mmm, Can someone please remove me from this blog? Thanks.

Not posting? Oh my!

I haven't been posting because I've been busy graduating. This will continue until Sunday, at which point I stop being busy graduating and start being busy looking for jobs.

"Busy busy no time for chat!" as a friend of mine says.

>.>

<.<

^.^V

Proverbs 27 - Gail - Me too. =)

I also chose:

Verse 6 - Faithful are the wounds of a friend, but deceitful are the kisses of an enemy.

I found out something about someone...and wondered if I should tell her, as what's going on is not right.

I will, and though she may not be happy with what I have to say...

It's better that it comes from a friend, instead of her following along with those that don't have the right values when it comes to this thing, right? The secular world only smothers all of us with deceitful kisses, and when we're in the wrong, it tells us that it's okay, everybody else in the world does that too, that it's normal...but it's not in God's eyes.

Proverbs 25 - Gail

Hi guys. =) Didn't get to use the computer really yesterday, ha ha, so hopefully, so here I am today. =)

Verse 14, though in a way silly, stuck out for me yesterday:

"Like clouds and wind without rain,
Is a man who boasts of his gifts falsely."

Muah hah. I kept thinking it was going to rain yesterday. Not during the day, really, but towards the night, as the daytime, there were thick clouds, a chilly wind, and at night, when playing with a telescope, I felt a bit of drizzle, and the clouds kept moving and covering the stars we were trying to focus on.

And yet, it didn't rain.

Boastful clouds. ^_^

In the same way though, that relates to those who boast falsely, who show off what, well, they really don't have, or even advertisements that make promises that aren't real or that they can't keep. Our school promised every kid that improved their API score from last year a free ticket to Pharoahs - a promise that was never kept, impossible to keep, and empty, made from last year's principal. I had about 2 or 3 kids ask me about it (most had forgotten) on Friday, and when I asked around, it turns out it's not going to be fulfilled. This year's principal, who's new, can't keep a promise he never made, as he wasn't sure what the plans were to do that. Last year's principal - well, he knew he was leaving. And yet, he made a big, boastful-cloud-promise that never rained.

Go!

OK, it has been quiet for way too long, and I have something to talk about:

How does one develop one's hope in God's promises? How does one develop one's love for God? How does one deepen one's faith?

These questions have been on my mind for a while...

Adventures in Orthodoxy!

Yes, I realize that my title is totally a ripoff of that oh-so-popular Focus on the Family cartoon and book series. Man, I used to love watching those... =D

Anyway...

Matoushin: How's Japan been? Do you speak much Japanese? Any cool stories?

About Orthodoxy:
Well, I've been going to an Orthodox Church for about a month now (an Antiochian Orthodox church, if anyone wants to know...). I must say, it's really ... interesting. I will definitely say that it has been a blessing, and that it has been helping me answer some questions and some issues that I have been having, both theological and non-theological.

Yes, I totally agree with you: there is definitely a lot of ritual in what they do. And, I'm not sure if that's totally bad. And, yes, I agree that such ritualism can exist in even the most free evangelical church there is.

I have gotten used to and even accepting of the idea of veneration to the saints, although there are certainly a few things that still irk me a bit. But, for the education and edification of those who read this: The saints (including Mary) are to be venerated (i.e. highly respected and honored) because of their relationship to Christ. They were obedient, and they loved God, even if they weren't perfect. They stand as examples of what a Christian life should look like (although, again, they weren't totally perfect). And, concerning kissing of icons, etc: Such actions are simply physical representations of honoring someone. We don't really have that in American culture anymore, but ther are some cases in other cultures: Japanese people bow, Filipino people (and many others) perform a "Mano po" (kissing the hand of an honored one, or touching it to your forehead), and there are many more. The kissing or whatever before an icon is just like that.

