Sean couldn't make it tonight so there were only two of us (and Jesus, of course - he is always with us).
We talked together about church life and encouragement.
11 December 2008
09 December 2008
Great Doddington - The ham of God
Rachael read the story about the ham of God by Anne Lamott. There's a transcript of Anne talking about the story, it shows how even the most unlikely and unexpected events can be used by him if we are just open enough to see. It shows how sometimes he may give us something for someone else so that we need to relate together to get the best outcome.
Like Anne, sometimes we can go from desert to rain in the blink of an eye!
We also thought about hidden writing using unknown letters. Try as we will we simply cannot see the meaning. Father says that even though you can't see the meaning, yet there is a meaning.
Chris pointed out that we are merely 'on loan' to one another, we are a blessing to one another.
Rachael saw people in a huge circle, dancing and playing harps, pipes and other instruments. They were dancing around the walls of a town like Jericho. It seemed to her that it is sometimes the relationship of the people to one another that brings the walls down. It's important to keep on dancing.
Like Anne, sometimes we can go from desert to rain in the blink of an eye!
We also thought about hidden writing using unknown letters. Try as we will we simply cannot see the meaning. Father says that even though you can't see the meaning, yet there is a meaning.
Chris pointed out that we are merely 'on loan' to one another, we are a blessing to one another.
Rachael saw people in a huge circle, dancing and playing harps, pipes and other instruments. They were dancing around the walls of a town like Jericho. It seemed to her that it is sometimes the relationship of the people to one another that brings the walls down. It's important to keep on dancing.
08 December 2008
Science? Technology?
Hang on, there's something unusual here. There's a shiny stone in the ashes. He picked it up and blew off the dust, it seemed unusually heavy in the hand, 
it was a strange shape, and its colour was unlike any rock he'd seen before.
He spat on it and rubbed it with his finger, then took it over to the brook and washed it. This was something special, he was was going to keep it. He slipped it into his leather pouch.
He thought about the fire. It had been fiercely hot where the wind had blown through a gap in the hearthstones, he'd noticed that last night. Fires were usually orange in the centre, this one had been a bright yellow, almost too bright to look at and much too hot to get close. Perhaps the extreme heat had somehow created this object? What else had been different?
Science or technology? -
What's going on in this little story? When is something science? When is it technology? What's the difference? Does it matter? There's popular confusion about these two words, not helped by the fact that some of our most respected sources are as confused as the general public.
But there's a perfectly clear difference between the two and it's really not hard to explain. We don't even need a scientist or a technologist to help us nail this one; a good place to start would be a dictionary. The Wiktionary definition offers two current meanings for the word 'science'.
For technology, Wiktionary gives
We can see right away that science is to do with knowledge whereas technology is concerned with techniques. The difference is that science seeks to understand what is while technology has a purpose and wants to make use of what is.
Two things immediately follow from this. There can be no technology without prior science, and technological advance usually opens fresh opportunities for science.
Making a discovery - Let's take another look at our little story. During the Late Stone Age (the Neolithic) somebody must have noticed that a shiny material was left behind in the ashes of last night's fire. This is science, initially it's just a matter of observing what happens. Maybe copper had been accidentally extracted from pieces of ore many times before but very little attention had been paid to it. Only a particularly inquiring mind would notice and begin to wonder.
What if? - The next step is to test the possible causes for what we have observed. This is a scientific experiment. The man who found the special pebble might try to create a hot fire deliberately by altering the layout of the stones and the amount and kind of wood. He might play around with different kinds of stone. He might discover that he could make a fire hotter by rearranging things. He might also find the heavy, lustrous material only appeared when a very hot fire was combined with a particular kind of hearthstone. By trial and error and keen observation he might become quite proficient at producing copper.
Finding out how things work is science, using the knowledge to make copper on demand is technology. It would be worth making because people always like unusual objects, he'd be able to trade lumps of this stuff for food, stone tools, and other things he needed.
