as sheep for the slaughter. Awake, why sleepest thou, O Lord? arise, cast us not off for ever. Wherefore hidest thou thy face, and forgettest our affliction and our oppression? For our soul is bowed down to the dust: our belly cleaveth unto the earth. Arise for our help, and redeem us for thy mercies’ sake. (Psalm 44:17-26)
I won’t go into all that this passage touches on, but simply to say, as is given in Galatians, those who are the LORD’s children have always been persecuted in this world (America really is an anomaly in this regard).
But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now. (Galatians 4:29)
The problem for many folks is that they believe more what they see with their eyes, that what they see through the eyes of faith (if even they have any faith at all). Thus, they want the world’s solution for the threats of harm they receive. But as touching the defense of the Lord’s church, consider the following:
If Christ is the head of the New Testament church, and the New Testament church functions as His body; does He not care for His body?
For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ. For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. For the body is not one member, but many. (I Corinthians 12:12-14)
But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him. (I Corinthians 12:18)
Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.(I Corinthians 12:27)
If the Lord is going to take the care to meld many different people into one functioning unit, and take the care to add and place every member as he sees fit, and call it His body, and make it function as His body would on this earth, certainly He will watch over it as He sees fit. However, for a church to be a New Testament church and have the Lord’s superintending care, it must follow the New Testament. Just how many churches do that? Moreover, the New Testament church is not universal either, but local, visible and autonomous. Being so, it is in obedience to its owner and head, which is the Lord Jesus Christ, and administered by the Holy Ghost. This being the case, don’t you think the LORD God knows precisely what is going on in His church, and how best to protect it if he so chooses?
Finally, I will leave you with two thoughts concerning knowing the will of God. The first is from Daniel, and is the standard for knowing the will of God. Notice the words Daniel uses in telling King Nebuchadnezzar the level of certainty for both the dream and the interpretation.
Forasmuch as thou sawest that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it brake in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold; the great God hath made known to the king what shall come to pass hereafter: and the dream is certain, and the interpretation thereof sure. (Daniel 2:45)
By the instrument of faith, Daniel knew with certainty and surety what Nebuchadnezzar’s dream was, and what it meant. The second example is from Jeremiah, and is an express instruction from the LORD God. Please note what the LORD states about knowing Him (and thus His will).
Thus saith the LORD, Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, neither let the mighty man glory in his might, let not the rich man glory in his riches: But let him that glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth me, that I am the LORD which exercise lovingkindness, judgment, and righteousness, in the earth: for in these things I delight, saith the LORD. (Jeremiah 9:23-24)
Here, Almighty God states plainly that you can know and understand Him. Since He does plainly so state, I don’t think the opportunity ought to be passed up.
You know, it is a sad day when Thomas Jefferson, who was a Deist who did not even believe that Jesus Christ is Almighty God come in the flesh, would be considered a fundamentalist by the vast majority of “Christians.” Why? Because he had no compunction writing the following:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
That is the problem with the vast majority of “churches” today – they are less fundamental than Thomas Jefferson.
In Christ,
Paul W. Davis
David,Paul,that was most excellent. Thanks for sharing.
Paul,
The problem is that you are stating that you believe that we should all give up our weapons and bow down to whatever evil others wish to inflict upon us. For is not the house of God the entire world? Should not followers of your interpretation of God worship God as you interpret the scriptures every single day, and not just on Sundays, the sabbath, in that building called a church?
I have no problem with Thomas Jefferson's words, but sadly I have difficulty swallowing yours. If God is a loving and merciful God as Jesus taught then why would He want his children raped, murdered, and abused by those who follow satan through their actions?
Now, admittedly, I have a firm grounding in History, including Church, and I know how the modern scripture was compiled. While I have no idea what was left out, I can reference just who compiled the works that were used. Please note that Christianity as we know it, unless you are a Coptic, is a product of the late Roman Empire. This includes the New Testament. This does not invalidate Christianity, nor does it invalidate the teachings. However, it is an important thing to keep in mind when one is reading scripture. During the time period in which the scriptures were compiled it would have been suicidal to encourage the commoners to be armed or to take up arms against the temporal rulers.
