My lovely wife is handling 99% of the work in reading books on the subject, researching the best curriculum, buying the materials, and dragging me to home school conventions.  However, the education of my children is a primary concern on my heart and mind as well.  Over the past few months I have begun to consider what I want my children to know when they leave home.

Following are the results of my reading, research and thinking.  The sheer quantity of topics, and I’m pretty sure I didn’t get everything, might be overwhelming, but when you consider that much of it will be covered in the curriculum already and also that we have 10+ years to do it, the task becomes manageable.  I want my wife and I to return to this list at least every year and come up with goals to focus on for the upcoming months.

The first half, Topics for Parents to Teach, are the categories in learning that will rarely, if ever, be covered in school curriculum.  These are things that it will be the parent’s sole responsibility to teach.  Do not be discouraged, however, all God’s forces for good are fighting for you!

For the most part, these topics can be taught outside of school hours.  Some of it might be taught by simply encouraging your teenager to read particular books and then discussing it with them.  Bottom line, these are the things that I know my child will need when they go out as lights into an unbelieving world.

Our second half, Topics for School to Teach, are categories of knowledge that our children will mostly learn in school.  However, and largely depending on the curriculum we choose for them, some of these topics will need to be supplemented.

Before you have a heart attack when looking at this list, let me qualify one thing.  As with any topic, three different levels of education can be assigned each of these topics: Information, Knowledge, and Wisdom.  Each family will need to determine where these topics fit based on the desires and aptitudes of the children:

1. Information being just simply knowing the general outlines of what a topic includes.  For myself, I would put things like Criminology, Earth Science, or Political Science in this category.  I want my children to know these topics in general terms, but unless they show special interest in them, that is all they need.
2. Knowledge means being able to use the information in a topic in real life.  Things like mathematics, logic or philosophy would fall in this category, for me.
3. Wisdom means (for me) how to apply the knowledge you have to life in a way that will further the Kingdom of God, bring glory to God, and help people.  This is obviously the toughest thing to teach and it will be by the grace of God if my children leave my home with true wisdom.

Without further ado, here are the lists:

Topics For Parents to Teach

CHRISTIAN WORLDVIEW

• Biblical Studies – Do they intimately know the stories and larger themes the Bible holds? are they able to effectively understand what they read using interpretation techniques? are they reading it every day?
• Community – Are they aware of the needs of the community around them and the community of the world at large? can they make a significant difference in their communities?
• Critical Thinking – Can they logically think through issues presented to them? can they research ideas and teachings? can they debate false ideas?
• Life – Can they defend the absolute sanctity of life?
• Multiculturalism – Can they deal with crass multiculturalism and explain how it will never serve a society well?
• Relativism – Do they know all four forms of relativism? can they name and deconstruct them?
• Sexuality – Can they defend traditional Judeo-Christian sexual ethics?
• Tolerance – Can they deal with a situation where tolerance is demanded by society in a situation where intolerance is necessary?
• Worldview – Do they know the three basic components of a worldview? can they detect a false worldview and compare it to Christianity?

LIFE SKILLS

• Associations – Do they understand and can they maintain the associations necessary to life: family relationships, friendships, companionship, comradeship, love, community, networking…?
• Exercise – Are they fully trained in a regimen of daily exercise? do they understand fitness and the importance of taking care of your body?
• Finances – Do they understand the fundamentals of money management, including budgeting, saving and investing? can they faithfully manage money without giving into spending foolishly?
• Healthy Eating – Do they understand nutrition? do they understand why eating healthy is important? can they cook their own meals? can they grow their own produce? can they hunt?
• Housekeeping – Can they maintain a household in all the essentials?  can they clean, mend, fix and organize?
• Loss Management – Do they know how to grieve? can they complete losses?
• Medicine – Do they understand the basics of the human body? can they employ natural remedies for illness? can they protect against common diseases? are they equipped for medical emergencies?
• Navigation – Do they thoroughly understand maps and directions?  do they understand geography?  can they draw a helpful map?
• Relationships – Are they able to form and maintain healthy attachments? do they understand the biblical roles in marriage and are they ready to fulfill them?
• Scientific Endeavors – Can they discover truth for themselves through the rules of evidence, not by memorizing the opinions of others?
• Self-support – Can they detect needs around them? can they support themselves by meeting those needs? do they have a vocation based on meeting needs?
• Shelter – Can they build and maintain basic structures? can they build and maintain furniture? do they understand general appliances and can they do basic maintenance on them?
• Transportation – Can they handle a car, motorcycle, boat (and plane)? can they perform basic maintenance on them?
• Work – Do they understand the value of work? can they work hard and persistently? do they understand the connection between working and having? are they free of entitlement?