Science is a matter of observing, making hopeful guesses, testing ideas, and narrowing down the truth by ruling things out. Technology is a matter of seeing the value of something and finding practical ways of achieving it. Science may lead to new technology, and technology may lead to new industry. And existing technologies and industries may enable further scientific progress.
Long before copper was first extracted by fire, technologies based on wood, stone, skin, fibre, bone and other materials were well advanced. Homes could be built from mammoth tusks or branches cut from trees, the frames covered with sods of earth or foliage. Baskets, woven fabrics, and simple pottery were used for practical purposes and for decoration. And hunter-gatherer technology was well advanced with good strategies for finding edible roots, fruits, shellfish along with bows, stone-tipped arrows and spears and more.
Why does it matter? - We often say 'science and technology' in a single breath without thinking about the difference. Studying sub-atomic particles is science so we're tempted to think that a particle accelerator is science too. But the accelerator is technology. Because astronomy is a science we think that the Hubble Space telescope is also science, but it's not.
This confusion becomes a problem when we oppose science because we are anxious about technology. Science informs us about the universe in which we live, technology makes changes that often affect us in practical ways. It is never harmful to understand something, but it may be harmful to make use of it. The internal combustion engine is a great example. Understanding combustion, the expansion of gases, or the structural strength of materials does not in itself do either harm or good. But the technology of an engine can be used to power an armoured vehicle or an ambulance. It can be used to make war, deliver a car-bomb, or rescue a sick person. And as we all know it may also have unexpected side effects such as causing global warming, city smogs, and respiratory diseases.
We will all agree that a certain level of effort is useful, without science and technology we would still be living without clothes, without houses, without fire, and without medicine.
But blaming science for issues with technology is counterproductive. It's not what we know that gets us into trouble, it's what we do with what we know. But it's also true that our current technology has done untold harm. It has enabled unsustainable growth of population and comsumption of resources, we are now between a rock and a hard place.
The main issues with science are deciding how much of it we can afford and where to focus the funds and effort. There are also some regulatory issues, science depends on experimentation and experiments may raise moral issues. We sometimes disagree over what is acceptable.
The main issues with technology are how it will be used and how it will affect society and our environment. Meanwhile, neither science nor technology can address the great questions of purpose. Why are we here? Why is the universe here? What is the purpose of love? Moral issues, questions of right and wrong, value judgements, all of these must be handled in some other way.
Questions:
See also:
it was a strange shape, and its colour was unlike any rock he'd seen before.He spat on it and rubbed it with his finger, then took it over to the brook and washed it. This was something special, he was was going to keep it. He slipped it into his leather pouch.
He thought about the fire. It had been fiercely hot where the wind had blown through a gap in the hearthstones, he'd noticed that last night. Fires were usually orange in the centre, this one had been a bright yellow, almost too bright to look at and much too hot to get close. Perhaps the extreme heat had somehow created this object? What else had been different?
Science or technology? -
What's going on in this little story? When is something science? When is it technology? What's the difference? Does it matter? There's popular confusion about these two words, not helped by the fact that some of our most respected sources are as confused as the general public.
But there's a perfectly clear difference between the two and it's really not hard to explain. We don't even need a scientist or a technologist to help us nail this one; a good place to start would be a dictionary. The Wiktionary definition offers two current meanings for the word 'science'.
1 - The collective discipline of study or learning acquired through the scientific method; the sum of knowledge gained from such methods and discipline.
2 - A particular discipline or branch of learning, especially one dealing with measurable or systematic principles rather than intuition or natural ability.
For technology, Wiktionary gives
1 - ... the study of or a collection of techniques.
2 - ... a particular technological concept - the body of tools and other implements produced by a given society.
We can see right away that science is to do with knowledge whereas technology is concerned with techniques. The difference is that science seeks to understand what is while technology has a purpose and wants to make use of what is.
