The Purpose of Suffering

Charlie Albright has posted (or re-posted...not sure which) an excellent fundamental examination of the purpose of suffering. I would like to post some of that article with preliminary thoughts and comments prompted in my mind by Charlie's post.

When approaching the issue of suffering, if we are to benefit from suffering, we need to first think about what suffering actually is. I don't pretend or aim to have a full answer to that question, but I would suggest that there are two basic types of suffering: the physical and the spiritual, and that both these kinds of suffering are designed to accomplish common goals in our life (dealt with later in this post). Physical suffering is usually pretty obvious. It can be sickness, injury, disease, pain, persecution and other such things. Then there is spiritual suffering, or "affliction". This can include depression, doubts, unrest, sorrow, etc.

One article on suffering I read described it in a way I found thought provoking and insightful: "It is a tool God uses to get our attention and to accomplish His purposes in our lives in a way that would never occur without the trial or irritation."

I personally like that definition and believe it is very much in line with Biblical teachings on suffering.

Suffering can be for disciplinary purposes. We know that God chastises those He loves (Hebrews 12:4-7) to purify them (Zechariah 13:8-9) and to bring them back to Him. We also know that what we sow will be reaped (Galatians 6:7-8). I make these points because as young Christians it's important that we understand this truth so we will know to examine ourselves (II Corinthians 13) in the face of suffering and not assume that our suffering is unrelated to our sin.

Suffering can also happen for reasons we cannot see or understand. This is where Christians can (and frequently do) become easily discouraged and disheartened. Just ask Job. He suffered more than I can imagine for reasons he never fully understood. Yet, the fruit of his suffering was clearly evident. Thank God we can always be assured by the truth of Romans 5:3-5 but must understand that we don't always know why we suffer.

Because we can't know why we suffer, it is imperative that we understand and cling to the promises of what is accomplished through suffering. That is why posts such as Charlie's are important and why we are posting it here. So, without further ado, here is an abridged version of Charlie’s post. If you would like to read the rest (and I would encourage you to) please hop over to Renewing Thoughts and read it there.

The Purpose of Suffering

Indeed, we felt that we had received the sentence of death. But that was to make us rely not on ourselves but on God who raises dead. 2 Corinthians 1:9

The suffering Paul and his companions were experiencing at this time felt like a death sentence. The burden of their suffering had driven them to the point that they had believed the time had come for them to lose their lives.

In the midst of the despair and sorrow that surround Paul and his companions the God of all comfort came to them. The experience does not end in despair. Though, it does not end in immediate physical deliverance either. Comfort comes by the means of truth. There is a truth attained by the experience which Paul explains in the last sentence, “to make us;” This tremendous burden of suffering had a purpose. There was an aim, a goal that it was set out to accomplish. No suffering is purposeless. Far be it from that! Instead the very creator and sustainer of ever molecule has a purpose in every affliction in our lives. What is that purpose?

It is theological in giving us a correct vision of God

“to make us rely not on ourselves;” The first aspect of this correction is in making us see that we are not God. We are not lords over our lives. We like to think that we are. We like to think that we are in control of each and every day. But suffering is the clearest demonstration that this is not the case. We are not in control.

“but on God;” When suffering removes our reliance from ourselves the only place that is a sufficient rock is none other than God. Suffering brings us to the place where the only stable and sure foundation is the Lord of the universe. This is why God brings suffering, that it might drives us to Him!

“who raises the dead.” It is not: rarely, maybe, sometimes. Our Lord always moves and works for His children. Our God is one who does mighty deeds and glorious works for His children. He never leaves them behind, but always fulfills the plan which he set out to do for them. Now, His plans are not our plans. Faith is holding on to this truth while waiting for the glorious plan of God to come to fruition.

Suffering is hard and painful, yet by faith we can hold to the truth that the purpose is more glorious than a life of ease. Let suffering drive us to Christ and His love!

To those words of wisdom I heartily say amen!

God bless and veritas supra omnis!

Read more...

No, Mr. President. Killing Is Killing No Matter What We Call It.

No, Mr. President. Killing Is Killing No Matter What We Call It.: "No, Mr. President. Killing Is Killing No Matter What We Call It. from the Desiring God blog."

Read more...

You "want" to help, but are you looking to help?

