I went with my brothers and children to see The Amazing Spider-Man, this 4th of July. If you remember that Marvel/Stan Lee has done a number of reinterpretations of Spider-Man over the years, you won’t be surprised with this movie. This movie is not Spider-Man 4. It is much like the alternate timeline in the new Star Trek movies or the new Batman series. (Although the new Star Trek does have continuity with the old as an alternate time line that Batman and Spider-Man do not have.) This Spider-Man is a bit cockier than his alternate and he has mechanical webs (as in cartoon and comics) and not biological webs (as in the last 3 movies and some comics). Most people tell me they prefer the mechanical web. I like either type of web; in fact, I liked the previous movies and this one as well.

The moral of the movie was a bit different than the previous movies; however, the theme is still responsibility. If you remember form the previous movies the moral was “With great power comes great responsibility.” In this movie it is “If you can do good, it is not a choice, it is your responsibility.” There are subtle and interesting differences between the two. The movie plays heavy on the ethics of Transhumanism as well. This movie is a treasure trove to draw upon for philosophical, moral, and ethical discussions.

Finally, the cinematography was outstanding. There were a number of times, more than in most movies, where a still of the screen would be an awesome and powerful picture. We saw the movie in IMAX 3-D and it was well done. I give this movie 5 out of 5.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0948470/

Book Review: Finding God in Ancient China by Chan Kei Thong with Charlene L. Fu

“Finding God in Ancient China: How the Ancient Chinese Worshiped the God of the Bible,” by Chan Kei Thong with Charlene L. Fu, caught my eye after I had seen some interesting websites that made a connection between the Genesis flood account and Chines pictographic characters (logograms).

Thesis
The thesis of the book is, “we will show that there is sufficient light peeking through the windows of general revelation in Chinese history, records, literature, and practices to convince one to take the next step, into the sunlight of God’s special revelation.”(40)

What this book is not saying
This book is not making the claim that there is more than one way to God. The claim is that the ancient Chinese had a rudimentary knowledge of the one true God that would have come from the revelation up to the point of their migration to the steps of China.

Chapter 1
The book starts with an explanation of the differences between myths, legends, and history. The book transitions into an explanation of general and special revelation of God. These become key points and a foundation for moving forward with their thesis. The book then promises to review the “signposts” that point to their thesis.

Chapter 2
Chapter two gives us a brief overview of the pictographic and ideographic nature of the Chinese written language. Further, the authors show how some of these characters correlate to the Genesis record and the basic tenants of sin, forgiveness, sacrifice, redemption, and salvation. The authors rightfully acknowledge that this can be dismissed as circumstantial evidence, however, “these characters should, however, compel us to seek further evidence within the Chinese culture to see if, in fact, the ancient Chinese worshipped the One True God.”(71)

Chapter 3
Chapter three addresses the name and concept of God for the ancient Chinese. The name given to God in Chinese is 皇天上帝 (Huang Tian Shang Di) which translates to Supreme Lord of the Great Heaven. Often, He is referred to only as 上帝 (Shang Di). For the ancient Chinese, this is the Creator God who is above and distinct from all other lesser gods (shen or spirits). The chapter continues with parallels between Shang Di and the Creator God of the Hebrews and Christians.

“We saw an abundance of references that strikingly show how the attributes of Shang Di (Tian) match those of the One True God of the Bible, leading us to the conclusion that Shang Di (Tian) is the general revelation to the Chinese people of the same God worshipped by the Hebrews of the Old Testament and the Christians of the New Testament.”(105) The author finally laments “It is unfortunate, therefore, that the Chinese have not worshipped this God alone; they have also worshipped a multitude of other beings. …many Chinese around the world have fallen under the power of a host of fearful superstitions and syncretistic religious beliefs.”(105)