Two things immediately follow from this. There can be no technology without prior science, and technological advance usually opens fresh opportunities for science.
Making a discovery - Let's take another look at our little story. During the Late Stone Age (the Neolithic) somebody must have noticed that a shiny material was left behind in the ashes of last night's fire. This is science, initially it's just a matter of observing what happens. Maybe copper had been accidentally extracted from pieces of ore many times before but very little attention had been paid to it. Only a particularly inquiring mind would notice and begin to wonder.
What if? - The next step is to test the possible causes for what we have observed. This is a scientific experiment. The man who found the special pebble might try to create a hot fire deliberately by altering the layout of the stones and the amount and kind of wood. He might play around with different kinds of stone. He might discover that he could make a fire hotter by rearranging things. He might also find the heavy, lustrous material only appeared when a very hot fire was combined with a particular kind of hearthstone. By trial and error and keen observation he might become quite proficient at producing copper.
Finding out how things work is science, using the knowledge to make copper on demand is technology. It would be worth making because people always like unusual objects, he'd be able to trade lumps of this stuff for food, stone tools, and other things he needed.
Science is a matter of observing, making hopeful guesses, testing ideas, and narrowing down the truth by ruling things out. Technology is a matter of seeing the value of something and finding practical ways of achieving it. Science may lead to new technology, and technology may lead to new industry. And existing technologies and industries may enable further scientific progress.
Long before copper was first extracted by fire, technologies based on wood, stone, skin, fibre, bone and other materials were well advanced. Homes could be built from mammoth tusks or branches cut from trees, the frames covered with sods of earth or foliage. Baskets, woven fabrics, and simple pottery were used for practical purposes and for decoration. And hunter-gatherer technology was well advanced with good strategies for finding edible roots, fruits, shellfish along with bows, stone-tipped arrows and spears and more.
Why does it matter? - We often say 'science and technology' in a single breath without thinking about the difference. Studying sub-atomic particles is science so we're tempted to think that a particle accelerator is science too. But the accelerator is technology. Because astronomy is a science we think that the Hubble Space telescope is also science, but it's not.
This confusion becomes a problem when we oppose science because we are anxious about technology. Science informs us about the universe in which we live, technology makes changes that often affect us in practical ways. It is never harmful to understand something, but it may be harmful to make use of it. The internal combustion engine is a great example. Understanding combustion, the expansion of gases, or the structural strength of materials does not in itself do either harm or good. But the technology of an engine can be used to power an armoured vehicle or an ambulance. It can be used to make war, deliver a car-bomb, or rescue a sick person. And as we all know it may also have unexpected side effects such as causing global warming, city smogs, and respiratory diseases.
We will all agree that a certain level of effort is useful, without science and technology we would still be living without clothes, without houses, without fire, and without medicine.
But blaming science for issues with technology is counterproductive. It's not what we know that gets us into trouble, it's what we do with what we know. But it's also true that our current technology has done untold harm. It has enabled unsustainable growth of population and comsumption of resources, we are now between a rock and a hard place.
The main issues with science are deciding how much of it we can afford and where to focus the funds and effort. There are also some regulatory issues, science depends on experimentation and experiments may raise moral issues. We sometimes disagree over what is acceptable.
The main issues with technology are how it will be used and how it will affect society and our environment. Meanwhile, neither science nor technology can address the great questions of purpose. Why are we here? Why is the universe here? What is the purpose of love? Moral issues, questions of right and wrong, value judgements, all of these must be handled in some other way.
Questions:
- Your home is full of the results of technology. Can you identify some of them?
- Can you make any guesses as to the kind of science that underpins those technologies?
See also:
- How does science work? - Journeys of heart and mind
04 December 2008
Eaton Ford - Out in Society
We thought about the Christian life out in society. We are indeed 'jars of clay', we see the Almighty's glory in Jesus face - a treasure indeed! Jesus shared his life with us, we need to share our own lives (which is really his life) with those around us.
