Hello, folks.

We’ve been asked if the world is going to end on December 21, 2012.  Well, in short, The Other Bald Guy doesn’t think so.

End-times prophecies have been around for as long as we can tell in recorded history.  The advent of 21st century communications has really broadened our abilities to explore, cross-reference, document, and recall.  Ergo, while memories fade, Google provides all sorts of recollection at our fingertips.

What this can allow us to do is see the more definitive histories of end-times prophecies, which will allow us to put the Mayan Calendar prophecy into some perspective.

To start, if you’re not familiar with the Mayan Long Count Calendar, then you can do worse than starting with a Wikipedia link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesoamerican_Long_Count_calendar

Probably the best annotated rebuttal to the idea of a Mayan Doomsday Prophecy comes from Robert T. Carroll’s The Skeptic’s Dictionary:

http://www.skepdic.com/maya.html

Given the specificity of the question, I don’t have a whole lot to say on the blog this time around.  I did encounter some interesting links, though, that are all worth your time.  In particular, this first link is a document entitiled End-Time Prophecy and the New Millennium written by Jeffery K. Hadden of the Department of Sociology at the University of Virginia.  It’s primary focus is the relationship between specific religious groups, end-times prophecies, and the impact of failed predictions.  I found it to be fascinatingly interesting.

Also, this document was written prior to the year 2000, so all references to the millennium are future-tense.  Given the hindsight that the reader is given, it makes this document all the more worthwhile to read.

http://www2.lib.virginia.edu/exhibits/brimstone/hadden.html

This document, by the way, is a part of a larger exhibit called Red, White, Blue, & Brimstone.  This exhibit examines the relationship between America’s history and the John’s Book of Revelation.  I haven’t been through all of it, but it sure looks interesting.

http://www2.lib.virginia.edu/exhibits/brimstone/

NOW, HOW ABOUT THOSE FAILED PROPHECIES?

The fine folks over at ReligiousTolerance.org have a neat list documenting numerous failed prophecies since A.D. 30.  This particular list goes up to 1990:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/end_wrl2.htm

They even have additional lists of end-times prophecies from 1991 to 2010 and beyond, as well as some other interesting information.  This link below takes you to a list of links on their site:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/end_wrld.htm

Oh, and if some of their writings tickle at your sensibilities a bit, then at least take a moment to see who these folks are.  They provide a statement of beliefs that I find refreshingly forthright.  I do appreciate their intellectual honesty:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/statbelief.htm 

AND FINALLY, the granddaddy of all End-O-World sites.  Posted on a Geocities site by a woman who lists herself as Alma Geddon (get it: Armageddon), this is quite possibly the most comprehensive collection on the Web.  This site also includes known future prophecies, particularly well-known Net-Kooks, and even a listing of TV/Movie/Theatre/Book treatments of The End and Post-Apocalyptic futures.

Now, there are few documenting links, but most of these items could likely be verified with minimal effort.   Surely in a site this big there may be a few inaccuracies — it’s a huge listing.  HUGE.  Also, be warned that the site is written with an edge of sardonic humor that gives no quarter to religion of any sort.  Nonetheless, it’s a lot of fun.

It’s The End Of The World As We Know It …Again

There is only now.

Peace.

Isn’t sin only defined by God?  We can only ‘sin’ against God, right?   Can we sin against one another?  In that context, then sin IS sin.  And to God, there is only one difference in all sin.  It seems to me that in Mathew, Jesus is talking about the greatest sin of all and the only one from which one cannot be redeemed…not accepting Him as Christ and Lord.

Yes, as Christ followers, I do think we will be judged for our failures to be ‘good’ (James 4:19), but these sins are heart issues.  Somehow, God looks upon heart issues differently than head issues.  (the head chooses not to be a Christ follower – the heart is unable to fulfill the completeness of being a Christ follower).  The heart issues somehow go back to the Garden.  Our inherent sin is against God and only God.  When we are made complete in our salvation, we will be able to live as we want to live now, but are unable to.

As humans, we are called to be ‘fruit inspectors’.  Lack of fruit from you is not a sin against me.