Hello all,

Good intentions are wonderful. I think we can all agree with that. However, good intentions are not enough unless they translate into action. The Bible clearly teaches in Matthew 7 that the measure of a person’s intentions and heart is no less than their actions.

   
¹⁵ “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. ¹⁶ You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? ¹⁷ Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. ¹⁸ A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. ¹⁹ Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. ²⁰ Therefore by their fruits you will know them. (Matthew 7:15-20, New King James Version)

I was really blessed and challenged this week by a story I ran across on lifesitenews.com about a man who exemplified the union of "intent" and action. The story begins with the following:

"They call retired salesman Don Ritchie "the watchman." Each day, as he sits in his favorite chair at his cliffside home, he looks up and scans the precipice that takes the lives of approximately 50 suicide jumpers each year, trying to discern the intentions of visitors.

When somebody seems to be lingering too long at the cliff, he walks out to talk to him.

"You can't just sit there and watch them," Ritchie told the AP in a recent interview. "You gotta try and save them. It's pretty simple.""

Later in the story:

"According to official estimates, Ritchie and his wife Moya have saved 160 lives during the 45 years they have lived near the Gap Park, a famous cliff frequented by sightseers that affords a beautiful view of the Sydney Harbor. However, the unofficial tally is closer to 400, according to the Sydney Morning Herald."

You can read the rest of the story here.

Cliff 'Watchman' Saves Hundreds From Suicide with Kindness and a Smile

When reading the story, the question posted in the post title came to my mind. I wondered, "Do I really believe the things I espouse?" You see, it's one thing to "believe" and another thing to do. For instance, many people think that to be a Christian you must only believe in God and believe in the Bible. But, even Satan and his demons believe.

¹⁹ You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe—and tremble! ²⁰ But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead?^[a] (James 2:19-20, New King James Version)

Footnotes:

1. James 2:20 NU-Text reads useless.

Don Ritchie didn't have to talk to these people that most assume to be beyond help (or worse, unworthy of help). But he believes that life is precious and had a sincere love for these desperate people. When he could have sat in his house and just prayed he voluntarily gave time and effort he was under no obligation to give.

Most of us don't live on a cliff popular with suicide jumpers. But, if we care to look, all of us can and will find something we can do to live out our faith; to unify our intentions and actions into a God honoring and glorifying testimony of loving action. It could be giving a smile to a person in the store that has a downcast look (which requires actually noticing other people and thinking about them), it could be stopping to give a meal to a person obviously in need of a meal or it could be sending baby dolls to Mexico for little girls that wouldn't otherwise have them. Maybe it could be volunteering at your local Crisis Pregnancy Center or be-friending the unpopular kid at school who needs a loving friend. It could be any one of these or a million other things. The point is that belief and desires translates into action and action is inherently pro-active. You need to be looking for opportunities to minister. If you just wait for them to come to you innumerable opportunities will be missed.

As I have been challenged recently to test my own beliefs in light of what I do so I also challenge you to test your intents and desires by your deeds and fruit. Ask yourself the question, "Am I really searching for a way to live out my convictions?" And, "If I'm honest with myself...what does my inaction say about my faith?"

May God give us grace and strength to obediently and faithfully follow the path He has set before.

God bless and veritas supra omnis!

Read more...

Changing focus a little bit

Hey all,

Not surprisingly, I've neglected my blog of late. It's not so much that I've forgotten about it, it's mostly that I want to write longer and more thorough blog posts that are more in line with my personality as opposed to more standard and shorter posts. I still hope to be able to put out long thoughtful posts, but in the meantime I'm just not able to write anything more than short posts and since I don't want to let my blog voice go silent I'm just going to start putting out short posts. That's really what I've been doing anyway, thanks to time constraints, so hopefully changing focus will help me to put out better short posts.

They might even be interesting. :-P

Comments are always welcome! I love to interact with my readers and especially love to field and read differing views on issues.

God bless and veritas supra omnis!

Read more...

Sen. McCaskill: Conway "reasonable" moderate

Hello all,
Imbedded is a clip from Morning Joe containing an interesting round table discussion of the Kentucky Senate race between Rand Paul and Jack Conway. I post it not because I am paying close attention to the race itself, but because it touches more broadly on political discourse and how candidates should conduct themselves.

The portion in question extends to about the 7:00 minute mark. I tried to imbed the video but for some reason the "imbed" link wasn't working so I'm just going to link it the old fashioned way.

