Heresy!

An interesting way to view the history of The Church is through consideration of the struggle that has gone on through the centuries to understand and explain the unexplainable.  From a Catholic viewpoint, possible explanations that were rejected by the church carry the label, “heresy,” meaning that while we have no full and complete and correct explanations of God, those particular rejected explanations have been judged to be wrong.  I guess it is often easier to be clear about what does not work than about what does.  Here is a list with an approximate timeline of many of the heresies than have been identified.  Click on it for a readable version. The Nicene Creed, which addressed and rejected the major heresies of the time, originated at the Council of Nicaea in 325 and was amended at the First Council of Constantinople in 381.
 
If the above is difficult to read, try downloading the PDF version below. Feel free to use these but be sure to correct any errors before doing so!
 
Heresy-copy-LargeDownload
First was the idea that one had to become a Jew (and be circumcised) before becoming a Christian.  That was rejected at the Council of Jerusalem about 15 years after the resurrection.  Then there were all those questions about Jesus.  Was he divine or human or both?  Was he prophet or savior?  Was he created by the Father, adopted by the Father, just one form of the Father, subordinate to the Father, or equal to and co-existent with the Father?  Did he have one nature or two, one will or two?  Did He come to save the whole world, or all people or just some people or just certain people?  Will he return physically or spiritually, now or later or never?  Did He just come to model the way he wants us to live, or did he establish a Church and leave people in charge of it.  Did he really die on the cross, or did somebody else take his place?
 
There were questions about God.  Is he involved continually with his creation or did he just set everything in motion at the creation and sit back to see what happens?  Was his creation evil or good or both?  How could he have created evil, and if he didn’t, what is the explanation for evil in the world?  Are there an evil god who created the earth and a good God, represented by Jesus, who rules the world to come?
 
What about the Church.  Is it just an invisible conglomeration of believers, or is it supposed to take up space and have a voice in the world.  Is it a democracy subject to the social pressures and whims of its members, or is there a teaching authority established by Jesus and handed down through the centuries to serve as a guide for society?  Does the Church do such things as baptism and communion just in obedience to and in memory of Jesus Christ, or is God truly present and primary in such actions?  Does the validity of such “sacraments,” if they are considered to be so, depend on the moral standing of the priest or pastor or only on the Grace of God?
 
And what about us and our salvation? Are we free and independent agents, choosing between good and evil, or are we totally dependent on God’s grace for anything good to happen.  Or maybe we just need a little nudge from the Almighty to get us headed in the right direction.  Or maybe our destinies have already been determined and we are just pawns.  Are we to read the Bible and interpret it as we see fit, or is there help or even some final word from the Church to assist or perhaps inform our understanding?
 
If you look through the subjects on the above chart, you will find references to all these questions.  And so far, the best statement we have of what we believe seems to be the Nicene Creed, finalized about 350 years after Christ and surviving now for more than 1600 years.    
 
Thanks be to God for the gift of The Church, The Body of Christ.

My primary sources for the information in the exhibit were Dissent from the Creed by Richard M. Hogan, The Story of Christianity by Justo L. Gonzalez, and www.newadvent.org.

Confirmed!

April 15, 1951, I was baptized into the Christian faith at First Baptist Church, Maryville, TN.  Today, Pentecost, June 12, 2011, I received the Sacrament of Confirmation at St. Peter’s Catholic Church, Columbia, SC.  Thank you, Jesus, for this special manifestation of the gift of The Holy Spirit.

CHAPTER ONE
THE SACRAMENTS OF CHRISTIAN INITIATION
ARTICLE 2
THE SACRAMENT OF CONFIRMATION

1285 Baptism, the Eucharist, and the sacrament of Confirmation together constitute the “sacraments of Christian initiation,” whose unity must be safeguarded. It must be explained to the faithful that the reception of the sacrament of Confirmation is necessary for the completion of baptismal grace. For by the sacrament of Confirmation, [the baptized] are more perfectly bound to the Church and are enriched with a special strength of the Holy Spirit. Hence they are, as true witnesses of Christ, more strictly obliged to spread and defend the faith by word and deed. – From Catechism of the Catholic Church

Acts 8:12-17  But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.  Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done.  Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John:  Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost:  (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)  Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost. 