QUALITY OF LIFE

• Balance – Do they understand and maintain the balance between variety in life and unchanging responsibilities?
• Boredom – Can they entertain themselves? are they seldom at a loss what to do with time? are they comfortable being alone?
• Consumerism – Can they detect and resist the varied techniques used in sales?
• Creativity – Are they empowered to create new things, have new ideas and experiences?
• Death – Do they understand and accept the significance of time, the seasons in life, and their own mortality? are they able to continue learning through each moment?
• Grounding – Do they intimately know the history of their family? do they understand and value their family, ancestors, background and local and larger cultures? do they understand their limits and possibilities?
• Physical World – Have they explored (not merely taught) as much of the physical world as possible?

Topics for School to Teach

FORMAL SCIENCES

• Computer Science – Are they well versed in theoretical computer science? can they write a simple machine-control program?
• Linguistics – Do they fully understand the four aspects of grammar? do they understand how to extract meaning? do they understand semantics?
• Logic – Are they able to think logically through complex ideas? do they understand the basics of logic? can they debate both sides of an idea?
• Mathematics – Are they fully able to use basic and advanced mathematics in real-life situations? algebra, geometry, trigonometry?
• Statistics – Do they grasp decision theory? can they collect, organize and interpret data effectively? can they effectively quantify information?

HUMANITIES

• Art – Do they know art and how it has evolved throughout history?  are they able to create art in various forms to the best of their abilities and preferences?
  
• Dance – Are they familiar with popular ball-room and classic dances? can they dance to the best of their natural abilities?
  
• History – Are they thoroughly familiar with biblical, church, US, and world history? do they understand historical precedent?
• Language – Do they know a second or third modern language? can they read an ancient language? can they detect a language when they see it?
• Literature – Are they avid readers? can they detect good literature?
• Music – Do they know the different types of music? are they able to perform music to the best of their natural abilities? can they enjoy music thoroughly?
• Philosophy – Are they well versed in biblical philosophy? can they detect and deconstruct modern philosophies?
• Religion – Are they well versed in the teachings of modern religions?
• Theater – Are they able to act, direct or produce to the best of their natural abilities? do they understand the process of bringing a story to the stage or the screen?
• Writing – Are they able to write clearly and correctly? do they have neat, readable handwriting?

NATURAL SCIENCES

• Astronomy – Do they fully understand the celestial objects in our universe and beyond? can they model the universe? do they grasp distances and modern techniques at measuring them?
• Biology – Do they fully grasp the complexity of modern organisms? can they effectively prove creative design through biology?
• Chemistry – Are they well versed in the known elements? can they conduct experiments and manipulate materials? do they understand the basics of matter?
• Earth science – Do they have a basic grasp on geology, geophysics, hydrology, meteorology, geography, oceanography, atmospheric and soil science? do they understand the scientific arguments for and against the old-earth and new-earth theories?
• Physics – Do they understand the fundamental elements of the universe and how they interact with each other? can they explain the modern theories and compare them with a Christian worldview?

SOCIAL SCIENCES

• Anthropology – Do they understand the origin of mankind? can they explain what makes us different from animals? do they appreciate and have they experienced cultural differences?
• Archeology – Have they experienced a dig? do they understand the cultures of the past? can they prove ancient man was similar to us in mental abilities? do they appreciate achievements of the ancients?
• Business Administration – Do they already manage all aspects of a small business?
• Communication – Are they able to use timeless forms of communication: writing and speech as well as current and upcoming forms?
• Criminology – Do they understand biblical, traditional and modern theories employed in behavioral sciences? can they deconstruct purely humanistic or purely natural explanations of behavior?
• Economics – Do they understand the differences between the four major economic theories? can they explain the interactions of various economic agents.
• Education – Do they understand the different ways of learning? can they explain the pros and cons of government, private and home education? do they know how to learn on their own?
• Government – Do they understand the various systems of government? can they determine pros and cons between each form? can they explain how all of the aspects of US government? do they understand the Christian stance towards government? do they understand international relations?
• Law – Do they understand basic laws and the consequences they produce?  are they fully aware of the punishment breaking a law will entail? do they understand when a law should not be obeyed? do they grasp how the US law system works?
• Political Science – Do they local, state, and national politics? can they determine which current political stances are best and defend them?
• Psychology – Do they understand elements that influence behavior and mental processes? are they prepared to deconstruct pop-psychology and anti-biblical arguments?

