Thought for the day

Luke 6:35-36 But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked. 36Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful.

“...without possibility of parole!”

The man jerked awake as the lights came on. Every day, he awoke to the last words he heard that judge say. He heard the groans of his fellow prisoners as the guards shouted, “On the line for count”

He stood up, and walked to his cell door as the guard walked down the aisle, checking off each prisoner. Soon, it would be time for breakfast, then work, the lunch, then work, and finally supper and back in his cell. Prison life revolved around strict schedules...

The guard finished his count, and then to the prisoner’s surprise, he stopped at his cell door, and said, “You have a visitor. Get washed up, and I’ll be back to get you in ten minutes”

The prisoner was puzzled. He had been locked up for six months, and had not gotten a single letter, phone call, or visitor. His buddies that had promised to visit him weekly never came. His parents had disowned him years ago because he was such an embarrassment to the family, getting into hardcore drugs and all. He couldn’t think of anyone who would want to visit him. The District Attorney had made him out to be a waste of life that would do anything for his fix, including kill….

The prisoner barely remembered the incident that got him here. He was in so much pain from not having the money to shoot up. All he wanted was a little money from the kid, but he wouldn’t hand it over. Then the knife…

The man shook his head to clear the memories from his head and he cleaned up and prepared to be escorted to the visitation room. When he arrived, he sat down at the table and the guard shackled him to the floor. The guard then walked to the wall, pushed an intercom and said, “Let them in.”

The prisoner looked up as he heard the door open, and his stomach fell as the parents of the young man he had murdered walked slowly into the room. He braced himself for the verbal assault that was sure to come. Why else would they be there. He had seen the utter devastation on their faces when they testified during the sentencing that the young man he killed was their only son. Not only that, but the father’s two brothers had been killed in a car accident, and the boy they had late in life was the only person to carry on the family name.

The prisoner felt utterly alone, and ashamed that his weakness had done that to this family. He looked down at the table as the couple sat down across from him.

There was silence for what seemed like eternity, then the father spoke softly, “I’ve hated you for a long time. You killed my only son and have caused my wife and me so much pain and loss that we thought we’d never make it. Every fiber of my being wanted you to get the death penalty, and then to sit there and watch you die for what you did.

But then I realized that God probably felt the same way about me when my sin killed His Son. Yet, God forgave me, adopted me, and made me an heir with Christ. He gave me the same privileges that His Son has, and made me acceptable in His sight through His love.”

The father reached across the table and took the prisoner’s shackled hand. The prisoner looked up, and for the first time in his life, saw love and compassion in someone’s eyes. The man continued, “Therefore, if it is okay with you, I’ve drawn up legal papers to adopt you. From now on, you will be just as much of a son to me as the one you killed. Everything I have will be yours, and when I die, you will be the sole heir to all of my possessions. We will buy you birthday presents, and come visit you as often as the prison allows. You will be my son in every imaginable way.”

The prisoner was stunned, and then tears began to form in his eyes. “How can you do this?” he asked, “After everything I did to you, you show me this much kindness and love?”

The man smiled and answered, “Because God the Father, through His Son Jesus did the same thing for me. The first thing I’d like to do as your father, if you’ll have me, is introduce you to Him.”

This is a true story... Would you have this kind of love? Jesus did, and He offers it to all who ask for it...

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

True spirituality shows the love of the Father in all circumstances, in all times, and in all places…



Blessings,

"Dirk Kennedy"

Alby - wasn't that the same father who disowned his other son because he was gay?

Psshht .. Well no ones perfect!

That father is a better person than me, I guess....I'd use my legal resources to instead beg the court to allow me to be the one to flip the switch on the guy.

me = not very forgiving

Very nice post Dirk. And wow... what a post for your first one!

This is a good reminder to all of us that God loves us... unconditionally. He does not force Himself upon us but gives us a choice in the matter. How difficult it must be for him to look down on me during the times I let him down, yet He loves me just the same.

There is a pastor friend of mine who lived the example that you gave. Hie son-in-law murdered his daughter. It took him years to really forgive him for taking his child, he held onto that hate and pain for many years but one day he finally did. What courage, what strength, what compassion. If I could only be so strong.

Oh, he later found out that the very weekend that he finally forgave his son-in-law was the very same weekend that his son-in-law accepted Christ into his life for the first time. Through Him all things are possible.

Most find that in the end the only one that is harmed by an unforgiving heart is themselves. It was my pastor friend who was set free by his forgiveness, not his son-in-law.

Billy,
Thank you for your kind comments. This was a devotional that I sent to various people several times a week.
Although I know that not everyone will appreciate them, the bible teaches that God's word does not return void until it accomplishes the will for which is was sent. It is my hope that God can use what I write in some small way to shine His love into people's hearts, and bring them into His kingdom.
Those who allow the Holy Spirit to touch their hearts will be encouraged by them, and those who resist God's leading will be angered and offended by them. Either way, I would not be very loving to withhold the truth, even if people respond in unkind, sarcastic, or even hateful ways to me.

Remember the words of Jesus:
John 15:18-19 "If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first. If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you.