Hello again, folks.  This is my first non-video post, and it’s in direct response to an email I received regarding my Feb 1 post on unknown sin.  (Oh, and forgive my extensive absence.  There’s plenty more TOBG to come soon.)

When I first read the email below, I was concerned that I had not been clear on a few points.  In reviewing my original post, I believe I was not unsound, but it may have been possible to take away an unclear image.  Also, there is the very real possibility that you may simply disagree with my conclusions.  This is totally cool with me.  I hope you enjoy what I write, but never take it as face-value gospel.  I am but a fallen and fallible man, saved by the grace of God through Christ.  Now, to respond:

Isn’t sin only defined by God?

Well, maybe (fair warning: I’m going around a BIG bend before I actually answer this question).  I have split the hair of defining sin and sins as two different things.  Sin is the concept of ‘conduct unbecoming’, and every sin falls under sin by definition (hence: sin is sin).  The word sins identifies that there are various different acts.  I may commit adultry, but I may not steal.  The sheer fact that we can logically understand the difference says that sins are not all the same.  Otherwise we would just have the ONE commandment “Thou shalt not sin” as opposed to a small laundry list of commandments delineating different varied sins.

Now, in all fairness, when pertaining to the Law as defined in the Torah, James (whom we believe to be the brother of Jesus) had this to say:

James 2:10 – For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it.

This actually reinforces the sin is sin concept.  Still, if you read starting from Leviticus 4 (which starts with unintentional sin — my original topic), you will read a litany of “If someone does X, then he is guilty and must do Y.”  If sin is sin in every way possible, then no matter what X is, Y should always be the same.  Yet in the very Law of God as written in the Torah, different transgressions require a different type of atonement. 

My point is well defended.  Sin may be sin, but sins are not sins. Or better put: not all sins are equal in every way.

Now, is sin only defined by God?  I’m not so sure.  It is very possible that Jesus, himself, provides the directive that the church has the power to define sin on some matters.  I genuinely believe that the point I’m about to defend directly relates to the eternal wisdom of Jesus, who knew that the church would eventually encounter situations that the contemporary authors of his time were not even capable of conceiving.

Proof?  Here you go.  First of all, Paul, starting in Romans 14:14, outlines that some things that are not sin in God’s eyes can be sin based solely upon human perception.  It’s right there in the Word, especially in Romans 14:22-23.

Another interesting reference is when Jesus gives Peter the keys to the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 16:17-20), and again to the disciples at large (Matt. 18:18).  He clearly states that “whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”  Now, I’ve heard numerous explanations to this verse, and a quick Google of it will provide you with many interpretations.  The most profound one to me, though, comes from Professor Richard Beck of Abilene Christian University.  You must read the whole post, called Binding, Loosing, and the Human Experience to gain a complete context, but here is a nice inflammatory excerpt:

My point is that, in each time and place, the goal of the church is to achieve a moral reading of Scripture. We should not simply READ scripture. We must, rather, aim for a CERTAIN KIND OF READING, a MORAL reading in light of the human experience of suffering and pain.

And I believe Jesus justifies this attempt. In the gospel of Matthew, Jesus gives the Keys of the Kingdom to the church, to humanity, to “bind and loose.” That is, the church must discern, in unique times and places, what is moral and what is not. In light of human experience, the church must “bind” currently permitted behavior that is now experienced as “unjust.” Further, she must “loosen” old restrictions deemed to be unjust. We have seen this “binding and loosing” already. The church now “binds” slavery and has begun to “loose” women. And what is critical is that these bindings and loosings on Earth are bound and loosed “in Heaven.”

In short, the traffic of “divine commands” is not a One-Way street: From Heaven to Earth. Jesus clearly states that the traffic is Two-Way. That commands on Earth will be obeyed in Heaven as well.

To conclude, Heaven and Earth are in a most profound conversation about what is just and good.

And sometimes it is Heaven that changes.

We can only ‘sin’ against God, right?   Can we sin against one another?

I think this question is clearly and concisely answered by Jesus, himself (Matthew 18:15-17):

If your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector.