Concerning doctrine, Mat. wrote:
"Doctrine is a tool that can be used to great effect, but it isn't a Swiss Army knife. It has a specific place, and a specific use, and it isn't meant to divide the church as it has."
I totally agree. However, when one looks at doctrine and sees it as dividing the church, one is at the same time acknowledging that that doctrine doesn't matter. For if it did matter, then it would be something that is worth arguing over, to the end that all may experience the truth and true salvation. With Creation/Evolution, when I look at it now, i realize that it isn't that important. But there was a time that I thought that you couldn't be saved unless you were a YECist. And, at that time, I argued. A lot. Because it was important for salvation.


The same can be said for a lot of things. Baptism, the Eucharist, church membership, homosexuality, etc. These things are argued about because they are thought to be important for salvation.

...

Hmm, what else...

More to come at some other time, when I am not up at 3 in the morning. I'm going to bed.

Kyrie eleison. Gospodi Pomiluj. Lord, have mercy.

Greetings from Japan

I'm in Japan!

I don't know if I bothered to tell you all here, and I'm too lazy to look back through the topics, but this semester I'm abroad in Japan.

Anyway, hi!

More importantly, Orthodoxy.

My sister, raised in first a baptist, then a non-denominational (which later turned evangelical free) background, she turned Orthodox and then married my brother-in-law who is Orthodox and the son of an Orthodox priest. So I'm mildly familiar with Orthodoxy, from having attended services, including my sister's wedding.

I recently displayed interest in Orthodoxy myself, but for primarily different reasons at the time. I, being a caring person, struggled for a long time, and in many ways still do, with a particular issue. That issue is namely that of all the people in the world who did not, do not, and will not get the opportunity to hear about Jesus Christ in the span of time beginning at conception and ending at death. A notable assumption I made which lead me to my quandry was that there is a choice to be made on our part to follow or not follow God. This is something that seems fundamental to me, as my understanding of why there is suffering in the world is that it is a neccessary side effect of God creating us to be more than "Yes Men". If God were to create us with no choice, it would defeat the purpose of suffering in the world, needlessly condemn people to hell, and generally fly in the face of being a "loving God".

Anyway, part of my struggle lead me to think, not very strongly as it was based on a single verse, that perhaps there is a post-mortem opportunity wherein Jesus reaches out to everyone who ever was, is or will be and those who follow him will reach Heaven and those who don't go to Hell or are seperate from God (which, by some definitions, is the same thing). I believe, correct me if I am wrong, that in Orthodoxy it is believed that the dead were all waiting somewhere (it had some name which I cant remember, but it was a familiar name), a somewhere which was abolished when Jesus died on the cross. There's more detail to it than that, but not being Orthodox and this having been a while ago, I don't remember it very exactly (I rarely remember anything exactly).

That interested me in Orthodoxy, but I've not gone too much further than getting a basic and fundamental understanding. Like all Christian denominations, it plagues me with the question, why is this one better over the others? There seems an undo amount of symbolism to me, and a lot of ritual for something which, though definitively sacred and certainly not simple to follow or do, seems to be against ritual itself.

Actually, this is something in many ways true of all major denominations that has contributed to my denominationlessness. It's simply a little more obvious with liturgical denominations. While litergy is obviously ritualistic, I feel that non-liturgical denominations can be just as ritualistic, it just isn't as obvious. Instead of priests robes, we have suits. Instead of carefully crafted cups and plates and bowls, we have brass. However, the weekly repetion of events and actions is there, along with the specific changes depending on holidays and recent events.

Recently I've had an anarchist streak when it comes to Christianity I think. I'm rather disappointed in Christianity as it stands in the US. This is largely the result of realizing that, while helpful at times, having a set doctrine and complete understanding of Christianity is not terribly important. I've spent a lot of time wondering how infallible the Bible is, and other issues that are common points of distinctive doctrinal difference dividing denominations (Mmm... Alliteration). And I've concluded that ultimately, that time would have been better spent simply reading my Bible outright or reaching out to people.

