Can stay-at-home Dads be “real men”?

I guess I came in late for this controversy: from 2008 there’s a YouTube clip of a famous preacher and his wife, responding to the question: “What are your thoughts on stay at home dads if the woman really wants to work?”[1]

“Too many guys take too little responsibility” was part of the answer, one with which I fully resonate. We have a culture where men play at being boys well into their adult years. At a time when their fathers and grandfathers had buckled down to marriage and a job or were off fighting Nazis, some guys focus on playing the field or playing paintball until they’re, well, practically my age. The women are complaining and they oughta be. These guys need to hear a Word about their behavior.

But let’s put them to one side, since the gist of their response was something else: If men are not the primary bread-winners in the family, they are not doing “what the Word says.” Parenting must be done principally by the mother, not just “anyone,” not even the father. The idea of a father staying at home to focus on raising children is a perverted idea, taken from our modern culture, not the Bible. These men are “conformed to this world.” Such behavior would even by “a case for church discipline.”

Okay, let’s see “what the Word says.” (more…)

‘Twas the Day after Christmas (Luke 2:8-20) – Part II

In the first part of this blog, we saw how the shepherds heard the angels’ message, saw the Christ child and went out to proclaim what they had seen. We too should pass on the entire gospel message, not just parts of it. But there is a second application for the Christian, one that pushes us past superficial application of Luke’s gospel:

 II. We should tell the message in a way that will be understood

In this case, we will not simply imitate what the shepherds did, but will honor their spirit and intention. Please notice that the shepherds were Jewish, and the people they told about Jesus would also have been Jewish. In fact, the angel spoke in terms that a Jewish person would have understood, using words like city of David, a Savior, Christ, the Lord, “Glory to God in the highest”.

Let’s play a game of “what if.” As far as we know, the shepherds did not speak to non-Jews, that is, gentiles. If the gentiles had heard the same message in the same language they would have understood it very differently than the Jews did. For example, “Savior” was one of the titles used by the Roman emperor – Caesar Augustus was “Savior” of the world, the one who brought it peace. “Christ” means “the Anointed One,” that is, a royal figure. The pagans also applied the terms “lord” and “god” to their idols. This means that if gentiles had accidently heard their message, they would not have heard it the way it was intended. To them it would have come across as badly distorted: “A new king has been born, he is a divine offspring of the Greek god Zeus, may Zeus be highly praised!”

If you and I are not speaking to people just like us, with our background, they will likely misunderstand us. Whose job is it to make him- or herself understood? One fundamental rule of communication is that it is the speaker, the person who is trying to communicate a message, who is responsible to make the message understandable. One of the things we do when someone doesn’t speak English is we speak louder, under the assumption that the message will get through with higher volume. Christians do the same thing, with equally poor results. (more…)

‘Twas the Day after Christmas (Luke 2:8-20) – Part I

Burned into our memory is the fact that the shepherds saw the angels, went to Bethlehem and worshiped the baby Jesus. All the Nativity displays end that way, with the shepherds fixed in place. But in fact, Christmas day was the very beginning of the shepherds’ story, since they rushed right out and began to tell others what they had seen.

We read Luke’s gospel and see what the shepherds did – but what do we do to wrap up the Christmas season?

  • We measure the diagonal on the wide-screen TVs,
  • We rush out to spend our Christmas money.
  • We Facebook our friends about going on diets to work off the eggnog.
  • We return the gifts we didn’t like, plot to regift others in 2012, or wonder whether we should wait two years to regift, to make sure memories will have faded.
  • We haul the tree to the curb, because they won’t let you burn it.
  • We buy the discount wrapping paper and ribbon and store them away until next time.

The shepherds’ spiritual career began on Christmas. (more…)

Will the Real Santa Claus please stand up!

St. Nicholas was a historical person! He was a pastor in Turkey in the 4th century. According to legend, there was a poor man in his parish who had three daughters, and he had no money to get them husbands. There was a danger that the girls would be sold into prostitution. Nicholas quietly raised money and divided the coins into bags. He went by the poor man’s house by night and tossed the bags through… the window, so the girls could have a dowry, get married and escape slavery. For his generosity, the church designated him as SAINT Nicholas; the Dutch shortened his name to Santa Claus, who comes around to give gifts to all good children.
St. Nicholas, follower of Christ and a man who gave gifts to the desperately needy, not to people already who had more stuff than they needed - a fine example to us all.

What was the real name of Jesus? Was it Yeshua?

A reader writes in: What really was Jesus’ name? Wasn’t it Yeshua? Is it an insult to him if we do not use his “real name” with the ancient pronunciation? Do we lose out on salvation if we call upon the wrong name?

First, it is highly probably that his given name was Yeshua, a Hebrew and also a Aramaic version of the Hebrew name Yehoshua o Hoshua (Joshua) in the Old Testament. We know that Jesus in general spoke and taught in Aramaic, so Yeshua (like Barnabas, Thomas) was probably meant to be an Aramaic name. Many people had names from different languages: Peter had a Greek name Petros, and an Aramaic one, Cephas bar-Jonas. Many had “rhyming” names in the second language: Paul was Sha’ul in Hebrew and also had a Latin name Paulus, similarly Silas/Silvanus; one Jewish co-worker of Paul had an Aramaic or Hebrew name Jesus, plus a Latin name Justus (Col 4:11); Joseph Barsabbas’ Aramaic name rhymed with his Latin one, Justus (Acts 1:23). Nowhere does the Bible indicate that the Greek or Latin names were “unclean” or wordly.