 

Judge Not!

Jesus said to him, ‘Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone. – Mark 10:18

That is the response of Jesus to a man who had just knelt before him, addressed him as “Good teacher,” and asked about eternal life.  I always have trouble identifying irony (I’m a chemical engineer, after all.), but I think this example of God asking a man why he is being called good because only God is good might qualify.  It is difficult to be sure what is going on.  Maybe Jesus recognized that the man seemed to know that He was God.  Or maybe Jesus simply saw the occasion as a teachable moment about judging.  Or, perhaps as suggested by commentator Pheme Perkins in The Interpreter’s Bible, Jesus was just trying to keep the focus on God alone and avoid any shift of attention from God to himself.

We have a more explicit and much more widely quoted statement about judging in Matthew 7:1.   “Do not judge, so that you may not be judged.”  That’s confusing because we seem to be promised in scripture that we will be judged (Hebrews 9:27 for example).  Perhaps that is the reason that many read Matthew 7:1 as “Don’t condemn so that you may not be condemned.”  That doesn’t help because we also know from scripture that whether we are condemned is not a function simply of whether or not we condemn (John 3:18 for example).  It is sometimes assumed that Jesus’ following statement, “in the same way you judge others, you will be judged,” refers to the final judgment, but it is hard for me to believe that God is going to adjust His standards of judgment to match ours.  So it seems more reasonable to me to see this Matthew 7:1 commandment as applying to earthly life, the way we are to live with each other, than to the final judgment.

I humbly offer my simple and unauthoritative solution to this question of what we are to do about judging each other.  Maybe the two verses, the warning against calling anyone good and the warning against judging, can be considered together to mean that we are not to be either approving or disapproving each other but rather to just be loving unconditionally in accord with the second greatest commandment (Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. – Mark 12:31).  Surely we can accept and live with and care for others without making personal judgments about them.  After all, we know that our basis for making such personal judgments, either positive or negative, is limited because, “…the Lord does not see as mortals see; they look on the outward appearance, but the Lord looks on the heart.” 1 Samuel 16:7

Well, the realization that the Lord is looking on our hearts should really give pause.  Putting up a good front won’t make any difference in that case.

Going to Church

Now that regular church attendance is no longer default behavior for responsible citizens as it was when I was growing up in a small East Tennessee town, much is being written about how and why the remaining regular attendees choose the particular churches they attend. Denomination choices may well be based either on sticking with, or avoiding, the denomination of one’s parents, but congregation choices seem too often to be based on liking the pastor, the sermons, the music, the food, the fun, or the fellowship. Sometimes proximity and convenience may play a role. Opportunities for service and ministry could play a role for serious believers, because, for them, personal involvement is essential. And perhaps some are just looking for confirmation of whatever theological or social positions they have adopted as their own over time though it does seem that few are interested in theology while many are interested in social issues.

 

But, not all denominations and churches are losing ground. While there is concern about loss of members and drooping attendance at so-called mainline denominations in the US, Roman Catholics and Southern Baptists have kept up pretty well with growth in the population.

 
 
 
The table above, data from Demographia, shows that, while 54% of the population claimed church membership in 1960, only 27% of the 110 million person increase over the next 40+ years joined up. This is old data, but I think the trends have generally continued during the last six or eight years.  Roman Catholics and Southern Baptists have shown the biggest absolute increases. The shrinking of some groups, at the expense of others, wouldn’t really matter except that organized churches get caught up in worldly things such as expensive and lightly used structures, headquarters operations, staffs, and utility bills. Such obligations spark a bit of competitiveness in efforts to keep enough funds coming in to avoid the pain of shrinkage and sometimes distract attention from the essential focus of Christianity: Jesus Christ.
 
Whether our personal theologies are best expressed by the singing of Blessed Assurance  or of Let All Mortal Flesh Keep Silence  and whether we prefer the democracy of congregationalism or the structure and authority of Catholicism, there are two things we can be sure of:
  1. Any successful search for eternal things will lead eventually to “one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father.”
  2. His Great Commission and two Great Commandments apply equally to all of us.