We can quite clearly sin against one another.  This is also supported by Torah law (i.e., Exodus 22) as it discusses atonement and compensation for transgressions between men.  Now, to be fair, I don’t think you can sin against a brother and yet not sin against God at the same time.  This, however, would be a topic for another post.

To be fair, though, I would like to also post further comment by my correspondent in regard to sin that is a supremely relevant part of breaking down the Word:

Perhaps (and I suspect this is truer than we may think) it is largely a translation issue.  I am pretty sure that there is only one word in the Greek for ‘sin’.  Given that, sin could be like those English words we misuse…example; love.  I love peanut butter.  I love the Beatles.  I love Jesus.  Admittedly, I don’t understand it, but my gut is that sin as referred to by Jesus and our ability to ‘sin’ against one another could and should be translated differently.  Perhaps as we read in Mathew 6:12 (Lord’s Prayer) the word should be ‘debt’ or ‘transgressions’. 

I have no problem with believing that sin as an act against a brother (a horizontal sin, say) is in an entirely different class of sin as a sin against God (ye olde vertical sin), and can even be treated differently.  This, however, also gets tied to my conversation of whether you can ever sin against one without the other.

The phrase ‘lack of fruit’, though, is quite an open-ended phrase that could encompass any number of acts or omissions.  Thus, I then do believe it is possible, somehow, that a ‘lack of fruit’ from me might possibly end up with being a sin against a brother.  Especially if my ‘lack of fruit’ leads him to believe I am at fault and he feels the need to show this to me.

MY POINT IS THUS

I do not in any way intend to invalidate the sin is sin concept, or any other basic understanding of self-examination.  I think every element presented in the email conversation above has some validity as we discuss our journey in this life.  I also believe though, that to say ’sin is sin’ is not the end of the discussion on sin, but the beginning, and that the idea of ‘unknown’ or ‘unintentional’ sin against God is reflective of our permanent and perpetual need to seek the face of God and apply what we learn in our self-examination.

Peace.

OK, I admit to bating you a little with the idea of unknown sin.  In reality, I’m not fond of the word sin anyway.  This isn’t to say that I have any interest in altering or watering down the Word of God.  By no means.  I literally have issue with the actual word, as I believe it has been abused and diluted of its full potency over the past century.  I find that folks, myself included, have lost a more pure definition of the word sin, and it has thus become weighed with meaning that goes outside of its original intent.  I also believe the word has lost any cultural significance outside the church, which makes for awkward usage for unbelievers, seekers, or those who have had a bad church experience in the past.

In his outstanding book Respectable Sins, Jerry Bridges addresses this very point.  He also presents an outstanding definition of sin that has become extraordinarily relevant to me these days.  Sin is, simply put, conduct unbecoming a Christ-follower.  Conduct unbecoming.  OK, this has meaning to me.

Largely, this rectifies some of the damage I feel that some folks of the “sin is sin is sin” camp have caused.  Now, don’t come after me too hard on this, but I have been presented the following theology numerous times over my life, the last of which was a conversation this past fall with an ordained minister.  Does this sound familiar:

We on earth put levels and degrees on wrongdoing, but to God, sin is sin.  To God, stealing a pencil off someone’s desk is the same as killing someone.  It’s only in our finite humanity that we see it otherwise.  To God, sin is sin is sin.

Ever heard this before?

Frankly, this waters down the true understanding of ’sin is sin.’  It is a theological error that gives too much power to the meaning of the word sin.

First, let me ask you a question.  Fath, hope and love: which is the greatest?  According to the Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians:

1Cor 13:13: And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.

So, there are degrees of goodness.  In addition, in the Mosaic Law, there is precept upon precept outlining various penalties for various sinful actions.

Hey, everyone!  Ready to tackle some scripture?

Me, too.

I have many times just sat down with the Word of God and opened up somewhere to read.  I have certainly been blessed when doing this, as just about any time I digest the Word it is a good thing.

Still, just like any good project, a plan makes for a most effective result.  First, be sure to pray before jumping into anything.  I think you’ll find that the Spirit of God is the best guide for where you should start your next study.  No one would know better than He, and He doesn’t disappoint.  Just ask Him for direction.