In the same way, I concluded that arguing doctrine is a waste of time. It's like taking a hammer, using it on screws and for sawing as well as for nails, and hitting anyone who disagrees with your particular style of hammer or for using it as you do. Doctrine is a tool that can be used to great effect, but it isn't a Swiss Army knife. It has a specific place, and a specific use, and it isn't meant to divide the church as it has. Still, people get into very fierce arguments of Creationism vs Evolution, but how does this save souls? Doctrine, like a hammer, is a tool that can accomplish a lot of good, and isn't inherently bad. But it seems to me that the current situation is that a bunch of people are using their hammers to hit people in the head, as opposed to building a church.

So, there's my anarchist streak right there. I'm content to be denominationless, because I think that the denominations are all wrong because of the very nature pf their existance.

I feel weird as a Christian, because my thoughts like these have been ricocheting around all over the place, but my practice has remained as always largely without change, save a slowly increasing amount of consultation with the big man.

I diverged off topic a lot, hopefully not too much. Have fun all.

well, that's, um, hmm,...

WTF?!?!?!!!!1111!

Now, that's interesting...

http://catholicoutlook.com/rpv.php

Think about that.

You want fries with that liturgy?

Thomas:

Sorry it has taken so long for me to write a response; I was writing one before, but I forgot to save it.

To be quite honest, a lot of the things that you bring up are things that I wonder about too and which seem kinda strange to me too.

However, as I look at it, evidence seems to say that the early church did have the veneration of icons, the veneration of the virgin mary, and some other things. So, I have to wonder why they did and why we don't. Is it because they were wrong or misguided in what they did, or perhaps is it because we don't properly understand the truth of the Christian faith? Perhaps what we believe is not the same thing as the early church fathers believed. And, well, if that is so, that is a problem, for then how can we say that what we believe in is truly Christianity as Christ delivered to his apostles and as the apostles delivered to their successors?

Another thing that I have been looking at, is the view of the church that the early church had. Did they have the view that is common among evangelical Christians today, that the church was not a visible church on earth, that it is just made up of all the people who believe certain things? That it can be made up of people who differ as much as Baptists, Reformed folks, charismatics, and Anglicans do in their theology and praxis? Or, did they believe that the church was indeed visible on earth, and that to be a member of the body of christ, you had to be a member of that visible church that visible body of Christ, and conform to a standard of the church (such as the creeds)? Or perhaps they believed something else...

And, concerning tradition and scripture, I think I may not have made this clear in my earlier post: As I look at it now, I think scripture is a part of tradition, so it makes no sense to say that one looks at scripture without tradition, or that one can have a truly christian tradition without scripture. Rather, Scripture is the highest source of truth in Tradition, and is to be interpreted in accordance with the rest of Tradition, whatever Tradition one holds, whether Orthodox, Catholic, Vanilla Evangelical, Reformed, or Charismatic, or whatever else. However, one must ask, which of these was the one held in the early church, and thus which one is truly Christianity as the apostles and their successors viewed Christianity?

If the historical church was wrong, where did it go wrong? And how do we know that they were wrong, and that we are right?

Hmm, I have more to say, but I'll get to more in a later post. Sorry if this post isn't so very clear; if you would like me to clarify something, please ask.

On Orthodoxy

Well, Jason asked, so here we go.
--------------
It seems to me that "sola scriptura" just doesn't work. The doctrine of "sola scriptura" tells us that scripture is the only infallible source of truth, and rejects Tradition as a valid source of truth. People say that we can trust only the Scriptures as a source of truth, because it is the only source that tells us what the teachings of Jesus were, according to the Apostles. All other Tradition is fabricated by man.

Well, as I look at it, "sola scriptura" is a tradition itself, and it doesn't even follow its own rules, for the idea of "sola scriptura," that the only valid source we have of the history of God's workings and of the teachings of God is scripture alone, isn't in the Bible. Like I said, it is a tradition itself, and one which one can look at and find a time when it emerged (the Reformation), and which doesn't go all the way back to the first century teachings of the apostles.