Click here to see video

I don’t agree with McCaskill (who btw, I like from what I've seen of her) about shaking opponents’ hands and the respect issue. Yes, there are circumstances in which an opponent can cross the line in attacking you or your family to such a degree that they have lost the privilege of being shown respect and Conway flirted with that line if he didn’t cross it entirely. What was implied in the ad - the innuendos in it - are pretty startling and Paul has a right to be upset about them (unless of course he’s just guilty as charged). Smarmy (or unctuous) is a word that comes to mind as accurately describing that sort of ad. Maybe that’s a bit too extreme on my part though.

Speaking to what McCaskill said regarding Conway being a moderate - while I haven’t followed the Paul/Conway race closely - Conway does appear to have some major inconsistencies in his record past and present (flip flops) that perhaps show Conway to be more politically motivated than “reasonable”.

Irrespective of how true the claims made by the Conway campaign are, the ad in question was an extreme ad making extreme accusations. Hardly something a “reasonable” moderate would put out if they were not thoroughly substantiated.

To the best of my knowledge they aren’t.

McCaskill needs to call out people like Conway even if they are in her party if she wants to have credibility when she speaks of being “reasonable” and of cross aisle collaboration and cooperation. By the same token, Republicans should do the same. This doesn’t mean people pounce on everybody who goes too far (Meghan McCain?) but you have to apply to you and your part the same standard that you apply to the other party.

God bless and veritas supra omnis!

Read more...

Gianna Jessen - Abortion Survivor in Australia

Greetings all!

A friend shared the following video[s] with me on Facebook and they blessed and challenged me so much that I had to post them here.

They really need no introduction. Jessen speaks with such power and conviction seasoned liberally with the grace of the Gospel, God has truly given her and ministry and blessed her with the tools to faithfully minister it.

Part 1



Part 2



I especially appreciate her "challenge" to the men. The abortion debate has become so twisted over time that we have largely forgetten the role of men in the matter, and bringing the focus back to it's proper place on the men is, I believe, a crucial element in winning the abortion war. If men would be men and support their ladies imagine how many young, precious lives could be saved!

God bless and veritas supra omnis!

Read more...

Psalm 148

Hello all,

I spent the greater part of yesterday hiking in the Redwood Canyon section of Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Park. The whole park is positively stunning and throughout the hike several scriptures kept coming to mind, one of which was Psalm 148. While I don't have anything profound to add to the Psalm in the way of commentary, I would like to post it here (along with a few of the many pictures I took while hiking) in the hopes that it will be a blessing to some of you.

 ¹ Praise the LORD!
         
         Praise the LORD from the heavens;
         Praise Him in the heights!
 ² Praise Him, all His angels;
         Praise Him, all His hosts!
 ³ Praise Him, sun and moon;
         Praise Him, all you stars of light!
 ⁴ Praise Him, you heavens of heavens,
         And you waters above the heavens!
          (Psalm 148:1-4, New King James Version)

 ⁵ Let them praise the name of the LORD,
         For He commanded and they were created.
 ⁶ He also established them forever and ever;
         He made a decree which shall not pass away.
          (Psalm 148:5-6, New King James Version)

 ⁷ Praise the LORD from the earth,
         You great sea creatures and all the depths;
 ⁸ Fire and hail, snow and clouds;
         Stormy wind, fulfilling His word;
 ⁹ Mountains and all hills;
         Fruitful trees and all cedars;
 ¹⁰ Beasts and all cattle;
         Creeping things and flying fowl; (Psalm 148:7-10, New King James Version)

 ¹¹ Kings of the earth and all peoples;
         Princes and all judges of the earth;
 ¹² Both young men and maidens;
         Old men and children.
          (Psalm 148:11-12, New King James Version)

 ¹³ Let them praise the name of the LORD,
         For His name alone is exalted;
         His glory is above the earth and heaven.
 ¹⁴ And He has exalted the horn of His people,
         The praise of all His saints—
         Of the children of Israel,
         A people near to Him.
         
         Praise the LORD! (Psalm 148:13-14, New King James Version)

Amen! May we never cease to marvel at the totality of His creation!

God bless and veritas supra omnis!

Read more...