So, we might as well work together and help each other out. After all, it’s not all about us. And, if we did that, we might see a reversal of that decline in total participation.

 
 

Theology of Salvation – Not an Easy Subject

I have been reading, for the second time, The Catechism of the Catholic Church and am now in Part Three – Life in Christ. The reading reminded me of one of the most challenging courses I took during three years at Lutheran Theological Southern Seminary, Theology of Salvation, taught by Professor David Yeago. That was in the fall of 2003. The focus was on Lutheran theology and absence from it, in recent decades, of emphasis on sanctification and spirituality.

My notes from Dr. Yeago’s lecture state the problem this way: “What it means to be saved has been reduced to something very subjective – something in our mindsets, feelings, and attitudes. No emphasis on a “new being” so all Christian life has become explainable by reason. Christianity has been redefined as something inward, private, and subjective. It has become an issue of what Jesus means to me, rather than any objective statement about Jesus.” My apologies to Dr. Yeago if I have miss-interpreted, but that is what I wrote down.

The agenda of the course was to read works of some early Lutheran theologians seeking an understanding of “newness of life” and “growth in holiness” and a concept of sanctification that would extend beyond “the subjective effect of hearing the word of forgiveness.” My particular assignment was to read and summarize for the class an excerpt from an 1875 paper by Heinrich Schmid, who addressed what he saw as a weakness in the contemporary theology of his church, a general belief that Word and Sacrament comprised God’s part in salvation and that faith, good works, and penitence were the responsibility of individuals for their own salvation. God did His part; now we must do ours. In an attempt to correct that misunderstanding, Schmid undertook the task of more fully describing and renewing interest in the Lutheran reformation perspective of Biblical salvation theology.

Schmid surveyed and summarized what some 16th and 17th century Lutheran Theologians had written about faith, justification, vocation, illumination, regeneration, conversion, mystical union, renovation, and good works, all Biblical elements of salvation. Renovation is not a word we hear in the church today, but may include sanctification, redemption, and penitence, three key words missing from Schmid’s paper. The results of his study were published in The Doctrinal Theology of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, Part III, Chapter III.

Here are Schmid’s descriptions of the terms he researched:
Faith: Means by which one partakes of salvation, accomplished only by the power of God
Justification: Act of God whereby He declares the believer “just”
Vocation: Act of Grace from the Holy Spirit by means of the Word
Illumination: An operation of the Holy Spirit addressed to the will and intellect
Regeneration: Act of Grace by which the Holy Spirit gives a sinner power to exercise faith
Conversion: Act by which the Holy Spirit turns the sinner from sin to God
Mystical Union: Act by which God makes his abode in the justified and regenerate person
Renovation: Ongoing process of leading, day by day, a more holy life before God

Beginning with the fundamental truth that Christ is the agent of salvation, faith is the means of salvation, and justification is the effect of salvation, Schmid defined and described faith and justification. Both are attributed to God. A person’s natural lack of faith can “be overcome only by God Himself. If, therefore, a man believes, this faith is to be regarded as a work of God in him…” Justification likewise has nothing to do with any action or decision on the part of the individual or with any moral change in the individual, but is “only a judgment pronounced upon man, by which his relation to God is reversed.” Faith and justification occur simultaneously and are both totally attributable to God.

Faith and justification, at a very high level, may be understood to fully describe the theology of Christian salvation. By faith, we are justified! However, they do not explain what happens in the life of an individual experiencing faith and justification or being saved. How does being saved look and feel to the person being saved, and what changes will such a person experience in his or her life? What does it mean for us to “work out our own salvation with fear and trembling?” Schmid attempted to describe “the internal conditions and the moral change which occur in a person at the same time with and after justification.” In other words, how and when and in what order does the person being saved through faith and justification experience vocation, illumination, regeneration, conversion, mystical union, renovation, and good works?

Of course the difficulty of explaining the unexplainable would all disappear if we were to focus all our attention on God rather than on whether or not we have salvation and when and where we got it. Given our inherent selfishness, that is not easily achieved. As Schmid suggests, the key indicator for an individual may be “…the strength or weakness of the confidence with which he embraces the offered salvation.”