Please provide your feedback on any of the items above or any missing topics that you consider an essential part of your child’s education.

Sources:

Absolute Truth by Nancy Pearcey
Weapons of Mass Instruction by John Taylor Gatto
Why Are There No Hittites on The Streets of New York by Dr. John Patrick
Wikipedia entries on Humanities, Social Sciences, Natural Sciences and Formal Sciences
Deuteronomy 6 by Moses

Let’s take a brief journey through recent scientific discoveries and the history that they illuminate for us.  First, the biblical evidence:

Now no shrub of the field was yet in the earth, and no plant of the field had yet sprouted, for the LORD God had not sent rain upon the earth, and there was no man to cultivate the ground. But a mist used to rise from the earth and water the whole surface of the ground. Genesis 2:5-6 (NASB)

These verses speak of a pre-flood world where it never rained.  Instead of rain, a mist came up from the earth to water the ground.  But how is this possible?  Was the hydrologic cycle not working?  This cycle, described several times in the Bible, is the scientifically proven process that happens when water evaporates from the oceans and accumulates in clouds which then empty over land.  If it had never rained, then what was preventing this process?

From what we can gather, the first time it ever rained was the flood.  Nobody believed Noah when he preached about the flood – they had never seen rain.

Let’s look at another passage that gives a somewhat cryptic reference to the “fountains of the great deep,” something different from rain:

In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on the same day all the fountains of the great deep burst open, and the floodgates of the sky were opened … Also the fountains of the deep and the floodgates of the sky were closed, and the rain from the sky was restrained Genesis 7:11, 8:2 (NASB)

It seems that in addition to water coming from the sky, water was coming up from “the deep”.  To explain this passage, some scientists theorize that the pre-flood world had vast underground caverns filled with water.  That the crust of the earth was literally “floating” on a layer of water.  If that was true, then it would explain where the mist came in the first passage.  It also explains where much of the water in the flood came from – underground.

Our next passage happens immediately after the flood:

And God said, “This is the sign of the covenant I am making between me and you and every living creature with you, a covenant for all generations to come: I have set my rainbow in the clouds, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and the earth. Whenever I bring clouds over the earth and the rainbow appears in the clouds, I will remember my covenant between me and you and all living creatures of every kind. Never again will the waters become a flood to destroy all life. Whenever the rainbow appears in the clouds, I will see it and remember the everlasting covenant between God and all living creatures of every kind on the earth.” Genesis 9:12-16

This passage talks about the rainbow being introduced to man.  Now, this is very strange because Adam and Eve had lived at least 2000 years prior, and this is when mankind first sees a rainbow?  What happened, did God change the scientific principles governing the way light interacts with water in the clouds to produce rainbows?

Next, let’s go back to creation:

And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.” So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. God called the vault “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.  And God said, “Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.” And it was so. God called the dry ground “land,” and the gathered waters he called “seas.” And God saw that it was good. Genesis 1:6-10

This passage speaks of what God created on the second day, and going into the third.  The interesting part is that it speaks of the “vault” or firmament dividing waters above from the waters below.  The firmament, it explains, is the sky.  It says that the sky separates the waters below (which form the seas) from the waters above the sky.  Conventional thinking would mandate that the waters above must have been clouds holding water, but this seems unlikely.  Based on the passages teaching that it never rained, this must not a reference to rain clouds.  But if not rain clouds, then what?  Could there have been a layer of water above the atmosphere?

Our next passage reveals how the environment of this pre-flood world affected humans:

When Adam had lived 130 years, he had a son in his own likeness, in his own image; and he named him Seth. After Seth was born, Adam lived 800 years and had other sons and daughters. Altogether, Adam lived a total of 930 years, and then he died … Seth lived a total of 912 years … Enosh lived a total of 905 years … Kenan lived a total of 910 years … Methuselah lived a total of 969 years, and then he died. Genesis 5:3-27

The inescapable conclusion is that life was very different in pre-flood conditions that what we experience today.  The fact of long life alone would indicate drastically different conditions.  Longevity of that type would be impossible today.  Was long life a supernatural miracle, or was it just a natural occurrence?