I hope this can be a more interactive post for anyone who joins us here at The Other Bald Guy.  Below, I have a selection of ideas to help in possibly providing useful information.

Rev. Kevin Salyer of Powhatan Community Church, who is also the original bald guy of PCC (or from this context: the other other bald guy), notes the following:

Regarding personal study…I’ve found that doing this within context of my small group is awesome. It gives me a framework and friends to share the experience with.

Kevin is a rather smart guy.  Building that sense of accountability with loved ones, such as a small group study, is important and so supportive.

-WE WANT LINKS!!!-

The following links have not been deeply researched, but interested me enough to want to go back.  Just remember, any of man’s writings contain interpretations, positions, and opinions that may or may not fit easily with your current understanding of scripture.  Don’t sweat it.  I have tried to keep the links below within basic orthodoxy tolerances, but I know some elements of these external sites do not fit my personal position.  No matter!  If you find something that doesn’t fit, then make it a point of conversation and study!  Learn why other Christ-followers see things differently than you.  It may not change your mind, but you will still have a better understanding of why others see things the way they do.

BaldGuy Disclaimer: The Other Bald Guy does not endorse any external link, nor provides any guarantees of any sort.  Links provided here are suggestions for you to explore.  If I have posted a link that really does not belong, then please let me know.

-Want to read the Bible in a year?-

The following sites offer Bible-in-a-year study plans

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/biblereading-1yr.html -a simple chart, also includes a 3-year plan.

http://www.oneyearbibleonline.com/ - “The One Year Bible daily reading plan consist of passages from the Old Testament, New Testament, Psalms, and Proverbs. This arrangement of Scripture brings variety and a fresh approach to each day’s 15-minute reading, while providing a clear understanding of the Bible’s larger message. No other “through the bible” plan presents the entire bible in such a user-friendly format. Simply select the month and date to link to the passages for the day.”

http://www.biblereadthrough.com/ - “Bible Reading Plans, featuring custom schedules, as well as audio and RSS.”  This one looks interesting and very customizable.

-TOPICAL LINK: The Concept of Love-

Robin Calamaio offers an exhaustive scriptural study on the concept of Love.  The rest of his site looks interesting, as well.  He has several topic options.

http://www.freelygive-n.com/Bible_study_on_Love.html

 -TOPICAL LINK: The Life of Jesus-

A series of short Bible Studies about the life of Jesus from the folks at Wycliffe Associates.  They, too, have other studies on the site that may be good.

http://www.easyenglish.info/bible-study/jesus-life/index.htm 

 -Memorizing the Word-

Looking to focus on memorization?  Below is a link to an article that links to downloadable Bible verse cards.

http://www.creativebiblestudy.com/Biblememorization.html

The AG Discipleship Ministries has a nice wealth of options for Bible memorization at the following link:

http://discipleship.ag.org/Discipleship/Bible_Study/Memorization/index.cfm

-YOUR TURN!!!-

Folks, talk to me.  There are as many Bible studies as there are ideas in the Bible.  What has worked for you?  What fascinating aspects of the Bible have you discovered and can share with us?  I am particularly looking for plans of action that are freely accessible.

Also, if you need help looking for something that’s just right for you, then PULEEZE take a moment and ask.

-The Other Bald Guy’s Last Word-

When choosing a plan of study, praying about it isn’t just a good idea, it’s an absolute necessity.  While it’s good to be sold on the idea of a study, and I believe it so very beneficial for everyone to be studying the Word, don’t dive in quickly on something you haven’t asked God about.  This is a quick way to possibly end up with buyer’s remorse, discouragement, and you can end up preventing yourself from seeking to engage in future studies.

Peace, love, and God’s wisdom.

Hello folks!

As the Christmas season nears, I thought it would be fun to examine some of the more interesting theories as to when Jesus was born. While we celebrate his advent on December 25th, a majority of scholars feel this is not the exact date of his birth.