Chapter 4
Chapter 4 compares the Great Border Sacrifice at the Temple of Heaven (which should actually be translated “Alter of Heaven”) with the Old Testament sacrifices to God. They conclude this chapter with this thought, “I found striking similarities in the ceremonies associated with sacrifices performed by the ancient Chinese and the ancient Hebrews. These very discoveries, though, raised further questions. Where did the concepts of substitutionary death – that is, an innocent dying for the guilty –and of atoning death – the requirement of death to pay for sin – originate?”(151)

Chapter 5
Chapter five covers the next “signpost” which is the blood covenant. The chapter explores the parallels in the covenants in the Bible and the rituals performed by the ancient Chinese. They conclude “The parallels between China’s practice of covenants and God’s perfect revelation of covenants in the Holy Scriptures are vivid and eloquent. God uses these dramatic ceremonies to teach eternal principles that were finally fulfilled in Jesus Christ.”(179)

Chapter 6
In chapter six, the authors explore the actions and discoveries of some of the first missionaries to China. In particular, they explore the Jesuit missionary Matteo Ricci (1550-1610) and his missional approach. Ricci’s approach was to demonstrate respect for the Chinese people and culture by such things as learning the native language. This was not common-place for most missionaries of the time. Ricci’s approach was not to convert the Chinese to a Western Culture Christianity but to a Chinese Christianity. (I have a past post on Christianity and the fact that it is culturally agnostic to a point). Ricci’s work, The True Meaning of the Lord of Heaven, is in part, a basis for this book.

“Therefore, having leafed through a great number of ancient books, it is quite clear to me that the Sovereign on High and the Lord of Heaven are different only in name.” “He who is called Lord of Heaven in my humble country is He who is called Shang-Di in Chinese.” - Matteo Ricci, The True Meaning of the Lord of Heaven

Others such as Johann Adam Schall von Bell (1591-1666), Ferdinand Verbiest (1623-1688), and James Legge (1815-1897) built on the goodwill built by Ricci. Particular for Legge, the key to understanding Chinese thought was by reading the classic works.

“I maintain that the Chinese do know the true God, and have a word in their language answering to our word God, to the Hebrew Elohim, and the Greek Theos.” - James Legge

Chapter 7
In this chapter the authors explore how the ancient Chinese understanding of God played a role in politics. In fact, I think this was one of my favorite chapters. The ancient Chinese had a concept they called the Mandate of Heaven 天命 (Tian Ming). This concept was that the ruler was given power by God to rule. This, however, did not mean that the emperor was free to do whatever he wanted. The concept included Tian Xia Wei Gong (Righteousness Rules), which meant that he was to be a righteous and virtuous ruler. If the emperor was not righteous in his rule, he was seen as having lost the Mandate of Heaven. This form of meritocracy is quite appealing to me. The person who was to be the next ruler was based upon that person’s merit, 禪讓 (Shan Rang), not their genealogy, wealth, or even popularity. The concept of 禪讓 (Shan Rang) is that the emperor was above all else, a servant, albeit the servant-leader.(241)

I have to admit, my biased libertarian bent, leads me to an affinity for the Mandate of Heaven.

Chapter 8
In this chapter, aptly entitled ‘Enter the Dragon,’ the authors show how the original worship of Shang Di was corrupted by the dragon cults. As you might bet, they show there are many parallels between the dragon in the Bible and those of ancient China. Much of China’s original heritage has been lost to the dragon and today, you see the principle of the dragon prominent in Chinese culture, government, and business. “Power, pleasure, and position are very enticing. But, they do not last. Like the dragon, they do not serve us; we end up serving them when we pursue them.”(291)

Chapter 9
The book finishes with a discussion of the parallel in the concepts of truth and some astronomy. The author relates a story of a doctoral student who made the statement, “The Chinese Shang Di cannot be the same as the God of the Bible because the latter is a Western deity.” The author, then, offers an illustration of two cups. If he made the claim that both cups are made up of the same material and you objected, how would you resolve the difference? The answer is, you break-down the composition of both cups and, if they prove to be similar or identical, then the two cups are the same. This is to say that you perform careful observation, critically examine the facts, and arrive at a logical conclusion.