We read from James 2, especially verse 8 that tells us loving our neighbour is a 'royal law'.
Jim saw people waiting on a platform for the train and sure enough the train arrived - but it didn't stop.
We read from James 2, especially verse 8 that tells us loving our neighbour is a 'royal law'.
Jim saw people waiting on a platform for the train and sure enough the train arrived - but it didn't stop.
02 December 2008
Great Doddington - A broken mirror
We had the thought that when a mirror is broken, each piece still reflects him. Nothing is lost. This seems to be a picture of the church.
This will be our last Tuesday meeting, in future we will meet on Mondays as Rachael will not be free on Tuesdays.
This will be our last Tuesday meeting, in future we will meet on Mondays as Rachael will not be free on Tuesdays.
29 November 2008
Salvation and unity
Two items that appeared in my email inbox this morning encouraged me to write something myself. One was a blog post by Prayeramedic, the other an email from 'The School of Christ'. 
The blog post questions the process by which people are encouraged to join the Church, the email questions our idea of unity within the Church.
They are strong messages and they demand that each of us consider where we stand on these important issues.
The two messages
Prayeramedic pulls us up short when he writes on 'The Heresy of the Sinner's Prayer'...
Chip Brogden ('The School of Christ') also yanks on our reins when he writes on 'Spiritual Unity'...
What are we to make of these messages? Are these challenges valid? Does it matter?
Their validity
I believe the challenges are valid and it matters very much indeed. In the first case, unless we understand what Christ did and why, we cannot fully engage with the process of becoming a believer. And in the second case, if we don't understand what Christ meant by 'being one' we will stand very little chance of living in unity as he intended it.
In both cases we see that there is the same principle at work. Either we understand what Yahshua said in his terms, or we see it on our own terms. If we see his words through our own wisdom we are certain to miss the point. And these are two very important points indeed. We need to be sure that we are walking in his powerful light, not merely in the darkness of our own intellect and emotion.
This is not about what we would prefer, it's about the facts as they have been explained to us by the One who really knows.
In Romans 8:1-17 Paul writes about living in the Spirit of Christ. In verse 9 he writes, 'If anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ' (emphasis mine).
Chip Brogden quotes from Yahshua's amazing prayer in John 17:20-26. The prayer is intended to include today's believers, this is clear from verse 20, 'I pray also for those who will believe in me through [my disciples'] message'. And he wants us to be one in the same way that he and the Father are one (verse 21).
So it's impossible to deny that unless we have the Spirit of Christ we do not even belong to him, but also that if we do have the Spirit of Christ we will be drawn into oneness with Yahshua, with the Father, and with one another.
Reasoning it out
Why is this? It is because if I am in Christ I must have his Spirit in me. I cannot be in him unless he is also in me! This is salvation, to have his Spirit in me.
And if I am in Christ and he is in me, then where he is I am also. And as he is in the Father and the Father is in him, I too must also be in the Father and the Father in me! And as the Spirit of Christ is the Holy Spirit, if Christ is in me the Holy Spirit is in me too.
So now we can see that the Father, the Son and the Spirit are one, and all of us who believe are also one because we are all in Christ together. We can't help but be one. So our unity is not dependent on our will or attainment, but like salvation itself it depends only on being in Christ.
So the Kingdom of Heaven is not something to be attained, and it's not a place we will go when we die, the Kingdom is the place of unity with the Father, with the Son, with the Spirit, and with one another. The Kingdom of Heaven is here right now and it's attained solely by the will and purpose of the Father.
The purpose of unity
But there is one final point. What is the purpose of the Father in all of this? To find out we need to look again at John 17:23, 'May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me'.
There we have it. The unity has a function. It's so that the world will know that the Father sent the Son and loves us the same way he loves the Son. The unity is there to stand as evidence, but not just any old unity will do. 'Complete unity' is what the Almighty is looking for in his people, absolute unity with him and with one another.