Tony Reinke - On Burning Religious Books

After my last post I continued to think about and to keep an eye out for Gospel oriented views on the well publicized Quran burning scheduled for this September 11th by Pastor Terry Jones and the 50 member strong Dove World Outreach Center. But since I was distracted by crazy events this evening and being unsatisfied with my own reasons and articulation for why this Quran burning is not God honoring, I was fortunate to come across this post by Tony Reinke thanks to Justin Taylor.

Mr. Reinke makes 6 basic points that I will share here with his most relevant comments (to the 6 points). If you would like to read his post in its entirety, which I would encourage you to do, please follow this link.

The Bible, as far as I can tell, mentions one account where religious texts are thrown to the flames (Acts 19:11-20). On the heels of the great work of God in Ephesus, the people had come to fear God and to trust in the Savior. As a result, “a number of those who had practiced magic arts brought their books together and burned them in the sight of all. And they counted the value of them and found it came to fifty thousand pieces of silver” (v. 19). In modern terms they ignited a bonfire using very expensive magic books.

What were these books? According to Eckhard Schnabel, they were occultist documents that described how to make amulets to protect against demons and how to make love charms (Early Christian Mission, 1221). The books gave directions for casting spells on others, either for good or ill, and they would have been quite expensive, which highlights the effect of the gospel upon the wealthy inhabitants of Ephesus. That Paul went toe-to-toe with the owners of documents, which later led to a book burning, tells me they qualify as religious texts, and probubly comprised the pop religion of the day.

From this account here are six points to ponder:

1. The Ephesian people burned their own books. These new believers renounced their past. This was not an act of Christians barging into homes to ransack libraries for kindling, or weeding out the public library, or buying up all available copies from the local bookshop. They gathered the valuable books from their own houses.

2. No Christian leader encouraged the book burning. At least the text doesn’t say it. Or would have been better for the books to be sold and the money given to the Apostolic ministry? Perish the thought. There there is no indication that Paul advised the people to burn (or sell) their occultist books.

3. The books posed no threat to the gospel. The gospel overcame the magic power of the books. The gospel is like a hurricane and nothing will stop its wind, certainly not a book of demonic spells.

4. God’s display of power convinced the people that their books were worthless. There was no need to address the value of the magic books directly. Once God’s power and his gospel were seen in the city, the matter was settled.

5. The book burning was a display of godly sorrow. The recently converted Christians wanted to confess their sin before “all.” The high value of the books (50,000 days wages worth!) made a strong statement. It was an act of personal sorrow for their own sin.

6. The burning illustrated the victory of the gospel. The magic books were burned because the gospel was spreading like wildfire: “So the word of the Lord continued to increase and prevail mightily” (v. 20).

These six points should make us very hesitant about burning other people’s religious books.

I concur with Mr. Reinke's thoughts and believe Pastor Jones would do well to give them careful consideration as well. As Christians, we must always do our best to ensure that God is glorified by and through our actions. I have no reason to believe that Pastor Jones doesn't think what he is doing somehow honors God, but I believe he is very mistaken and would encourage him to reconsider his and his congregants scheduled burning.

God bless and veritas supra omnis!

Read more...

Burn Couches, Not the Quran

Hello all,

I happened across this article by Andrew Lisi and wanted to pass it on to you because I believe he is thinking along the right lines. I believe the burning to be deeply misguided, but as Mr. Lisi points out, a Christian shouldn't respond in a purely reactionary manner. Rather, grace is needed all around for a positive and Christ like impact to be made.

Burn Couches, Not the Quran

God bless and veritas supra omnis!

Read more...

A pro-life perspective on ELLA

Hello friends, family, and random internet readers!

As promised in a previous post, I am back to post with some information and thoughts on the “ELLA” drug recently approved by the FDA. In my previous post I shared a video clip in which Randy Alcorn and Mark Driscoll discuss the dangers common contraceptives pose from a pro-life perspective, which I am sure includes the ELLA drug. I have similar concerns about ELLA.

So first, what is ELLA?

According to the Wall Street Journal, ELLA is “a new drug that is supposed to block pregnancy up to five days after sex, two days longer than the currently available emergency contraceptive Plan B.” In the words of the FDA, “ella is a progesterone agonist/antagonist whose likely main effect is to inhibit or delay ovulation. Since May 2009, the prescription product has been available in Europe under the brand name ellaOne.” According to the pro-life organization Americans United for Life (AUL), “Ella is being marketed as an “emergency contraceptive,” but it is the “next generation” of the abortion drug, RU-486.”