To illustrate Schmid’s points, and to spark classroom discussion, I constructed a diagram, in the shape of a cross, in an attempt to link the salvation-related words in some kind of process beginning with Vocation or Call, the beginning of Salvation, and ending with Good Works, which are the fruits of Salvation. My first version of the diagram didn’t pass muster with Dr. Yeago because it ignored the simultaneity or at least overlapping of several of the elements. So the double ended yellow arrows in the diagram below were added in an attempt to express the uncertainty of the process linking those elements.

One impression I have after reviewing the Theology of Salvation course material while in the process of reading The Catechism of the Catholic Church is that those early Lutheran theologians might be more comfortable in the 21st century Catholic Church than in the 21st Century Evangelical Lutheran Church in America.

Sampling of Relevant Scripture Verses (NRSV):

Romans 6:4 – Therefore we have been buried with him by baptism into death, so that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life.

2 Corinthians 5:17 – So if anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation: everything old has passed away; see, everything has become new!

Ephesians 1:4 – …just as he chose us in Christ before the foundation of the world to be holy and blameless before him in love.

Ephesians 2:8-10 – For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God–not the result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are what he has made us, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand to be our way of life.

Romans 5:18 – Therefore just as one man’s trespass led to condemnation for all, so one man’s act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all.

Ephesians 4:1 – I therefore, the prisoner in the Lord, beg you to lead a life worthy of the calling (vocation?) to which you have been called

1 Corinthians 2:12-13 – Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit that is from God, so that we may understand the gifts bestowed on us by God. And we speak of these things in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual things to those who are spiritual. (illumination)

John 3:5-6 – Jesus answered, “Very truly, I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God without being born of water and Spirit. What is born of the flesh is flesh, and what is born of the Spirit is spirit. (regeneration)

Matthew 4:17 – From that time Jesus began to proclaim, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near.” (conversion)

John 6:56 – Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood abide in me, and I in them. (mystical union?)

1 Corinthians 6:17 – But anyone united to the Lord becomes one spirit with him.

Romans 6:22 – But now that you have been freed from sin and enslaved to God, the advantage you get is sanctification. The end is eternal life. (Renovation)

James 2:26 – For just as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is also dead.

Philippians 2:12-13 – Therefore, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed me, not only in my presence, but much more now in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; 13 for it is God who is at work in you, enabling you both to will and to work for his good pleasure.

Telling the Old Testament Gospel Story

I am always moved by the reading of the seventh chapter of The Acts of the Apostles in which Stephen, newly elected deacon facing accusations of blasphemy, summarizes the Old Testament story in a 1300 word homily. Two thousand years later it is easy to forget that the Jewish Bible, the Old Testament, was the only “Holy Scripture” for the early church, maybe for as long as 300 years, until the New Testament Canon was agreed upon and added.

In his discourse, Stephen recounts the stories of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, and David and then reminds his listeners that their ancestors had persecuted the prophets who had “foretold the coming of the Righteous One.” And then the crowd drags him out of the city and stones him to death as Saul, later to become a teller of the same story he has just heard, looks after the coats of the killers and, presumably, looks on approvingly as the blood of Stephen is splattered about. If you haven’t read it in a while, it’s worth five minutes of your time now.

A sampling of New Testament occurrences of “scripture,” always referring to the Old Testament.

Luke 4:21 -Then he (Jesus) began to say to them, “Today this scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing.”


John 2:22 – After he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this; and they believed the scripture and the word that Jesus had spoken.


John 7:42 – Has not the scripture said that the Messiah is descended from David and comes from Bethlehem, the village where David lived?”


Acts 1:16 – “Friends, the scripture had to be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit through David foretold concerning Judas, who became a guide for those who arrested Jesus—


Acts 8:30-35 – So Philip ran up to it and heard him (Ethiopian eunuch) reading the prophet Isaiah. He asked, “Do you understand what you are reading?” 31 He replied, “How can I, unless someone guides me?” And he invited Philip to get in and sit beside him. 32 Now the passage of the scripture that he was reading was this: “Like a sheep he was led to the slaughter, and like a lamb silent before its shearer, so he does not open his mouth. 33 In his humiliation justice was denied him. Who can describe his generation? For his life is taken away from the earth.” 34 The eunuch asked Philip, “About whom, may I ask you, does the prophet say this, about himself or about someone else?” 35 Then Philip began to speak, and starting with this scripture, he proclaimed to him the good news about Jesus.