Anyway, last thing to note: He who does not live by the sword can still die by the sword.
Gregg,
There is not space on this blog, and it is not the purpose of this blog to go as far as necessary to explain what is incorrect with all that you have stated. Thus, I will touch on what is most necessary, and leave the rest.
First, the House of God is not the entire world. If you believe it is, could kindly cite the Scripture to support your contention and thus prove me wrong? What I see here is a collection of assertions that I find no basis for in Scripture.
For instance, since the New Testament church took the place of the nation of Israel as the House of God, are we then to believe by your assertion that the whole world was included in the covenant the LORD God made with Israel at Mount Sinai? (Exodus, chapters 20 through 24) Was the whole world present with the Lord Jesus Christ in the upper room at the last Passover the Lord Jesus held with the apostles? You know, the word “testament” is actually a word for a specific form of covenant, which is brought into force and effect upon the death of the testator. (Hebrews 9:15-22) Where in Scripture is the LORD God’s covenant with the entire world to be His house of witness which is referred to in Scripture as the House of God? Sorry, it’s not there. The closest you can come to that in Scripture is what the Catholics believe, which is the universal, visible church, which cannot be squared with Scripture either.
Now, as for your first statement, just where in what I wrote in the two extended comments do you draw your inference? The only reason I can see for your uninformed comment is your doctrine and the fact that you blew right past the first paragraph of the second comment. Where I stand is not hidden at all, and the following links prove that:
Why They Hate the Second Amendment
Of Government
Of Christian Citizenship
By the way, all the links are from my website and blog, and these show expressly where I stand on the issue of civil law. Plainly, you are confused about the distinction between the civil duties of a born-again child of God, and proper conduct in a covenanted assembly (a New Testament church). How the New Testament church is defined can be seen in the following study:
The House of Witness
You know Gregg, there are numerous things in what you state that simply cannot be squared with Scripture, and there is not space here to address them all. However, I do note that you are quick to point out your credentials and how you are educated in the things of this world. I am not. I hold no college degree, I have not been Bible College or seminary trained, and I am just a lowly maintenance and control tech. I do study history, and keep up on events in this world, but no formal training in either history or geopolitics. No, I’m just a local church trained, fundamental, unaffiliated, Baptist.
But, I do have one thing that seems noticeably absent in your commentary, I do know the same Lord and Teacher that the apostles know:
Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were unlearned and ignorant men, they marvelled; and they took knowledge of them, that they had been with Jesus. (Acts 4:13)
At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes. Even so, Father: for so it seemed good in thy sight. (Matthew 11:25-26)
You know, I don’t detect that you know the LORD at all in what you posted. Rather, I do note that you took it upon yourself to mock what the Lord Jesus Christ plainly stated in attempting to contradict me. This is something no born-again child of God would ever do. It was the Lord Jesus Christ that stated “Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.” (Matthew 26:52)
There is a final item I wish to point out to you. The belief in Christ as Saviour (and all the doctrines that pertain thereto) did not begin when the Word was manifest in the flesh in Bethlehem. Rather, it began in the Garden of Eden when the Word, who took the office of Christ, preached the gospel to Adam and Eve following their fall from righteousness. This same gospel has been preached throughout the entire history of the earth (approx. 6000 years). The only difference between the Old and New Testaments is the tense. In the Old Testament it was future tense, and now it is past tense. Consider Job’s testimony:
Oh that my words were now written! oh that they were printed in a book! That they were graven with an iron pen and lead in the rock for ever! For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth: And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God: Whom I shall see for myself, and mine eyes shall behold, and not another; though my reins be consumed within me. (Job 19:23-27)
Don’t you think it interesting that Job, a contemporary of Abraham, speaks of Christ to come and a resurrection to come? How could he do that if he did not know the gospel? The very same way Abraham knew:
Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness. Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham. And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed. (Galatians 3:6-8)
You say it is sad, and indeed it is. But the sad part is that the truth is right in front of you, and you refuse to even see it, let alone believe it. You are very much like Pilate:
Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice. Pilate saith unto him, What is truth? And when he had said this, he went out again unto the Jews, and saith unto them, I find in him no fault at all. (John 18:37-38)
In Christ,
Paul W. Davis
Sorry Paul, all I see from what you write is delusionary blather based on a bunch of writings compiled to serve the purposes of some group in the 4th century AD.