There is no indication that any of these differences: the lack of rain, the lack of a rainbow, the mist coming up from the “deep”, and the longevity of life were miraculous.  Consequently, if we are to believe the Bible is not mere fairy tales and myths, then we must believe that these differences can be explained in scientific terms.

Interestingly enough, some recent scientific discoveries have opened new possibilities for understanding these Bible passages.

First, scientists have discovered that the atmosphere was surprisingly different thousands of years ago.  Through testing levels of oxygen in the ice at the bottom of the ice caps^[1], and, more importantly, testing bubbles of air trapped in amber (remember Jurassic Park?) they have verified that the atmosphere was very different.  The biggest difference is high oxygenation – 35% oxygen instead of the 21% we have today.^[2]

The second discovery involves space shuttle launches and the ice crystals that form from the exhaust that is left from the rocket launch.  Surprisingly, these ice crystals never fall to the earth. Instead they slowly float towards the arctic and remain suspended about 50 miles up in the air, forming mysterious “clouds” that shine at night.^[3] Since it cannot fall to the earth, it seems that all of the ice we have formed in 40 years of space exploration is still up there (300 tons per shuttle launch)!^[4] Apparently, the earth’s magnetic field is holding it up.

How are all of these biblical passages and scientific discoveries connected?  Apparently, many Christian scientists today believe that when God created the world, he set a layer of water above the atmosphere.  This layer of water was probably formed of ice and suspended by the earth’s magnetic core, maybe 50 miles above the earth.  Almost certainly making the sky shine at night, this layer of water would have made a tremendous difference to life here on earth.  First of all, it would have filtered out harmful ultraviolet light and other radiation from the sun. This alone would have contributed significantly towards longevity of all life on earth.  Scientists tell us that one of the primary reasons for aging are the UV rays from the sun.^[5] Second, this layer of water would have created an atmosphere of higher air pressure than what exists today.^[6]

These conditions would have been optimal for human, animal and plant growth.  For plants, it would have been similar to being planted in high-tech greenhouse.  Due to the large quantity and the size of the plants, the highly dense atmosphere would have naturally contained increased levels of oxygen.  This, in turn, contributed to the increased health and longevity of humans.

Some scientists and inventors have begun to use these theories with astounding results.  For example, Hyperbaric Oxygen Chambers, basically air-tight compartments that are fed elevated oxygen levels under increased air pressure, are being used today.  Patients can relax in these chambers for a time and reap the benefits of the increased oxygen and air pressure.  Reported results of rapid healing and increased overall health are very common.  In fact many professional sports players have used these chambers to overcome injuries more rapidly than thought possible. ^[7] NFL players like Zach Thomas and Hines Ward are huge proponents of this technology.  Terrell Owens used one of these chambers to heal from an ankle injury in time to star in the 2005 Super Bowl.  The new Denver Broncos quarterback, Tim Tebow, supposedly takes one of these chambers with him even on road games.

Think about what life would be like if instead of rich people paying $100 to spend an hour in optimal conditions, we were to live in that type of atmosphere!  The biblical stories about longevity make a lot of sense when all of this is taken into consideration.  How amazing it is when the Bible is explained by science.  We have a wonderful God and the only more exciting thing that the world he once made, is the new world He is making for us to live in.  Now that will be something special.

Personal note: After researching the amazing claims about these Hyperbaric Oxygen Chambers, I found that several local companies rent them out.  I wanted to see if they would help a close family relative, who was suffering from terminal cancer, so we sent him to spend an hour in one of these chambers.  His results were impressive:

1. Before entering the chamber, one of his limbs was swollen tremendously.  Overnight the swelling went down by a third.  Doctors had been unable to treat this swelling or even tell him what it was.

2. Due to the cancer, he suffered a lot of pain, to the point where he could barely sleep most nights.  That night he slept without waking once, saying later that he got the best sleep he could remember.  It wasn’t until the next evening that he felt his pains start returning.

3. His level of energy went way up.  The day after he spent one hour in the chamber, everyone noticed how he was way more active that previously, and in a much better mood as well!

“Why are you writing about this subject then?”, you might wisely ask.  Well, the reason is that I recently learned, for the first time in my life the difference between “being open” and “being vulnerable.”  I realize now that I have been making excuses in my mind for not being vulnerable based on a misunderstanding of the difference between openness and vulnerability.