PET PEEVE ALERT 

First, let me air a pet peeve of mine.  Jesus wasn’t born on ‘the first Christmas’.  It’s just one of those things.  The earliest reference to the celebration of the nativity on December 25 (the Mass for Christ) is found in the Chronography (Calendar) of 354, an illustrated manuscript of important dates of the year A.D. 354 compiled in Rome for a Roman Christian named Valentius.  In Part 12, the commemoration dates of the martyrs, it begins with “VIII kal. Ian. natus Christus in Betleem Iudeae” (“Eighth day before the kalends of January [December 25], Birth of Christ in Bethlehem Judea”).

There are other inferences in the writings of antiquity that may hint of a possible celebration before A.D. 354, but this is the first clear indication of a December 25th commemoration of the birth of Jesus.  While there were possible celebrations of the birth of Jesus in the early church, historical writings indicate various churches held them at different times.  Most scholars believe the Mass for Christ, Christmas, was not acknowledged prior to the 4th century.

BUT ENOUGH OF ME…

When was Jesus born?

I wish I were brilliant enough to provide insight on my own, but alas, I cannot.

Let’s start with an excerpt from the Encyclopedia Britannica.  While this does not provide insight into when Jesus was born, it is an excellent and concise outline of why we may have chosen December 25th:

The early Christian community distinguished between the identification of the date of Jesus’ birth and the liturgical celebration of that event. The actual observance of the day of Jesus’ birth was long in coming. In particular, during the first two centuries of Christianity there was strong opposition to recognizing birthdays of martyrs or, for that matter, of Jesus. Numerous church fathers offered sarcastic comments about the pagan custom of celebrating birthdays when, in fact, saints and martyrs should be honoured on the days of their martyrdom—their true “birthdays,” from the church’s perspective.

The precise origin of assigning December 25 as the birth date of Jesus is unclear. The New Testament provides no clues in this regard. December 25 was first identified as the date of Jesus’ birth by Sextus Julius Africanus in 221 and later became the universally accepted date. One widespread explanation of the origin of this date is that December 25 was the Christianizing of the dies solis invicti nati (“day of the birth of the unconquered sun”), a popular holiday in the Roman Empire that celebrated the winter solstice as a symbol of the resurgence of the sun, the casting away of winter and the heralding of the rebirth of spring and summer. Indeed, after December 25 had become widely accepted as the date of Jesus’ birth, Christian writers frequently made the connection between the rebirth of the sun and the birth of the Son. One of the difficulties with this view is that it suggests a nonchalant willingness on the part of the Christian church to appropriate a pagan festival when the early church was so intent on distinguishing itself categorically from pagan beliefs and practices.

A second view suggests that December 25 became the date of Jesus’ birth by a priori reasoning that identified the spring equinox as the date of the creation of the world and the fourth day of creation, when the light was created, as the day of Jesus’ conception (i.e., March 25). December 25, nine months later, then became the date of Jesus’ birth. For a long time the celebration of Jesus’ birth was observed in conjunction with his baptism, celebrated January 6.

There are many opinions as to the date of Jesus’ birth, and I have only provided a very small list here.  There are evidences for a birth date for every season of the year.  In fact, a bit of searching can find supporting evidence for just about every possible date.  I tried to find selections here that were both enjoyable to read and backed by reasonable scholarship of one flavor or another.

Joseph Tkach from the Worldwide Church of God provides a basic overview of a common position many learned Christ-followers hold.  As a bonus, Michael Morrison has a compelling inset column on this page discussing specifically choosing December 25 as a deliberate opposition to the pagan celebration of Saturnalia to minister to recently-converted or not-yet-converted pagans.

http://www.wcg.org/lit/jesus/datebirth.htm

John Parsons of Hebrew4Christians.com has a neat comparison of two prevailing theories: mid-fall vs. mid-winter birth dates:

http://www.hebrew4christians.com/Articles/Christmas/christmas.html

Among other things, Gene Edward Veith is the Provost and Professor of Literature at Patrick Henry College.  He proposes evidences of a specific birth date of December 25th.

http://www.geneveith.com/evidence-december-25-is-the-right-day/_184/

The folks at New Life Community Church in Stafford, Va, offer a best guess of Sept 29, 5 B.C.

http://www.new-life.net/chrtms10.htm

Stepping outside our comfort zones, we visit Stargazers.com (“Astrology Services for spiritual beings on a human path”).  While The Other Bald Guy doesn’t ascribe to astrology, this is one example of numerous attempts to identify Jesus’ birth through celestial events (i.e. the Star of Bethlehem).  Hannibal Giudice’s guess: March 1, 7 B.C.