So, then, which tradition is right? Well, we must look for the true Tradition, the one that does go all the way back, through the centuries, all the way to the First Century AD. As I look at all the different traditions of different groups (orthodoxy, catholics, protestants), it seems to me that some of the doctrines of orthodoxy are the ones that do indeed go all the way back. (Yes, I mean "some"... there are still a few that bother me...maybe more on that later...)
---------------
This is not to say that all non-Orthodox are not Christians. It just seems to me that they are the most correct in their doctrines.

I believe I am a Christian right now, even though I am not Orthodox. However, I believe that a lot of people are Christian(dispensational premillenialists, really charismatic people, really Reformed people,...) who are Christian, but who are wrong in what they believe. I have to ask if I am like that, if what I believe is really the truth. And orthodoxy seems like it may be correct.
---------------
One thing, though, that does really jump out at me is the different viewpoint they have on salvation. Western Christians, when they think about the gospel and salvation, will often focus on the fact that we are sinners, and that God has grace on us in the person of Christ, and sees us as righteous because of what Christ did. That is, out of justification, sanctification, and glorification, they focus on "justification."

Now, as I look at Eastern Christianity, I see their focus on Theosis, of partaking to the divine nature. As I understand it now, they focus a lot more on sanctification and glorification than on justification.

And I think that's cool. I have had a lot of questions about life, death, and Christianity that I find some answers to in the teachings of the Orthodox church.
---------------
Hmm, I suppose I could write more, but I'll just leave it at that for now. Oh, and in case anyone wants to know more about Orthodoxy, I plan to go at least a few times to the orthodox Christian fellowship here in Berkeley. They meet on tuesday evenings, so if on some tuesday (including today) you want to come and check it out, call me or email me.

May God continue to show grace and mercy to us all.

Jehovah Witness Keep Knocking at My Door

So these Jehovah Witness people have kept on coming to my door.

I think I'm too nice to reject them and say go away! So instead, I end up chatting with them over what I believe and how yes, though they have similar ideas as what I know about God, there are differences here and there.

And so maybe now, they want to keep coming, hoping to convert me. Oy!

One of the things they push is that heaven is on Earth - that the Bible says our land will be this or that, etc, etc...But see, for me, it doesn't matter WHERE heaven is. I just know that I will be near God - the minute details are things I don't argue about.

I'm not a minute-detail-debater. In God, I'm assured that things will go according to His plan, and that I will be in heaven with him. I'm not blindly following, and minute details are interesting, yes - like how God created the Earth (but 7 days vs. 7 thousand years - whatever. God can do whatever He wants, right? Though He can certainly do it in 7 days, ha ha ha! Cuz He is all that and an infinity bag of chips...!) and what not.

But yeah. So what do you guys know about Jehovah's Witness???

Stuff

Well, it's been quiet in here for a while... so here's some stuff, just to fill the silence.

I just found this. Now that is an interesting gift idea. (I know that Jason would love this!)

I have recently been enjoying Tom Hinkle's blog. It's a pity, though, that Tom, of the BHT doesn't update so very often.

For those who haven't been reading it, the Real Live Preacher blog just got a face lift! I highly enourage all of you to go check it out.

Checkl out the recent essays at Internet Monk. Good Stuff.

Hmm, what else...? Oh, I was wondering about what you guys know or think about Eastern Orthodoxy. I've been very interested in it of late....

For all of you theologians who want to meet good Reformed girls, here's a new pickup line:

To Lima Team

How cool! It's AWESOME to know what's going on in the Dinosaur world...and yours at this moment. =) Does Thomas get to be a special dinosaur? Are Lima dinosaurs different? Heh heh...^_^

It's great to know what's going on out there. Keep us informed whenever you can! Godspeed - our prayers are with you!

Well, this was unexpected...

So, on my post with a whole lot of different topic ideas, I included a topic about cats:
"I do not like cats. They are a curse upon the world, and must be extinguished."

Now, on BoarsHeadTavern.com, they're talking about cats.

Hmm... well, that was unexpected...

Ok, all of you, I don't care what you are doing, Go to www.boarsheadtavern.com and read the interesting discussion they are having on girly lyrics in worship music. No, really, Go. Go now. Stop reading this. Dammit, ... here let me help you, just click here.