“That is what we have sought to do in this chapter and indeed throughout this book. We have presented facts from China’s ancient historical records, records that secular scholars and experts agree are reliable and true, and we have arrived at our conclusions, which we have presented in this book. These facts are now before you, for you to draw your own conclusions.”(321)

My thoughts
I think this book is a primer for any apologetic, evangelistic or missionary work to people in the Chinese culture. The book is especially useful for contextualizing your message. I have to admit that I have a deeper appreciation for the richness of Chinese culture. I have to admit I find Chinese culture fascinating and I want to learn more about their culture.

Further, I find it absolutely fascinating how God works and leaves his fingerprints everywhere around the world. I think God is much like an artist; He loves the different cultures and expressions. It is amazing that, in each of the cultures around the world, God has “set them up” for the truth.

Other books have been written on this subject, however, this is the best treatment of the subject that I have found.

Chronicle (the Movie)

I think there is much more to this movie than meets the eye.

Spoiler Alert: Don’t read if you want to see the movie.

Storyline: Three high school friends gain telekinetic powers after making an incredible discovery of a strange object in a cave. Soon, though, they find their lives spinning out of control and their bond tested as one of them embraces his darker side.

What would happen if you gave a group of teenagers extremely strong telekinetic powers?

It depends on the teenagers. In this movie you have three very different teenagers brought together by accidently gaining telekinetic powers from an unknown source. They bond together as they learn what they can do with their powers. Steve is running for class president and is the most popular kid in school. Andrew is an unpopular misfit with a dying mother and alcoholic abusive father. Matt fits in somewhere between the two.

Andrew uses his powers and accidentally hurts someone. Matthew, his cousin, says they need to come up with rules on when and how to use the powers. I can see him quoting Uncle Ben from Spiderman, “With great power comes great responsibility.” In this situation, Matt was pleading for an moral standard.

Together they continue to learn and grow their powers. However, giving people powers that are not prepared for it can be devastating. Andrew and Steve do a magic show during the schools talent show. Andrew’s reputation changes instantly; finally, he is popular. However, Teenagers’ feelings are fickle, so when Andrew pukes on a girl at the after party, the taunting becomes worse that it was before. In addition, his father becomes more abusive as he thinks his son is up to no good. Andrew starts to feel the walls closing in.

Out of anger, Andrew accidentally kills Steve, who was trying to tell him he was still his friend. He then confronts his father and beats him up for a change. This becomes the beginning of the end, as if Andrew had tasted blood for the first time.

In a key scene to the story Andrew sits in a junk yard and crushes a car with his mind. In his internal monologue Andrew uses naturalistic evolutionary bases to explain his justification for his coming actions. His first premise is the idea that an apex predator does not feel guilt in killing inferior animals. His next premise is that he is now a superior being. His conclusion is that he then should not feel guilty if he harms others.

The final straw comes when he cannot buy medicine to ease his mother’s pain. He then rationalizes robbing people. When a robbery at a gas station goes wrong and the station explodes, Andrew ends up unconscious in the hospital. His dad comes in and tells him his mother has died and blames him because he had to go look for him that night.

Andrew snaps and the mayhem begins. Matt goes to talk to him and reason with him, but he won’t listen. The talk deteriorates to an all-out brawl. They tear the city up with their fight. In the end his anger gets the best of him, and Matt has to kill him.

You can see the materialistic naturalism based morality play out with the Judeo-Christian based objective morality being contrasted as the story progresses.[1] The self-destructive materialistic naturalism played out to it’s natural conclusion. The moral of the story: with great power comes great responsibility, and if you don’t believe you have a responsibility, you will follow self-gratification to your own destruction, leaving behind untold carnage. This is a powerful story with a powerful message.