Much love!
Dirk

Good sentiment, and wise words.

But my master said I have to embrace the dark side and allow it to consume me, or I'll never know the true power of the force....

Excellent point, Billy. Forgiving others is like a spiritual colon cleanse!

Dirk, welcome and thank you for posting. When I first read your devotional post, I thought to myself, Why the heck is he posting that here? Keep in mind that I am a nearly 30-year veteran of the Christian faith. That said, I hesitated to post a reply until now.

I am of the belief that actions speak voluminously louder than words. IMO, God's word -- in action -- can be a powerful thing. So many of the professing Christians in these forums, however -- myself included -- have made some pretty unloving and distasteful comments and/or statements here. I mean no dis-respect, but I often find that those who cite the passage from Isaiah 11 stating that "God's word will not return void" are, in a way, putting up a red herring, absolving themselves of any real involvement or responsbility when it comes to genuinely engaging with other human beings. It seems as if they are in effect saying, "I've done my part, I'm no longer obliged." To quote scripture and/or to relay inspirational stories is fine, but I have my doubts that taking that approach is what Isaiah had in mind when he penned those words nearly 3,000 years ago.

Just my $2L.

Paolo,
Thank you for your comments, and I completely agree and understand where it is you are coming from.
Please understand my quote from Isaiah was not an attempt absolve myself or any other Christian from the respondsbility to love (agape) others. My main point behind posting that is a firm faith that God's Word is powerful, and has the ability to change hearts and minds. It can't return void, it will either bring repentance, greater love and appreciation for who God is, or further hardening of the heart toward God...

Not everyone will agree with me, nor will they like me. Most, especailly those who hate God and/or Christianity will probably utterly despise me and my writings. I have a choice to make then: either follow the command of Christ to love them, or hate them in return. I choose agape love.

Blessings

is this the new place for people to beat the bible....for fucks sake we haven't finished beating the dead horses around here yet

Everything else is discussed in these forums, why not the bible?

I liked Paolo's comments in reply to your post. I think "those who hate God" is another red herring. You either believe in god or you don't. If you believe then you're not likely going to hate god. If you disbelieve you're also not going to hate god. You can't hate what you don't believe in. I mean no offense but I find these kinds of devotionals a bit offensive. Not the sentiments expressed in them which are admirable, but the use of universal traits as advertising for Christianity. Love, generosity, charity, peace... I'm all for encouraging people to be good, and kind, and loving, but there's an undercurrent in Christian devotionals that bothers me... the suggestion that these things depend on belief in God and depend on religion. Do you feel that without god you'd be incapable of those things? If the answer is yes, I find that frightening. If the answer is no, then these parables are unnecessary as anything other than a means of reinforcing the myth of that dependence. There always have and always will be people capable of that kind of love and forgiveness, across all belief systems including non-believers, and that's been true since long before Jesus ever walked the earth. No bashing intended. Just some food for thought.

I think that debates about the bible could be an interesting forum topic. The subject facinates me from a historical perspective.

However, while I believe that the concept and practice of forgiveness is sound and something that is healing to the human ego or spirit if you prefer, I see no need to justify it with a passage from a document written by a man named Theophilus probably well over 100 years after the death of Jesus.

(The time line is frequently debated) - in fact, it has been debated whether Luke actually knew Jesus personally or was in fact, inspired by the Gospels of Paul who he frequently followed and was in prison with.

Even that rendition could be incorrect in as much as has been lost or morphed through translation sometimes in genuine error and sometimes deliberately to be used politically, to justify the amoral actions of powerful men.

What disturbs me most about fundamental christianity is that a number of wars, mass murders and enslavements have been perpetuated on various factions of women and mankind and then justified by referencing scriptures that were questionable when written and certaintly became more so when translated.

Use of these ancient writings as justification to intervene in other peoples lives and perhaps even take the life of another has gone on for centuries and is still happening.

Along the same lines, I don't need a passage from an ancient scripture to justify for me what I sense is moral behavior in my world today. I admire people who can forgive someone who is genuinely sorry for the mistake or carelessness that has marked someone elses life. I admire people who are able to recognize and correct mistakes they have made. I have learned this from many different sources, the bible being only one of them.

The bible contains some very good philosophical and moral concepts, I'm not arguing that, I'm just pointing out that other philosophical opinions written by those that knew nothing of Jesus (such as Budda) can be just as compelling and just as "moral".

Rose,
Thank you for your response. There are a a couple of points about your post concerning the bible that I wanted to address.

Paul never wrote a gospel. It's believed that Luke got his information to write his gospel from John Mark, who got his information from Peter. It is believed that either Matthew's or Mark's Gospel served as the blue print for the other two synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke)
Luke most likely never knew Jesus, but was one of Paul's early converts from his early ministry in Asia. He was not a Jew, but a Greek physcian, who wrote two letters which dealt with the history of the early church to a friend named Theophlus about 20 years after Jesus ascended into heaven. The first is now called the Gospel of Luke, and the second is the Book of Acts.
Paul on the other hand wrote most of the books in the New Testament (12-13), which dealt mostly with doctrine.