http://www.stargazers.com/jesus.html

And to wrap things up, I offer up the writings of Rev. Bosco Peters, an Anglican priest in Christchurch, New Zealand.  Rev. Peters provides a wealth of information as to why the Christian church may have chosen December 25th as the day of celebration for the advent of Jesus.  Interestingly, he presents two separate documents: one outlining a Pagan-centric theory of Dec 25th, and the other being a Judeo-Christian theory.  Very interesting!

Pagan-centric theory: http://www.liturgy.co.nz/worship/matters_files/christmasday1.html
Judeo-Christian theory: http://www.liturgy.co.nz/worship/matters_files/christmasday2.html

Welcome to the home of The Other Bald Guy.  Hopefully you have come here to relax and study about God on a little bit deeper level.  Together, we can chat about the tough questions and explore God, the Bible, and what it means to be a Christ follower.  While reading the Bible is a principal element of a Christ follower’s life, without some scholarship we may not be reaching the fullness of the message (I’ll leave the concept of sola scriptura for another day).

Remember, I’m here to meet you where you are, and we can then walk together in faith, love, and scholarship.

I’ve decided to follow Christ.  What now?

Boy, oh boy, has a whole new world of study opened up for you.  If you care to understand about the human condition, understand that there is a future for you in a living, breathing devine presence, and to encounter the joys of both this life and beyond, then you’ve chosen wisely.

First, make sure you’re plugged in with folks who have been following Christ.  It’s not a path for the weak minded, so plan to be challenged in many ways.  Being around other believers who have already had time in the act of following Christ will allow you to experience the faith more fully and on sure footing.

Also, read your Bible (perhaps start with Phillipians).  Seeking the face of God will take reading the words of His prophets.  Beware, though: the Bible is a whole context in and of itself, so don’t get hung up on a single phrase.  Take your time and trust that once you’ve digested larger amounts of the Bible, certain portions begin to make more sense within the whole.  Following Christ is a lifetime journey.

What questions are stupid questions about following Christ?

I suppose I have to give the obvious answer: the only stupid question is the one you don’t ask.  Our God is so big that we will ask questions the rest of our lives and not scratch the surface of His being.  Still, every question we ask enriches our lives and broadens our worldviews.  Asking questions is like breathing in God — soooo nice and fulfilling.

How do I get access to bears?

Well, first you have to be an Old Testament prophet (strike one for you, I’m guessing).  Basically, the joke about having access to bears is from the Old Testament book of 2 Kings.  One of God’s prophets, a man by the name of Elisha, was on a trip to the city of Bethel.  I’ll let the rest of the story speak for itself:

as he was going up the road, some youths came from the city and mocked him, and said to him, ‘Go up, you baldhead! Go up, you baldhead!’ So he turned around and looked at them, and pronounced a curse on them in the name of the Lord. And two female bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the youths. (2 Kings 2:23-24)

Wow, Elisha was a testy little prophet, now wasn’t he?  A little male-pattern baldness apparently goes a long way to pushing a prophet of the Holy One right over the edge.  I actually chose this story intentionally to show what I really want to do here.  On its face, this story is almost mortifying.  Youths make fun of Elisha (in the King James, it’s translated ‘little children’!), and in seeming retaliation he curses them, and plenty of their friends, to being eaten by she-bears.

Is that simply the end of the story?  Is there no more to be known?  Is God so capricious that He would allow one of His prophets to kill 42 kids over some teasing?  Perhaps there’s more than meets the eye here.  Here’s where you and I get to take some time and study what some modern scholars think on the issue.

Discovery Magazine has an interesting take on the whole thing here:
http://www.discoverymagazine.com/articles/d1999/d9911e.htm

If you want a more in-depth study, and one I find very valuable in this instance, then hop to this link below at one of my favorite sites, the Christian Thinktank:
http://www.christian-thinktank.com/qmeanelisha.html

My take: Don’t make fun of bald guys.

Peace, y’all.