Jesus probably grew up with a knowledge of written Hebrew (the Bible). What’s more, it is very likely that he would have spoken in Greek from time to time, in order to speak with Gentiles (e.g., Matt 8:5-13, 15:21-28) or with Pontius Pilate. Two of his disciples had Greek names, Philip and Andrew. During his ministry, some may have addressed him using Greek form of his name, Iesous. After his resurrection and exaltation, the apostles went forth to proclaim his name, consistently using the Greek form Iesous. There is no reference to any other form of his personal name in the Greek New Testament. The Greek Testament was the original version, from which the Syriac, Latin and other versions were made. This means that when Luke wrote Acts 4:12, “Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved,” he did not write the name Yeshua, but the Greek form Iesous. We are not saved by pronouncing his name with an “sh” rather than an “s”, but because it is the Savior himself who is being named.

For that reason, that is no special benefit to be gained in saying “Yeshua” in place of “Jesus”. The church used this form from the very beginning, from the Day of Pentecost when Peter preached in Greek to Hellenistic Jews (Acts 2:22). “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved” (Acts 2:21).

It is by calling upon his name, no matter in what language, that one is saved. There is no special “magic” in removing the final “s” from his name. According to the apostles’ example, it is perfectly acceptable to say Yeshua, Iesous, Jesu, Jesús, Yasu (Cantonese), Иисус (Russian) or – in English – Jesus.

By Gary Shogren, Seminario ESEPA, San José, Costa Rica

May 23: Camping has now spoken; this time ignore him!

It was 9pm EDT and I was hooked up to Family Radio by internet, since I live outside the US. Harold Camping was going to speak and explain why the Rapture didn’t come on May 21. Remember, Camping had been absolutely clear about what was going to happen: the Rapture of 200 million people and a massive worldwide earthquake. This was not supposed to be symbolic. He did not offer a Plan B. He said anyone who disagreed with his interpretation did not believe in the Bible – his words, not mine.

Neither happened. (more…)

For Camping’s followers: it’s May 22, let’s have a serious talk

May 21 has come and gone. You won’t hear an “I told you so” from this Christian. No jokes. No funny looks. No condescending pity. Only concern.

When someone predicts a date for the rapture, it is not a miscalculation, but an actual sin.[1] It is a sin that has dreadful consequences for those who believe a lie. Harold Camping’s teaching is one such lie.

Nor can we say, well, he was wrong about the details of the rapture, but it was good because at least it got people thinking about God. Nonsense! People are using the failed prophecy right now as an excuse not to think about Christ or his coming. May 21 at 6pm, and you know what was happening at the Family Radio headquarters? People were dancing to rock music and making jokes about the Lord. Family Radio has set back the course of the gospel.

What will Camping do next? If history is any guide, he will take one of these options: (more…)

For followers of Harold Camping and Family Radio – “Take the May 22 Challenge”

Please also see my blog after May 22: http://justinofnablus.com/2011/05/22/for-campings-followers-its-may-22-lets-have-a-serious-talk/

There are thousands of followers of Family Radio who believe that the Lord will return on May 21, 2011. I have read the material of Harold Camping and am thoroughly convinced that his calculations are groundless. He is a man of boundless imagination but he uses it to wiggle out of the clear truth of God’s Word.

Please take it from someone who has loved Bible prophecy his whole life that Harold Camping’s dating system is a house of cards and will not come to pass. Of course, he would use my opinion as “proof” that I am the one who is apostate. That is what is known as circular reasoning.

Mark 13:32 says that “But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.” (I’m using the KJV, since Camping does). Like many false teachers, Camping has “proven” that that verse does not apply to him. In fact, it does. This means that Camping is claiming that he knows that which the Son of God does not know. This is not a question of an error, or miscalculation, but false teaching. And this is why people cannot be neutral about him, or say, “Well, who knows, it’s interesting, perhaps yes, perhaps no.” By definition Camping and Family Radio have committed sacrilege. (more…)

Have they Discovered the Lost Prayer Diary of Elijah?

The following is a scholarly address, which I seem to remember giving many years ago before the International Association of Scholars, Theologians, Philosophers and other Professional Thinking Persons (AFL-CIO).

Thank you for your invitation to address this scholarly assembly. Webster’s defines “scholarly” as “Of, relating to, or characteristic of scholars or scholarship”; but later on it gives a couple of other definitions,including #3 “depressingly and numbingly monotonous, dull, or wordy.” That seems to land us just about where we need to be. My lecture today concerns a recently discovered manuscript from around the Dead Sea that has by chance fallen into my hands, the so-called Prayer Diary of Elijah.

This discovery could shed new light on James 5: “The prayer of the righteous is powerful and effective. Elijah was a human being like us, and he prayed fervently that it might not rain, and for three years and six months it did not rain on the earth. Then he prayed again, and the heaven gave rain and the earth yielded its harvest.”

Yet some scholars have doubts as to the new manuscript’s veracity (more…)

Is sin “missing the mark”?

Have you been told that the word for “sin” literally means “missing the mark” in the original Greek? In fact, it does not.

The verb “hamartano” (αμαρτανω) was sometimes used in pre-Classical and Classical Greek to refer to missing a target. (more…)

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 51 other followers