Peru?

Jason: When I think of you going to Peru, somehow I think of that VeggieTales song where Larry has the large sombrero and sings. Don't ask me why, I don't know.

Gummichild: I think I tried to make the distinction that small groups can work when there's someone in there who knows their relevant theology cold. I might have forgotten. Anyway, such is my experience that having someone knowledgable helps. However, it is also my experience (in college) that given no idea of how a small group is actually supposed to function (from the Church), confused brothers and sisters come together to try and learn something through small group bible studies. By the nature of these groups, there isn't a single theologically experienced person. The result is a group of people, some of whom don't understand exegesis or how to interpret scripture, some who think they know but are misapplying what they learned from studying Emily Dickinson, some who might really know but don't speak up, and maybe some people like myself who have some feeling for it but honestly are not probably the best people for the job but inevitably voice themselves the most.

In a way, the small group has also become a misused crutch for people who don't read the bible alone. For whatever reason, the bible simply isn't read (I'm guilty of this for extended periods of time). When one person comments that they are failing in this area, another chimes in and they suggest maybe they could read together. However, inevitably this doesn't turn out to simply be reading the scripture and soaking it in, but another example of attempted group exegesis.

There needs to be some direction from the Church, regardless of denomination, on how to properly run a small group (both for leaders and the lead). As it stands I haven't seen much effort being put into explaining the proper way to talk about scripture amoungst one another. While perhaps we should not contrain the small group so far into becoming a small group Sunday school, I certainly think the leader should be somewhat authoritative, if only to avoid misguided notions and conclusions. However, often the leader is more concerned with making the scripture and themselves approachable, or is more concerned with something beyond maintaining theological soundness.

I no longer know where I'm going with this, and I have to go to work now. Anyway, enjoyable discussion, and don't take my nitpicking the word "against" too seriously. I'm just like that, and it's not something I'm offended by or intended to offend by. :)

Jason/Thomas: God speed, and may the light of our Lord be with you as you travel abroad. :D

Emily

In general, dogs are more attention-loving, and need you to care for them. It's that need that creates that bond between owner and dog .I'm only hypothesizing, as I've never had a dog, but have always wanted one; I'm also basing this on past pets I've had - goldfish, pigeons (which, uh, we ate...I didn't know till college that we ate them when I was little!!! Oy...we're so Chinese...>_<), an alligator lizard (skink), a few grasshoppers, a praying mantis, a beta fish...and more recently, a scaley headed pionus parrot that flew away, and currently, 87, our California desert tortoise.

If I was to have a dog, I'd like one of those little terrier types. Intelligent and fun. =) A bigger dog...I'd only make exceptions for labradors/retrievers. =)

The best pet I've had was Emily though. She was the smartest, most beautiful parakeet that ever existed in the world. Yep. ^_^

Philosophical adventures in Love

Hello all.

I have been finding myself quite philosophical as of late, and I would like to know what you all think on certain subjects. What is the proper, Christian view to take on such subjects, in your opinion?

Meditations on Love
More on Love (from my online journal, from oldest to newest):
(Note: I cannot guarantee that I fully agree with the me of the past on some of these topics)
- Love is such a curious thing
- More on Love
- On Biblical Love, Romance, Infatuations, and Teeth like Sheep...
- On Physical Attraction and Love
- Analyzing "love", from inside and out, and other thoughts...

Hmm, there are other topics I'd like to discuss, but lets stick with this one for now. Any thoughts?

Oh, and could someone please, please, start on that topic of cats?

Group Leaders, Peru, and SoCal

Matoushin:

Hi hi! =) By no means was I specifically referring to you when I was commenting earlier, heh heh...nor was I posting anything "against" anyone...so if it seemed like it, then I do apologize! Heh heh...those that know me in person know that I hardly am one to argue in such a way. I don't really debate in terms of arguing against another person. I just share my thoughts on what someone else may have said, if I think differently, or if I think there's more to be said on something, and I think I was more just adding onto your thoughts with more thoughts that were in my head.