You see, I have always thought that being open is selfish.  It unloads something negative like bitterness or hurt on somebody else.  In return, they give you an apology, sympathy or compassion.  Either way, it usually feels good for the one being open, and not so good for the one who is being dumped on.  Think through these examples:

“Hi, I just wanted to tell you that you hurt me by not returning my phone call.”

“Sister, you were very insensitive when you said that.”

“Bro, I forgive you, but just wanted to let you know that it was really rude not to say hi when I walked in.”

In all of these examples, the person has been hurt or offended and they unload on the person who hurt them in order to feel better.  All of my adult life I have thought that this type of thing is commanded by God, but I somehow never could get my heart behind it because it seemed like just a bunch of selfishness.  Of course my solution of just not speaking up when hurt was not good either.  Thankfully I am very laid back and forgiving by nature, but I have often struggled with forgiving, forgetting and trusting my heart again.

When I learned the difference between being “open” and being “vulnerable”, it opened up a whole new realm for me.  I realized that I have a tool that God can use in my life for forgiveness and also for growth!  Here is what I learned:

The basic definition of vulnerability is exposing your own weakness.

That’s it!  When I thought about it, I realized how true this is.  In every situation where you are hurt or bitter about something, the reason is because you are weak in some area.  For example, if somebody doesn’t say “hi” and you are hurt by it, the weakness if probably insecurity.  If somebody overlooks your hard work, your weakness could be doing things out of the right heart.

Vulnerability, as I learned it, involves three things:

1. Acknowledging your weakness

2. Exposing your need

3. Sharing your feelings about what happened

The first step is to figure out why something hurt you, or why you disliked something.  That should be the first thing you share.  The second thing is to let the person know your need in this area.  The third thing is to express your hurt in the situation, without judging the motives – because, after all, you would not have been hurt if you were not weak.

Think about how different the following examples of vulnerability from the “open” examples above:

“Hi, I just wanted to let you know that I am a very insecure person.  When people don’t return my calls, I start thinking that they don’t care about me.  So, I need people to return my calls.  I know that you were probably busy, or maybe you didn’t get my call, but I just wanted to let you know that I felt hurt when you didn’t return my call.”

“Sister, I am a very sensitive person.  I’ve struggled with this all my life.  When people say things without thinking I am often hurt, so I need you to know that so that you can be careful around me.  When you said “…” it hurt me, not because of what you said, I’m not questioning your intentions, but just because of my sensitivity…”

“Bro, I am a very insecure and somewhat touchy person.  If anybody slights me in the smallest way it sets me to questioning my worth and our friendship.  I really need a lot of affirmation.  When I walked in today I said “hi” and didn’t hear you respond.  I don’t know if you did, and I just didn’t hear, or maybe you didn’t hear me or had something else on your mind.  But, it hurt me due to my insecurity.  My uptightness, made me started questioning whether you really cared for our friendship…”

Isn’t this type of vulnerability much better than simply being open?  It seems like if done right there are incredible benefits!  First, you wouldn’t be as likely to hurt the other person.  Second, you would be automatically closer to them because you are exposing your own weakness.  Third, you are likely to grow in that area of your weakness the more you expose it.

I pray that God helps me in this new venture in life.  I want to learn true vulnerability on an experiential level.  Let me know if you have any thoughts about all of this – as I said before, I’m no expert!

Teachers in my church typically (or, almost always) are from the preterist persuasion.  In order to get a fuller understanding of this view, I am going to attend a class which starts next month and I read the teacher’s book in preparation.  The author is Andy Confer and the title of the book is Three Woes for Babylon.  After finishing the book, I am left with a pretty good understanding of the preterist position, but am also left with many questions that I hope will be answered in the class.  (I’d hate to bug the teacher about them, but I will.)  In the meantime, if anybody reading this blog has the answers, please comment.

Before I start, here is a quick description of the preterist position from the book Revelation: Four Views (pg. 2):

“The preterist approach sees the fulfillment of Revelation’s prophecies as already having occurred in what is now the ancient past, not long after the author’s own time.  Thus the fulfillment was in the future from the point of view of the inspired author, but it is in the past from our vantage point in history.  Some preterists believe that the final chapters of Revelation look forward to the second coming of Christ.  Others think that everything in the book reached its culmination in the past.”