No, I do not have the same experience as you I do not consider the Son to be the Father. I am not a fundamentalist. I was raised Catholic, the base religion from which all of teh other Christian churches sprang, with the exception of the Coptics and the "Jews for Jesus.
You believe in behaving differently in church than you do in the greater world. I find that sad, but not surprising. Many fundamentalists are as bad or worse than "sunday catholics". Personally, I live my beliefs and I will not alter those beliefs based on the building in which I happen to be. OTOH, I am the weapon, anything else I have on my person is just a tool. I am better armed with my bare hands than many people are with fully automatic firearms. BY your claims I should not be allowed inside the confines of a church.
Odd that we both feel that the other is blind. I choose, and will continue to choose, to believe that a merciful God would not expect His children to be defenseless and at the mercy of any random miscreant. You have chosen the opposite. Would you wish to enforce that choice upon all other people? If so, then how are you different than the other gun control advocates? Please respond logically and not by quoting a book which may or may not be factual. (Which does not invalidate the lessons that can be learned from the stories it contains.)
You know, it is plain to see that you have set yourself up as The Authority and will only take what you want of the LORD God and the things of God. You have also made major assumptions and inferences about who I am, and how I conduct my life. Were you in Washington County, Arkansas, you would be laughed at by all that know me. Even those who disagree with me vehemently would laugh at you. Why don’t you do search of this blog and see all the comments and things I have submitted to this blog supporting our individual right to keep and bear arms? I have made one statement concerning the one place where no man has the right to keep and bear any arms, as it is profaning a place specifically set aside for worship of the LORD God, and you decide, in virtual ignorance, to conduct ad hominem attacks, assert that I believe things I never said and do not believe, and deride, mock, and ridicule what I have stated.
What a sterling track record you have.
Moreover, you decided that you will set conditions for a “discussion” that are impossible to meet. Over half the items in contention in your comments above require the Scripture to discuss. Yet, you demand that I respond without Scripture, using whatever arguments you determine to be logical. Your “Please respond logically” is about as insincere as it gets. Why? Because of the insincerity of your position on the Lord Jesus Christ and the nature and person of God. You state:
“I choose, and will continue to choose, to believe that a merciful God would not expect His children to be defenseless and at the mercy of any random miscreant.”
and then turn right around in the same paragraph and state:
“Please respond logically and not by quoting a book which may or may not be factual. (Which does not invalidate the lessons that can be learned from the stories it contains.)”
How is it that you find out about who God is without the Bible, which you have just stated that it is not much, if any better than Aesop’s Fables? I may be delusional, but not so delusional as to believe and state a virtual contradiction within five sentences.
Contrary to what you, and many others believe, I know God intervenes in the affairs of men and He watches over His children with special care. I know that when I am obedient to His word, that He blesses greatly. I have seen Him work in the hearts of individuals to change them in ways that social workers and psychologists say is impossible. Even when I have messed up totally, I have seen Him work despite my failure. I have prayed for certain messages to be preached to the congregation, and have seen visiting missionaries preach the exact message I prayed about weeks before. Most of all, He as changed me from a bitter, angry young man, willing to wipe out half the world, to someone who actually cares about the souls of men, and sees the life that God gives us as utterly precious.
You know, If God will do that, how much more can he change the heart of a man bent on murder, especially when it concerns those who have covenanted together to serve Him? Even if He chooses not to stop the individual who will kill one of His children, what real harm does that do the Lord’s child? All it will do is send the Lord’s child home. When I die, whether it be today, or 50 years from now, and whether it be of a heart attack, stroke, or other disease, or it be at the hand of man, all that it will bring to pass will be my going home. Finally, my labor will be done, and I will go HOME. I will have peace and rest, and I will meet my Saviour and my God face to face. It’ll be a good day.
Go ahead, mock on.
In Christ,
Paul W. Davis
Post a Comment