Galatians 3:8 – And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, declared the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, “All the Gentiles shall be blessed in you.”


2 Timothy 3:16-17 – All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 so that everyone who belongs to God may be proficient, equipped for every good work.

Virtues and Vices

A few times I have used the Boy Scout Law, (“A Scout is trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean, and reverent.”) as a good list of desirable traits for one to develop.  Somewhere this week I saw something about a list of virtues, Googled that, and found that The Catholic Church lists seven virtues, three of them “theological” and four “cardinal.”  One thing led to another and next thing I knew I was toying around with a chart to display the virtues, gifts of the Holy Spirit, fruits of the Holy Spirit, and even the seven “capital” sins, all as taught in the Catholic Catechism.  This is what I came up with.  Actually that Boy Scout Law is a pretty good list summarizing the virtues, gifts, and fruits.  Putting the Grace of God in the center just seemed like a good idea to me.

Scripture Alone?

A pillar of Protestant theology is Sola Scriptura which means that “Scripture alone is authoritative for the faith and practice of the Christian.” That quote comes from this web site which seems to present a balanced view of the subject and some of the controversy surrounding it.

With a unifying common principle such as Sola Scriptura, it would seem that all who subscribe would be in agreement on the important issues of the Christian faith and would be in full communion with each other. Alas, that is not the case because various Christian churches making the claim end up with quite different positions on theological issues they deem important such as the appropriate age for and method of baptism, whether a person once “saved” is always “saved,” whether the Lord’s Supper is a memorial or a sacrament, whether our salvation is up to us, up to God, or depends on both to some extent, whether miraculous healing and prophesy or even exorcism are alive and well in the 21st century, and whether God wants His followers to be rich or poor. The obvious conclusion which must be drawn from the existence of such variances is that it is not Scripture itself but rather the interpreters of it who are seen by us as the final authorities.

Some would argue that these differences are not important and that most Christians, whether claiming Sola Scriptura as their foundation of belief or not, agree on certain Biblical essentials of salvation such as our creation by God, our sinfulness, our need for forgiveness, the facts that God sent his Son Jesus to show us how to live and to give his life for us, and that through faith in Jesus we become part of the family of God and receive eternal life. These basic elements of the faith comprise sort of a “Four Spiritual Laws” approach to Christianity, and that approach works as an introduction to the Faith. But if a believer or a seeker begins a deeper study, it is discovered that efforts to understand some of those key words in the sentence above, “creation,” “sinfulness,” “forgiveness,” “Son,” “live,” “faith,” “family of God,” and “eternal life,” for example, have resulted in centuries of study and contemplation, volumes of writings, and multitudes of opinions. So, even when we agree on the basics, we don’t necessarily agree on exactly what they mean. The inquiring student also finds that there are lots of mysterious things in the Bible that don’t seem to be pointing to these simple ideas but rather to something much deeper and more complex. And it is those differing opinions on theological issues, word meanings, and complexity (possibly along with occasional squabbles over pastors or property) that have resulted in splintering of the Church over the centuries to the point that there are now thousands of Christian “denominations.”

For many 21st Century Christians, neither these divisive issues nor the splintering of the Church is problematic. To many, the proliferation of denominations and churches is good because it makes it easier for believers to find what they want or need in what has become a giant religious shopping mall. For others, purity of belief is critical and they will argue any point of disagreement, citing proof text after proof text in support of their position and even stand ready to found a new church or denomination if some unique distinguishing position can be identified and defended. And finally there are those to whom the splintering of the Christian Church and the resulting confusing and unclear messages about The Gospel to an unbelieving world seem counterproductive at best and who would like to see a lot more uniting and a lot less dividing going on.