That's one thing I don't like about online stuff: people can't hear tone, and they may just take things the wrong way, or make assumptions about what was typed (these were part of the problems why onecross died, and why some people seemed to take offense about certain things, and why at least one person left rather angry from the discussions that were on there, as great as those discussions were...), or the way that it was typed, especially if one doesn't know typing etiquette (I had one parent all year that liked to type in CAPS ALL THE TIME AND WITHOUT PUNCTUATION SO THAT EVERY TIME I GOT AN EMAIL FROM HER IT FELT LIKE SHE WAS SCREAMING AT ME IN ONE BREATH BUT THAT WAS NOT THE CASE BECAUSE MOST OF THE TIME SHE WAS THANKING ME FOR THIS OR THAT OR ASKING ME FOR THIS OR THAT. ^_^).

They were just statements in general. From what it seems like here, you don't seem like one to church-hop anyways or to not do something about a problem (hey, if you were one of those types, you proooobably wouldn't have been posting here on such topics here, right?). =) And I agree with you - there are churches that fail in what they need to do, whether it's in terms of leadership, shepherding, etc...and sometimes, a church may break apart for a reason that only God understands. In all paths, God already knows what the end-result will be. It's just a matter of how we all plan to get there...

Matoushin/Jason: Now, if a small group is simply teaching the Bible wrong, then there are problems. But realize that each person that is teaching should be qualified for it somehow, just like how, if you were the Sunday School Coordinator, you would choose Sunday School teachers that are suitable for doing the job well. Or choosing counselors for youth camp - I can't let anyone that just wants to do it, if they're not a Christian, do it. And even if they ARE a Christian, but let's say that they don't go to church much, don't practice living like a Christian, and don't make efforts to be like Christ...how can I let someone with those traits - even if he/she has repented of his/her sins, accepted Christ, and been baptized - be a counselor, a role model, and a teacher to youth about what God would want them to be like? Yes, there is a discrimination over who one chooses to put as a leader for those around that person.

And during small group, as a discussion, it's also not for one person to dictate the conversation. Everyone should have a chance to put forth their opinions, or at least form thoughts in their head. The leader should facilitate, but not dictate, the outcomes of their thoughts. But Truth is Truth, and if something's not right, someone should be stepping in, whether it's the facilitator or a member of the small group. If things are questionably interpreted, one can always go to the pastor, or extensively google it up and compare thoughts (but you all know how fallible that internet can be...heh heh...). We're humans, and we can't be perfect, can't be exactly right, at every moment of our lives. But small group leaders do have a responsibilty to extensively understand and research what it is that they are teaching, and even who they are teaching, and not just throwing it together last minute. If they don't fulfill their responsibilities in doing that, it may hurt those very ones that they are trying to help.

Jason/Thomas: You two are going to Peru this weekend!!! How exciting! Good luck, to both of you, on your endeavors in South America! May you find joy in serving the Lord there as you've had here in North America, heh heh, and if there are mosquitos...be careful! ^_^

On the topic of "Norcal > Socal":

SoCal Rocks. Sunnier dispositions and weather, and a happier climate all around. =) We're close to the beaches (snorkeling, kayaking, swimming, surfing!), mountains (snow, fishing, lakes, hiking), cities (for shopping - am I the only girl currently posting on this? If so, I expect no sympathy for shopping, ha ha...- and playing), and close to drive to national parks (hiking, climbing, river rafting, camping!!!), another country (Mexico), another state (Las Vegas - mmm...buffets...Circus Circus...), and a million other good things. ^_^

NorCal is a little too dreary for me. Been there...and though I DO like it (the charm of Fisherman's Wharf and buying fresh crab from Cantonese people who gave us a discount simply because we spoke Cantonese too, and meandering in Chinatown, as touristy as it is, was priceless!), I wouldn't want to live there. Sorry NorCal'ers. =)

Thus, for me, it would have to be: "SoCal > NorCal" ^_^

Any Thesauruses out there?

