Bible Study

Doesn't theology matter?  Isn't it important to understand who God has revealed Himself to be instead of erecting an idol in our minds of a god that we are comfortable with and imagine how we think he ought to be?


I have been thinking the past few days about a monthly Bible study group that I attend. 


The thing that I appreciate most about these men that I have the privilege of meeting with is that they will not "go along to get along". They refuse to smile and nod when they disagree with me and they refuse to accept "that's just what I believe" as a satisfactory answer to any topic of discussion.
While this may seem an odd thing to appreciate I do and my appreciation for this is made possible by the spirit in which we disagree. We disagree in a pursuit of truth and not in the pursuit of being right and it is this dynamic, when shared among a group, that allows men to bond and grow closer as they passionately disagree about things they hold dear.


We all seem to believe that theology matters and rightly dividing God's Word as too important a task to be satisfied with a superficial unity. We all seek to persuade each other by appealing our cases to the arbiter of truth, the Bible.
While I haven't had any major theological shifts I have refined many of my ideas and convictions.  As I consider this group in relation to my traditions, beliefs, and ideas that I have taken for granted for so long Proverbs 18:17 comes to mind. "The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him."


Thanks for examining me men and for refusing to agree when you don't.


I know everyone cannot handle being challenged in this way, but if you desire to have your theological ideas and traditions questioned by men who only want you to rightly understand God and His Word you should consider joining us.  If you'd like to join us email me at caisonj@yahoo.com


It's hard to describe the dynamics of our group but I can assure you that we are not like this...although after going through our gauntlet you may wish to join a group like this! :)

Teach me who You are O' God! (Gen. 2)

The next time we find God speaking is in Genesis 2 only this time He is not describing Himself, but instead is speaking concerning the man He had created.

I struggled with whether or not to put these types of instances of God speaking into this study because I don't want to get into the inference game, see 1st post for why that is.  I finally decided to do so because this study is about knowing who God is and in order to know something you need a "knower"....that's us if you didn't follow that last sentence. Since we are the ones learning what God has said about Himself I have decided that it would be wise and good to know what He has said about us as well. If we can understand ourselves accurately perhaps we can more accurately understand God as well.

In Genesis 2:15-17 we find God putting the man He had created in the Garden of Eden and giving him a command. We can see at least one reason why God put him there, to work and keep the garden. We also see what the consequence shall be if the man disobeys the command that God has given him.

In the next verse we see that God says that it is not good for the man He created to be alone and so God creates a helper that was suitable for him, a woman.

So what do we learn? We learn that God put the man He had created in the place where He wanted him to be in order to do what God wanted him to do. We also learn that God places a restriction on what the man can do and gives a clear consequence if the man disobeys.
We also learn that God has said that it is not good for a man to be alone and that God's solution to this problem was to take part of the man and create another human being, specifically a woman.

So what do we know about God so far?
1. God is the Creator of all things.
2. God is an "us".
3. God put the man He created where He desired for him to be.
4. God resticts what the man can do and promises a consequence for disobeying.

What do we know about man so far? (I would say what do we know about us, but it will be a while before we can 100% link us to this first man. I know that may seem like straining a little bit, but remember that we do not want to assume things just because we have always believed them.)
1. The man was created by God and in His image.
2. The man was put in a place where God wanted him to be.
3. The man was subject to the command of God.
4. The man was to die if he disobeyed the command of God.
5. It was not good for the man to be alone so a suitable helper was made for him.
6. The man's suitable helper was a woman.

Why I Will and Will Not be Voting For NC Constitutional Amendment One

Why I WILL be Voting FOR Amendment One

1. I have the opportunity to be apart of amending my state’s constitution in such a way as to reflect what the One who created marriage defined it to be.
2. If the state is going to bestow benefits on people who get married because it is observed as being a stabilizing influence on society and is beneficial to the perpetuation of said society through the children that are conceived and born in those marriages then there is no reason for the state to offer the same privileges to same sex couples because they can not produce these affects.
1. The question of heterosexual couples who can’t have children or choose not to has no bearing on this argument because governments make laws for the masses and not for exceptions to the general rule. Governments are trying to macro manage when they make laws.
3. Because I do not view government sanctioned marriage as a human right. If government sanctioned marriage were a human right then arguments concerning discrimination would be valid and correct.
1. If the government of the US and/or state of NC did not recognize or provide benefits for heterosexual marriage I for one would not be prevented from going before God with Amy and entering into a covenant relationship. That’s the marriage recognition I care about. I would only complain about the government if they arrested me and incarcerated me because I married a woman   

 

I will NOT be Voting FOR Amendment One…

1. Because not doing so will legalize same sex marriage in NC. There is already a law on the books for that purpose and so those who are trying to scare people into voting for Amendment One for that reason should be ashamed of their dishonesty. Likewise those who use that fact as an argument for not needing a constitutional amendment should not ignore the fact that if North Carolinians want to keep that law in place it is necessary to have redundancy in the state’s constitution. The judicial activism you have applauded in other states has rightly taught North Carolinians who are for marriage being kept as a legal privileged status for one man and one woman that a law on the books is not enough.
2. In order to define marriage for North Carolinians. People can only define what they create and if they did not create it then they can only discover, recognize, and accurately describe what has already been created. Since North Carolinians did not create marriage then we cannot define it, we can only recognize and describe it. The question is whether or not we will describe it accurately.
3. Because Christians believe marriage is sacred. Although individual Christians may believe marriage to be sacred we do not as a group. If Christians, as a group, believed that marriage was sacred for the reasons we claim it be so then the divorce rate among our people would not be the same as the rate of those we are trying to convert. If Christians, as a group, believed marriage was sacred “no fault divorce” couples, individuals engaging in sex before marriage, and adulterers would be biblically dealt with in the Church instead of ignored. We are rightly labeled as hypocrites when we focus on homosexuality but ignore heterosexual sins. I dare say I will not be seeing Christians rallying for state laws that would make “no fault divorce”, adultery, and fornication illegal.
4. Because I believe the Church needs the State in order to prevent homosexual or polygamist unions. Marriage is a contract between a man, a woman, and God. The State is not necessary for this equation. If I’m not mistaken on my history this was the view of people in western cultures until the state run Church of England decided it wanted to have a say in who could and couldn’t get married in order to have control over the institution and help raise revenue through issuance of licenses. This evolved over the centuries and was continued after church and state was separated in the US in order to prevent slaves from marrying. It was continued to be used in order to prevent interracial marriages until it was deemed unconstitutional in 1967 by the US Supreme Court. If we are honest the Church was pleased over these centuries to give the institution of marriage to the state in order to legalize marital racism.

I have more reasons, but I do not have time to write them all out.  I am happy to discuss any/all of my reasons with anyone who agrees/disagrees with my reasons. If you have a question or counter argument your comments are welcome. If you have a rant then your comment will be deleted.