If you would like more information about the bible, the theology and philosophy of Christianity, I am here to serve

Love and blessings

Dirk

GOD IS DEAD!

Wow.....the nerve of some people taking a post about love and forgiveness and bashing it.
Get a grip people.

Actually this may surprise you coming from an atheist, but I have studied the bible. In fact, I spent most of my academic life in catholic school where the study of theology was a requirement. The particular historical information that I sited happened to be from the "JCS of Christian Inconnect". I only referenced them because I felt they had a more robust list of references to church documents than others I've seen.

As I said in the post, the authorship and chronology of the gospels and scriptures are not certain and are often debated as frequently (and fervently) as their translation and meaning.

That was my point.


.

Shed. Dynamite soaked with gasoline. Match. Light up. Throw.

It seems to me that Dirk's intention is not necessarily a "fair-and-balanced" discussion of Christianity from an historical or a philosophical point of view. The words and phrases he uses denote another agenda. You'll notice that he did not address the substance of Rose's post, except for some "corrections" on lexiconic matters. Nor did he respond to Chip's concerns.

That's OK, and it's his right to post or respond how he likes. But it's an unfortunate pattern I see among many Christians, particularly evangelical Protestants prone to make the kinds of statements like the original post. The lack of substantive engagement is usually explained away by refering to the other side's inability to "understand the message".

The original post is a nice story. Told in a nice way. And one we've all heard a thousand times, in one way or another. But it's apocryphal. And does not indicate how most Christians behave in such circumstances. And therefore, in the very words of the New Testament's chief theologian, largely irrelevant.

It would be nicer to have a balanced, fair, and respectful discussion of varying philosophies and religious approaches to common questions about human existance. As Rose and Chip offered.

Seth - I suspect that you are inferring that Dirk's intent is to proselytize, and you are probably right on the money. If nothing else, a Christian's one true "duty" is to go out into the world and "share the good news." That brings up an interesting question: What is an appropriate method for proselytizing within a forum community such as this one?

In my previous post, my main point was that it seemed out of context to post something like this devotional out of the clear blue sky. There was no previous relational investment leading up to Dirk's post, and that is essentially what I was referring to when I called attention to the Christian tendency to recite the "four spiritual laws" in some form or fashion without actually engaging with the intended audience. I don't fault Dirk for this, and I really do think his intentions are honorable. In addition, I defend Dirk's right to express himself this way. I would, however, like to hear from others as to what would be considered appropriate.

"God is dead." - Nietzsche

"Nietzsche is dead." - God





I would be very careful in how this passage is used, Dirk. When Jesus refers to the world, he refers to the masses, and the groupthink that rises from collective opinion. He does *not* single out every member of 'the world' as culpable. It is far too easy to make the conclusions that people who disagree are part of the world, and are therefore hateful. Using this line of scripture to justify one's own interpretation of God's message is dangerously close to self-righteousness, from my viewpoint.

My opinion? I think Johnny Mercer said it best:

"Accentuate the positive, eliminate the negative, and don't mess with Mister In-Between."

You don't share the Good News by showing how your audience is not currently with the Good News. Everyone, from Pagans to Catholics to Islamics to Christians to every other religion under God's rainbow has some basic connection with God...he created them, after all. This should be assumed by evangelicals, IMHO. If you believe you are spreading God's Word to sinners...you are casting the first stone. Humans have the potential for great good and for great evil. If we want to spread the Gospel to others, we should show people what is positive about them...not what is negative.

So the issue for Christians, Paolo and Liona, is "Do we spread?" or "Do we discuss?"

Good questions. My patently un-Christian answer: For most of us a good discussion, reasonable points, tolerance, and a diversity of views expressed in a friendly manner, is a far more effective "spreader" than other strategies. No expectations, however, because expectations can be a form of pressure.

To be blunt (and yet not unkind or unfriendly) Dirk's posts were jargonistic, an expression of "Christian language" and "Christian culture", with evangelical phrases, words, and assumptions that are somewhat meaningless to those he was perhaps trying to reach.

I fear that we may be talking at cross-purposes, simply because many of us wish reason and dialogue to underlie such discussions, and many more of us base such discussions on acceptance, faith, and spirituality. And there is a conflict of protocol and communication there.

In other words, one side might say, "Let us discuss this reasonably and come to a true understanding." And the other side might say, "Ultimately, you can only come to a true understanding through acceptance and faith." And while neither is necessarily wrong, there is little basis for communication because assumptions and methods are so different.

And that makes these kinds of threads hard.

Oh, I agree. We can only come to an understanding of our core beliefs through discussion and a willingness to listen. Faith is a living aspect of a person's being, and it adapts to each person's own situation and life. Many people who discuss spirituality fail to take into account that they are *not* the person that they are talking to.



I think it is possible to have a reasonable dialouge on faith and spirituality. The keyword here is *acceptance*. Spirituality is a personal part of ones life. As long as all who are involved respect that, constructive discussion can follow.

Positive Positive Positive!!!!