Har har, dinosaur pun. I'm so funny I don't see anyone else laughing (I'm going to assume it's because I'm laughing so hard).

Anyway...

Jason: Thanks for the defense. My only critique is your use of the word "against". Gummychild's reply was by no means "against" me. It was critiquing and in disagreement with what I said, but it certainly didn't wave signs claiming that I was hellbound and surely would be the destroyer of worlds etc.

Gummichild: I just want to be perfectly clear that I by no means endorse rampant church switching. From personal experience, doing so will leave one in rather turbulent waters in terms of faith and the understanding thereof due to a time of uncertaintly after each switch. In my case, I'm pretty sure God put me through that intentionally because I was far too comfortable where I had been, and needed some good ole' fashioned turmoil to get me moving.

Also, I'm definately not the kind of person to see a problem and do nothing about it. At each church I ended up leaving, I told someone in an important position (usually the pastor) how I felt. Sometimes it was merely a matter of doctrine, and after prayer found that I was not to stay where I had been. In a particular, and very sad case, the church was going somewhere that was completely against my heart, soul and mind and reponded less than half-heartedly to my concerns.

I won't name any names, but that particular church had three sermons in succession about how great their new, bigger and better church building was going to be. Sermons for crying out loud. I have no problem with a church mentioning church related issues in church, even in the service. It's probably the best time to bring up something that requires major funding like an entirely different church building. I was only minorly disturbed by the first "sermon", but when the next two had almost nothing to do with God or Christ as well and were simply about "what we should be doing so we can finish this nice new church building", I was more than disturbed. Between that and some other issues I was having with the particular church, leaving was necessary to preserve my faith.

*Matoushin comes to the realization he's rambling a bit*

To get back on topic, Jason defended me beautifully, and there isn't much more I can say specifically to that. I found a church at college that is the epitomy of awesome (so much so me and my roommate were compelled to cook dinner for the pastor and his wife one evening which, by the grace of God, was wonderful), and have stuck there since.

I'm here because I need fellowship with fellow Christians, and not ones who will necessarily agree with me. I have the unforunate problem of attracting people who largely agree with me, and I haven't figured out why yet. In any case, it is hard to be an honest Christian when one's secular friends know so little (and care even less, in fact getting livid at the mention of Jesus) and one's brothers and sisters in Christ are of the same mind one's doctrine is scarcely challenged, not to mention faith.

In any case, rest assured I don't advocate "shopping" for churches, or using them like some people use, uh, things you use once and throw away when you're bored. Additionally, I most definately advocate involvement in the church, and I think similarly towards government as well, and am generally of the opinion that if you have a problem with someone, something or anything and want to complain about it you have to also do something about it. If someone is complaining for complaining's sake, I usually call them on it and ask them if they are planning on talking to the person about it etc.

I should stop rambling now, before it's too late.

Jason (again): Keep up the dinosaur comics, they rock.

Rebelling Against Rebels?

I agree with Jason. Making those rules won't get those that don't post to post more, and only limits those that want to and appreciate posting here regularly on here. It's like trying to force the rebel kids in class that don't want to participate to participate in class discussion/activity and stopping those that really want to participate in class.

The rebels don't care if it affects their grade, because their grade is not their priority, thus, they still won't participate. The ones that WANT to participate then begin to see the class discussion/activity as stagnant or boring, want to jump in but are reprimanded when they do, and then they become angry, sullen, or lose faith in the purpose of that discussion/activity altogether.

Plus, this is not a classroom where all the members are physically present together in one location. Some members may not have read this site in a while - I know I didn't when I was gone for a week and some on vacation, right? =)

concerning comments:
If you guys want, I can set it up so that whenever someone makes a new post or a comment, you will get an email notification. Of course, I would still prefer to have our conversations in the main "room" of the tavern (heheh) rather than in the comment threads.