Without further ado, here are my biggest questions (in no particular order):

1. Every reader can tell that Revelation is hard to understand.  It seems that the preterists believe the reason it was “veiled” or encrypted was so Christians would understand the message but others would not.  If the book fell into the hands of their enemies they would not understand what it said.  My question is: why?  If persecution of Christians was so bad that even saying you were a Christian (Jesus is Lord, not Caesar) was punishable by death, then why would it matter if you have a book in your possession saying that Jesus will win in the end?  What difference would it make?  Is there any ancient document that indicates this is the case?

2. One of the rules of interpretation that preterists hold to is this: all of the New Testament must be understood literally unless the context indicates otherwise.  The exception is Revelation, which must be understood symbolically unless the context indicates otherwise.  My question is: how do you know?  Isn’t that a preconceived idea to bring to the table?  The book I read pointed to Revelation 1:1-2 as proof that the book had to be taken symbolically, but after reading these verses I don’t see how it proves this point.

What if Revelation is to be read as an allegory rather than merely symbolic?  Allegory is when you tell a story where the characters represent something.  If Revelation is symbolic then the main characters represent something and the details merely add dramatic effect to the symbolism, they are not necessarily true or accurate.  On the other hand, if it is an allegory, then the main characters are symbolic, but the details are absolutely true: sometimes literal and sometimes symbolic, depending on context.  It seems that the author of the book I read was not taking allegory into account – it was stated several times that if some details are literal then everything has to be literal, including the dragons, beasts and everything else!  My question stands: what if Revelation is allegory?

3. One of the most-used arguments for preterism seems to be the timeliness of the message sent to Christians.  The question is asked: if these Christians were in the middle of terrible persecution, why would they care about a book of prophecy dealing with things thousands of years in the future?  John would have wanted to encourage them with hope for Jesus’ victory in the short term, not in the distant future!  This initially sounded good and logical, but after reading the book, I was left with a question: what deliverance or victory did these suffering Christians ever receive?  The book I read has the Emperor Domitian as the “beast” and his assassination is the victory that the Christians would celebrate.  Other preterists, from what I hear, have a different opinion, but all of them point to some victory for Christians in the midst of persecution.  My question is what was this victory?  The deaths of Nero or Domitian did not stop Christians being martyred.  Christians were persecuted and killed for hundreds of years during “10 seasons” as described in the book Martyr’s Mirror by Thieleman J. van Braght.  The first persecution began in AD 66 under Nero, the second persecution was the one under Domitian in AD 93, the third under Trajan beginning in AD 102, and so on until the 10th persecution which began in AD 302 under Emperor Diocletian at which time, according to the writings of J. Gysius “the whole world was stained with the holy brood of the martyrs.”  If this is so, then where is the victory which John was supposedly telling his readers was to “soon” take place?  Even after the death of Domitian in AD 96-97 there was very little respite for Christians between then and AD 102 when the next season of persecution began.  Timothy reportedly was killed in AD 99 and many others at this time as well.  So how can you look at this historically and say that John was prophesying about a victory and deliverance for Christians by Domitian’s death?  And if the persecution did continue for hundreds of years, then what is the difference for a believer alive in AD 95 if the victory would come 200 years later or 2000 years later?

4. Another of the arguments that is often used is the use of the phrase “coming soon” eight (8) times in Revelation.  Revelation 1:1 starts off by saying: “The revelation from Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place.”  The argument is that we are clearly told that these things would happen soon, not 2000 years later.  However, when you think about it, two questions come to mind.  First, why is “soon” to be taken literally when nothing else is (see question #2)?  And second, the last three (3) references (22:7, 12, 20) speak of Jesus coming soon, rather than the other events happening soon.  Are the preterists saying that Jesus already came?  Because the same word “soon” is used for both the things prophesied to come soon, and Jesus to return soon.  So if we agree that Jesus has not come back yet, even though He said it would be soon, then why wouldn’t we apply that same meaning to the word “soon” used elsewhere in the book?

I have many other questions which I intend to ask, but these are probably the four biggest ones that seems to me have to be answered before accepting the preterist position.  I would be very happy if someone else answers them for me!  But if not, I will follow up with the answers I am given once I take the class.  Until next time!

Interestingly enough, George MacDonald, my favorite author, repeatedly said similar things in his writings over a hundred years ago.  One of them is quoted below:

“If sin must be kept alive, then hell must be kept alive; but while I regard the smallest sin as infinitely loathsome, I do not believe that any being, never good enough to see the essential ugliness of sin, could sin so as to deserve such punishment. I am not now, however, dealing with the question of the duration of punishment, but with the idea of punishment itself; and would only say in passing, that the notion that a creature born imperfect, nay, born with impulses to evil not of his own generating, and which he could not help having, a creature to whom the true face of God was never presented, and by whom it never could have been seen, should be thus condemned, is as loathsome a lie against God as could find place in heart too undeveloped to understand what justice is, and too low to look up into the face of Jesus.”
From Unspoken Sermons III, 1889.