The Catholic Church officially rejects Sola Scriptura and argues that there is a tradition of scripture interpretation and Christian practice going back to the very birth of the Church and passed from Jesus to and through the Apostles that must go hand in hand with Holy Scripture. As the keeper of that Tradition, the Catholic Church claims the sole authority to interpret and teach Holy Scripture. That sounds pushy, but c’mon Protestants, surely we must admit that we too are sometimes claiming that authority but, it seems to me, without the case that Catholics can make from Holy Scripture that Jesus gave power and authority to Peter and Paul and the other apostles and established The Church and put them in charge of it.

So, if the issues of Christian unity and teaching authority are of concern, what is one to do? One can take the loner approach and say, “It’s just between me and Jesus and The Holy Spirit will reveal whatever truth I need to know.” Or one can align with one of the more fundamentalist and authoritative churches and just accept their traditional interpretations, varied and youthful though they may be. A third option is to join a US mainline denomination congregation “read scripture together faithfully, “join the conversation,” cast a vote about how to interpret Holy Scripture, and then accept the result in the very young tradition of democracy. And finally, one can discount the well deserved scorn the Catholic Magisterium had earned in some quarters by the late Middle Ages, sparking The Protestant Reformation, conclude that the Reformation has outlived its usefulness, and accept that Jesus really did establish a church with leaders and teaching authority and a succession plan and that that church is the Catholic Church, blemished though it may be. And, when the person who makes that choice gets upset with the Catholic Church or is faced with criticism of it, he or she can remember that even Jesus had trouble with personal ambition, denial, and betrayal among his original twelve and that he never promised a blemish-free church but rather one against which the Gates of Hell would not prevail.

I think all four options are valid and reasonable and may be appropriate for any one Christian at various stages of his or her faith journey. Probably for the vast majority raised in one of the traditions, the questions raised in this essay are unimportant because they are quite happy and secure, blessed by God and “blooming where planted” so to speak. Others have doubts and concerns from time to time, recognize that Christian faith is a journey, and are blessed or cursed with inquiring minds that know God is beyond our understanding but are always searching for increased wisdom and understanding.

I think one serious result of the disunity of Christians is our tendency to be self righteous and to criticize each other. Today’s (10/24/2010) Gospel lesson, Luke 18:9-14, is the story of the Pharisee who came to the temple to pray and loudly announced his thankfulness that he was so much better than other people. He was followed by the tax collector who came just humbly asking God for mercy because he was a sinner. As I was listening to the sermon, I had the thought that probably some of us there were making the same mistake as the Pharisee, sub-consciously thanking God that we are not like that selfish fool, and completely forgetting that we are all in need of mercy because of our sin and just need to follow the example of the tax collector in our prayers.

So, let us be patient with each other.

"Giving Back"

I wonder what the implication is when someone says they are doing volunteer work or donating money or helping someone directly because they want to “give back.”

Is the implication that they have taken something and want to give back some of it or all of it or is it that they have been given something and now want to give some or all of it back?

Is “giving back” different from giving forward to someone never before encountered?

Is there some suggestion in a person’s declaration of intent to begin “giving back” that nothing much has been given in the past but that a point in life has been reached at which “giving back” is appropriate and affordable and not too disruptive or maybe even fun or ego building or image enhancing?

I think it is the simple word “back” that bothers me about this popular phrase probably because of the suggestion of reciprocity.  After all, Jesus is not reported in Acts 20:35 to have said, “It is more blessed to give (back) than to receive,” and while there may be some suggestion of reciprocity in Matthew 10:8, “Freely you have received, freely give,” the word “freely” seems to take away the selfishness.

Of course we know that Jesus gave everything so the standard has been established.  If only I…
 
When he had received the drink, Jesus said, “It is finished.” With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit. – John 19:30

Sorry for the rant about a pet peeve.  But it is food for thought.

Faith, Doubt, and Certainty

Famous and not so famous quotes about faith, doubt, and certainty abound, but I believe this phrase which came to my mind while I was on a bicycle ride last evening may be original.

Faith and doubt walk hand in hand.  Faith and certainty are perfect strangers and have no need of each other.

If not, I apologize to whoever first composed it and anxiously await their identification so I can thank and acknowledge him or her.