Oh, and for all of the quiet members out there, I would still love to hear your thoughts. But, in case you don't know what to talk about, here are some ideas (not necessarily those of the author) that you can respond to. Oh, and (to make things interesting) you can only discuss these topics if:
1) You have posted less than 5 times total, and no one else has started the discussion. That means me, Jason, Matoushin, and Albert cannot start a discussion on these.
2) You have posted 5 or more times, but someone has already began a discussion.
3) You have posted 5 or less times.
4) You are a visitor on the site. (Leave a comment.)

SO, that means if any of us talkative folks want to talk about these things, we need to wait for someone else to talk about them, or we need to urge others to discuss them (member or visitor).

OK, here's the topics:
- "Modern worship music may sound great, but it really lacks in theological content, and therefore should not be sung in churches, fellowships, etc.."
- "'Left Behind' and despensational premillenialism are crap as eschatological views, and are the result of bad readings of the Bible (bad exegesis and hermeneutics)."
- "Christian -> Republican."
- "The emergent church movement is dangerous and should be opposed by all real Christians."
- "I do not like cats. They are a curse upon the world, and must be extinguished."
- "Reformed theology is the theology most faithful to the texts of the Bible."
- "Dave Fong should grow his hair back." (Related: "Jason should stay bald.")
- "John Piper's Christian Hedonism is a dangerous movement in modern theology."
- "Young Earth Creationism is the only valid reading of the creation texts."
- "Small groups suck." (See here)
- "Linux > Mac > Windows."
- "Homosexuality is not morally wrong, and all these Conservative jerks are just being mean and unloving and Pharisaical."
- "Joel Osteen is brilliant and represents the best of Christianity."
- "Norcal > Socal."
- "Christians need to learn to stop using their own Christian lingo all the time."
- "Catholics are really Christians too."

Ok, all you quiet people: time to start talking. My hands are now tied, so please start something here.

Honey Nut Cheerios

Matoushin: I know what you mean in this post, though for me, it was more of a whole church thing, and not a small group thing. Twice, I almost left my church. And twice, God yanked me right back. =) Perhaps that's a story for another time.

But meanwhile, your post, as well as past experiences, have put the following thoughts together:

Isn't this posting a form of small grouping? Perhaps not, as we're not fully all on out putting forth our Bibles out, opening up to Scripture, and saying this is what this is saying, etc...But a small group also allows for people to form closer bonds to each other as Christian brotha's and sista's, to form that support group that Christians do need. We do need to know that there is someone we can turn to, to either ask for advice, or just speak to, when the time is needed, and someone that we know can keep us accountable for who we are supposed to be.

Theoretically, that is what it's mainly supposed to do, right? Of course, we ain't perfect - we're human and full of errors, and there may instead be drama, anger, jealousy, and all those things that do not show our love to each other as children of God. We're a little stupid and prone to these mess ups. However, that's why as Christians, we need each other - to imitate and be like Christ, to see examples of others doing this, to be role models for others, and as said earlier, to support each other in this way.

We can't fellowship with Christ without fellowshipping with our fellow Christians.Being in a small group is one thing. Leading is another. One of our calls as Christ's children is to serve one another. The answer (to me) to the meaning of life is to serve God, and in doing so, you become a part of that church.You can't see a problem, and not try to fix it (oh wait, note - this in no way directly applies to you, Matoushin, as I don't know you except through here. ^_^ It's a general statement that I'm making based on what I've seen happen here and there. ^_^), and then say, well, this is not for me, and leave. Sometimes, it's God's will to move one to another church, but moving away is not the only option when things are inadequate and needs aren't met.

It's serving to fill the void or need that you see, and doing what you can, and getting others to join you in this mini-crusade, to take care of it. When people serve, they then have a purpose and need to be at that the church, and oftentimes, God will show you how you matter and what differences you can make when you let Him use you. You won't be able to see all the ripples you make in the water though - that's for God to know and reveal, right?

If people don't serve, what purpose do they have to be there? The church can only give so much as the people in the church want to give. To give is to receive, right?

If everyone at church stepped away when they saw their need wasn't being met, nothing would ever get done.

If everyone stepped in, karazy-koolness could ensue.

It's like that saying about how a single snowflake doesn't do much...but a snowstorm can stop traffic.