These questions deal with an essential question that has plagued thinking believers and non-believers alike for many centuries.  How could a loving God send somebody to Hell?

The question was especially pertinent in George MacDonald’s time, when the majority of Christians in England held to Calvinist doctrine, essentially believing that God created some people for Himself, and other people He created for Hell.  These people had no chance of ever believing and being saved.  I forget the exact reference, but MacDonald is quoted as saying to an unbeliever, “if God were the way you say He is I would not believe in Him either!”

In our day Christendom has, for the most part, abandoned Calvinism and most Christians believe in “free will.”  Meaning, that everyone has a chance to know God and come into a relationship with Him.  However, this does not completely answer the question raised by my friend, and my others in our society.  Why would God send people to Hell just because they misunderstood something?  Or even if they chose to ignore Him – they obviously were not completely aware of what they were choosing.   It is like a child who says they want to be a policeman before they understand what is involved.   You wouldn’t send the 12-year old off to the police academy, in the same way, how could God hold it against well-meaning people who simply didn’t believe he even existed?

These are tough questions.

Part of the answer may lie in our misunderstanding of God’s nature.  Many today have this picture of God as an old guy sitting in the clouds and looking down disapprovingly on mankind.  When somebody dies, the Old Man pulls out his list of requirements and checks it against the poor dead bloke’s life, and if it doesn’t match up, well … let’s just say it doesn’t go well for the dead dude.

What if it isn’t like that at all?  What if it has nothing to do with a decision based on arbitrary rules you must live by and things you must believe?  What if there is a very good reason for Hell and a very good reason for the rules?

I recently saw something in the Bible that I had only glossed over previously.  It is somewhat shocking when you think about it:

For the LORD your God is a consuming fire, a jealous God.
Deuteronomy 4:24

That isn’t the only place.  A quick search will bring up around a dozen references that speak of God being “fire,” including these:

The sinners in Zion are terrified; trembling grips the godless: “Who of us can dwell with the consuming fire? Who of us can dwell with everlasting burning?”
Isaiah 33:14

for our “God is a consuming fire.”
Hebrews 12:29

In addition, the Bible often speaks of God as light, which is one of the qualities of fire, as in this example:

who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever. Amen.
1 Timothy 6:16

Passages like these paint a very different picture of God than the one I described above.  Instead of a good, old, man, these describe something of a nature very different than what we are.  What if the reason some can be with Him and some cannot is not arbitrary, but natural?  Have you ever wondered why no man can look at God – and live?

Here is what I mean: would you blame a fire for burning up a piece of paper that landed on it by accident?  Would you blame the sun for disintegrating your deep-space probe if it came too close without the proper protection?  Of course not!  The sun cannot help how hot it is!  Fire cannot change its nature just to please the paper that happened to drift too close.

So why do we blame God for being who He is?

What if God’s whole purpose is to make us into men and women who can abide to live in His presence?  Sons and daughters who can look into His face without being destroyed?  What if the whole reason Jesus came was to give us a new life that is able to dwell in His presence?   A life that is able to have fellowship with a Consuming Fire.

Is the fire different for gold and for dross?  It burns up the dross and refines the gold.  Is it the fire’s fault?  The fire is the fire.

We see the same thing happen with earth.  If the earth is well watered, it becomes moist and easy to work with when the sun comes out.  If the earth has no water, it hardens into clay and becomes impossible to work with.   The same sun hits them both, with different effect.

Throughout the Bible God is shown doing all He can to get us to follow His Son.  Why?  The only way we can be “Children of Light” and “Shine like Stars” is if we become disciples of His Son, and so begin to change in our very nature to be like Him.  Then, we shall “see him like He is.”  (Philippians 2:15, Ephesians 5:8, 1 John 3:2)

However, this really good news, is only half of the story.

If we have changed as a whole in our thinking, how are we rationalizing the difference in ICOC doctrine with the rest of evangelical Christianity?  The answers below should give a lot of clarity on where we stand…The second question basically asks if people can be saved in a different way that what we teach in our Church.  It seems like most of the membership is convinced that we know the only way to be saved.