The possible dangers and ethical questions raised by ELLA are not as clear as most people would prefer. Still, from a pro-life perspective, I believe a solid answer can be reached.

What are the dangers of ELLA?

First, does ELLA interfere with or kill a developing embryo? That depends on when you believe life to begin. Basically, forgoing the technical and scientific terms that I find it difficult to keep straight sometimes…ELLA’s primary function/purpose is to inhibit or interfere with ovulation. But, if it is unable to do that, its next function is to keep that fertilized egg from attaching to the uterus. Turning again to AUL for input, “Ella, like RU-486, is a selective progesterone receptor modulator (SPRM). As a progesterone blocker, an SPRM works to interfere with the developing human embryo, causing it to die by either interfering with the uterine lining and preventing implantation, or by starving an implanted embryo.” AUL further states in a letter to Margaret Hamburg (Commissioner, US Food and Drug Administration) urging that ELLA not be approved “Ulipristal Acetate and the abortion drug Mifepristone (RU-486) are both selective progesterone receptor modulators (SPRM). SPRMs block progesterone, which is necessary to maintain pregnancyithus starving an unborn baby of the nutrients it needs to continue life.

Given ella’s similar chemical makeup to RU-486, women deserve to see evidence demonstrating that ella will not destroy or harm an unborn child and that ella’s modes of action do not include abortion, especially in light of studies that show ella causes abortions in animal studies. FDA materials admit that data is “too limited to draw any definitive conclusions regarding the effect of ulipristal on an established pregnancy or fetal development.”

So the answer to the question of whether ELLA interferes with or kills a life (and thus constitutes an abortion) depends on when you define life to begin and whether ELLA is successful in its primary function of preventing ovulation. If you believe life begins at the moment an egg is fertilized, then yes, ELLA absolutely interferes with and/or kills a human life when it fails in its primary purpose (which it must be assumed will happen with fair regularity due to lack of precision in administration). According to studies, only 2% of women taking ELLA up to 120 hours after intercourse become pregnant. 2% sounds small but when thousands upon thousands of women take ELLA 2% quickly becomes a large number. But, if you believe life begins at the moment of implantation or when the egg is attached to the uterus, then it is not clear to what extent ELLA interferes with the embryo. I say “not clear” deliberately because that leads to my next concern with ELLA.

Is ELLA safe and thoroughly studied enough?

As with virtually all prescription pills or drugs, there are possible side effects of ELLA. Not new news. But, there are concerns that ELLA has not been sufficiently studied to determine its effects on women and embryos it does not prevent from being fertilized and implanted. On this count, AUL has this to say: “While the FDA made specific assurances that Plan B would not affect an embryo after implantation, it contraindicates ella for “known or suspected” pregnancy. The FDA admits, “There are no adequate and well controlled studies in pregnant women.” It cites studies in animals with high rates of pregnancy loss, and it acknowledges that the effects on a fetus that survives ella are unknown.”

Exactly what weight these concerns about safety hold, I just can’t say with authority, due to my lack of familiarity with the process of approving prescription pills. Neither a human life or the health of a mother are worth the chance of an insufficiently researched product; so I believe it behooves the FDA to further examine the affect ELLA would have both on the health of the mother and the child, in the event that ELLA does not keep an egg from implanting or is taken too late.

In summary: the bottom line from a consistently pro-life perspective is that ELLA is sure to interfere with and end many human lives in their earliest stage of life. For this reason alone I believe ELLA should not be used by pro-life individuals but the unanswered questions concerning the safety of ELLA are also a significant concern.

There is no good reason for not examining more thoroughly safety questions, especially when a fetus could be harmed for life. The FDA’s failure to do so raises questions about the impact of political and industrial involvement in the approval process. The answer to those questions is of secondary importance though as the FDA cannot make individuals use ELLA.

The choice is the individuals. How will they decide and what will the pro-life community do to stand up for the unborn and protect the sanctity of life?

God bless and veritas supra omnis!



Related Articles:

AUL's "Letter to the Commissioner" http://ellacausesabortions.com/ellapetition/Media_Center_files/Ella%20Group%20Letter.pdf

"Is Ella Birth Control or Abortion?" on Slate.com
http://www.slate.com/id/2264108/

WaPo "FDA approves ella as 5-day-after emergency contraceptive"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/13/AR2010081305098.html

Read more...