The blog post questions the process by which people are encouraged to join the Church, the email questions our idea of unity within the Church.They are strong messages and they demand that each of us consider where we stand on these important issues.
The two messages
Prayeramedic pulls us up short when he writes on 'The Heresy of the Sinner's Prayer'...
I'm not saying it's wrong to use a prayer to help people confess Christ, but to convince people that they are saved simply because they pray a prayer is ridiculous -- it is not the Gospel of the Scripture. This runs deep, it runs at the heart of how the Church never talks about sin anymore.
Chip Brogden ('The School of Christ') also yanks on our reins when he writes on 'Spiritual Unity'...
People will pick up on this phrase, "that they may all be one", and try to create a unity that embraces everyone equally, no matter what they teach, what they believe, or how they live. In this false unity, every path to God becomes a valid path of spiritual expression and should not be criticized. Of course this contradicts what Jesus had just said about Himself being the only Way to the Father, but it certainly makes it easier for us to create unity for everyone. Is that what Jesus wants - quick and easy unity through compromise and concession?
What are we to make of these messages? Are these challenges valid? Does it matter?
Their validity
I believe the challenges are valid and it matters very much indeed. In the first case, unless we understand what Christ did and why, we cannot fully engage with the process of becoming a believer. And in the second case, if we don't understand what Christ meant by 'being one' we will stand very little chance of living in unity as he intended it.
In both cases we see that there is the same principle at work. Either we understand what Yahshua said in his terms, or we see it on our own terms. If we see his words through our own wisdom we are certain to miss the point. And these are two very important points indeed. We need to be sure that we are walking in his powerful light, not merely in the darkness of our own intellect and emotion.
This is not about what we would prefer, it's about the facts as they have been explained to us by the One who really knows.
In Romans 8:1-17 Paul writes about living in the Spirit of Christ. In verse 9 he writes, 'If anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ' (emphasis mine).
Chip Brogden quotes from Yahshua's amazing prayer in John 17:20-26. The prayer is intended to include today's believers, this is clear from verse 20, 'I pray also for those who will believe in me through [my disciples'] message'. And he wants us to be one in the same way that he and the Father are one (verse 21).
So it's impossible to deny that unless we have the Spirit of Christ we do not even belong to him, but also that if we do have the Spirit of Christ we will be drawn into oneness with Yahshua, with the Father, and with one another.
Reasoning it out
Why is this? It is because if I am in Christ I must have his Spirit in me. I cannot be in him unless he is also in me! This is salvation, to have his Spirit in me.
And if I am in Christ and he is in me, then where he is I am also. And as he is in the Father and the Father is in him, I too must also be in the Father and the Father in me! And as the Spirit of Christ is the Holy Spirit, if Christ is in me the Holy Spirit is in me too.
So now we can see that the Father, the Son and the Spirit are one, and all of us who believe are also one because we are all in Christ together. We can't help but be one. So our unity is not dependent on our will or attainment, but like salvation itself it depends only on being in Christ.
So the Kingdom of Heaven is not something to be attained, and it's not a place we will go when we die, the Kingdom is the place of unity with the Father, with the Son, with the Spirit, and with one another. The Kingdom of Heaven is here right now and it's attained solely by the will and purpose of the Father.
The purpose of unity
But there is one final point. What is the purpose of the Father in all of this? To find out we need to look again at John 17:23, 'May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me'.
There we have it. The unity has a function. It's so that the world will know that the Father sent the Son and loves us the same way he loves the Son. The unity is there to stand as evidence, but not just any old unity will do. 'Complete unity' is what the Almighty is looking for in his people, absolute unity with him and with one another.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Copyright
© 2002-2022, Chris J Jefferies
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. A link to the relevant article on this site is sufficient attribution. If you print the material please include the URL. Thanks! Click through photos for larger versions. Images from Wikimedia Commons will then display the original copyright information.