The third question is very similar to the first, but gets to the one aspect of our “plan of salvation” the divides us most from other evangelical churches: baptism.  As expected, the results are very similar to the second.  This result is interesting because some of the more well-known teachers in our church are teaching that if you repented and were baptized, then your baptism is valid, regardless of what you believe about it.  However, it seems that the older teaching of “retroactive understanding not being sufficient for salvation” is still what most members believe.

The fourth question goes beyond the theoretical and asks a specific question about famous Christians like Billy Graham, Rob Bell, John Eldredge and Rick Warren, or even noted Christians of the past like C. S. Lewis and A. W. Tozer.  Can this type of leader know so much of the Word and have such an impact in the world and still, not only be wrong, but also be lost?  Interestingly enough, the majority of our membership thinks it is not even possible that they are Christians.

The final question was not really a part of the survey, but rather a way to see how many people had entirely forsaken the basic teachings of Christianity.  These people are either hiding what they really believe, or more likely, they took the survey without really being members of our church.  It looks like 4% of survey takers are in this category.

In summary, even though we as a membership believe that there are other Christians, most of us (80-85%) would believe that only those who hold to the same doctrines of salvation are true Christians, which certainly narrows it down.  I don’t want to put words in people’s mouths, but it seems like we believe that the major Christian denominations in the U.S. are all lost and not Christians.  That means most Baptists, Methodists & Episcopalians, Lutherans, Presbyterians and others.

These results may be a little discouraging to some of us, myself included, but there is growth from the “old days” and in that we must take courage.  What do you think?

The first question was the most basic and easy to answer (I think).  Do you believe only members of our churches are true Christians? This question is very relevant because it was what our church has been accused of over and over: thinking we are the only Christians.

Some clarification is necessary.  First, most of the respondents were members of our congregation (Turning Point Christian Church in Los Angeles), but also included some current members of our sister churches around the world.   Second, this is not a scientific poll, notwithstanding, there were over 100 responses, so it is a good sampling of our membership.

Well, is it true?  Do we think we’re the only ones?  You decide based on the results.  I’ll tell you what I think below.

These results are amazing!  90% of our members would say that we are not the only Christians.  23% of them do not believe they have ever met a true Christian outside of our Church, but they do believe they exist.  A full 66% (2 out of 3) would say unequivocally that we are not the only Christians. I think this is huge progress in the past 7 years.  Obviously I can’t be sure, but I think it is safe to say that if we asked this question 7 years ago, the results would have been very different.

My personal stance is that any church who thinks they are the only ones God would consider a “true church” are in grave danger of arrogance and downright foolishness.  In fact, the hallmark of most cults is that they claim to be the only true believers.  Far be it from us.  I thank God that we have grown in this area.

That being said, I wonder what our membership actually believe in regards to salvation.  I will post the next question: Do you believe only people who hold to our plan of salvation (hear, believe, repent, confess, and be baptized) are true Christians? and its surprising answers, in a few of days.  Stay tuned.

The answers will be published in Faith21 Magazine (www.faith21.org).

Thank you.

So, my question is: what do you, as a Christian, consider to be further to the bad end of the dial, abortion or child pornography? Please answer at the bottom of this post.

The purpose of my question is to get at the basis Christians use when determining how bad something is.  Are we using the Bible or are we going by the current views in our modern society?

I submit to you that murder of an unborn innocent child is probably one of the worst sins that could be committed, and yet a big percentage of our modern-day world does not even consider it evil.  On the other hand, society has recently (maybe over the past 100 years) started to get very protective of children in the area of abuse.  Now, this is a very good thing and I personally hold that any child-molester or child-pornographer is despicable.  However, why would society consider a child molester or even a child pornographer as worse than a child murderer?

Of course, most people would consider a child murderer as worse than a child pornographer – the problem is that abortion is not seen as murder at all!  Our society has effectively relegated abortion to the “unfortunate necessity” category.

Think about it.  Would we have elected a president that said something like: “I think child pornography is not the best, but it is a father’s choice to do what he wants to with his children.  We should rather work at fixing the economic issues that would force a parent to make this choice.”  Ridiculous, right?  But that is basically what he said about abortion.  Why?  Probably because he, as most people in our society, see child pornography is infinitely worse than abortion.

What do Christians think?

I’m planning to post this blog to as many places as I can.  Any suggestions?