Movie Information: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1706593/

Footnote:

[1] Both materialistic naturalism and Judeo-Christian moralities are objective. I just want to point out they are both based on something rather than the relativist position where morality depends on any number of factors. Materialistic naturalism is very much like social Darwinism (social evolution). Naturalism holds that only natural laws and forces operate in the universe and not supernatural ones, i.e. God. Materialism holds that the only things that exist in the Universe are matter and energy. Morality is thus derived as a result of material interactions i.e. genetics. It follows from this that if there is no higher power, why do we have constraints on behavior? Why not live out survival of the fittest? Morality is thus objective because you are hardwired for it. Does a lion feel guilty for killing a gazelle?

On the other hand, the Judeo-Christian view is that morality comes from the Creator. Especially in Christian doctrine, every person was created in the image of God (Imago Dei) and thus has value. It follows then that killing of people is wrong because there is a command not to from God and because people are of value to God.

One could argue that the movie does not specifically show Matt’s position as Judeo-Christian. I guess that is true, it could be based on Jainism where all life and non-violence is considered sacred. Some Native American tribes would have a similar quasi-pantheistic or animistic view. In any case Matt’s view of morality is transcendent (being entirely beyond the universe) while Andrews is materialistic (being entirely in the universe).

John Smulo, a friend of mine, gave me a copy of a recently released book titled, “The Cross Is Not Enough: Living as Witnesses to the Resurrection” written by his friends Ross Clifford and Philip Johnson. I have to admit that the title caught my attention, and I started reading it that day. I am not finished with the book yet, but it is so jam-packed with information that I had to write down some of my thoughts before I forgot them.

Premise of the book

The book starts with the following quote:

“If the Church had contemplated the Empty Tomb as much as the Cross of its Lord, its life would have been more exhilarating and its contribution to the world more positive than has been the case.” – George Beasley-Murray

My critical-thinking mind quickly asked the question “Is this true and if so, what are the implications?”

Here are a few quick quotes to sum up their thesis:

“This book will argue, however, that the church needs to step away from the smaller pieces of the puzzle and take time to recognize and focus upon Christianity’s lynchpin.”[20]

“We intend to demonstrate in this book how the micro-pictures – morality, repentance, discipleship, apologetics, mission – although valid, only have full meaning when they have the resurrection as their fountainhead.”[21]

“We are not calling just for a refocus on the resurrection; we are calling for an understanding of the resurrection as the lynchpin of Christianity.”[35]

After reading the first chapter, I quickly realized my bias toward their view. My walk with God took a dramatic change in 1992 when I, too, realized that Christianity is more than the forgiveness of the Cross. I realized that He came to give us a new life; just as He was raised, we too shall be raised. However, it is more than a future hope. He also comes to fill our lives now. Some call this the neglected half of the Gospel. I think this book would pair nicely with books by Ian Thomas, Bob George and Steve McVey.

Symbols and focus

One of the interesting points they bring up is how to tell if people focus more on the cross or the resurrection by the symbols used in church, music and other things. I then wondered, if the resurrection was central to my faith, wouldn’t I lean more toward music and symbols that reflect the resurrection? A quick impromptu experiment might shed some light on this. If the resurrection was central to my belief, the songs I listen to should focus more on the resurrection.

I listen to my music on my iPod, I rate my favorite music, and iTunes counts the number of times I listen to a song. So, I opened up iTunes to see what my most-listened-to favorite songs were. Based on the authors’ premise, I found some interesting and predictable results. According to my non-scientific, impromptu experiment, my music listening habits are in line with a resurrection central mindset.

My number-one-listened-to song was Blessed Redeemer by Casting Crowns. With lyrics like “Seems now I see Him on Calvary's tree” it definitely seems like the focus is on the cross. However, looking at my other top listened-to songs with lyrics like:

“Jesus has overcome and the grave is overwhelmed, the victory is won He is risen from the dead, and I will rise when, He calls my name, no more sorrow, no more pain, I will rise on eagles' wings, before my God fall on my knees, and rise I will rise.” - I Will Rise by Chris Tomlin

“You called and you shouted, broke through my deafness, now I’m breathing in, and breathing out, I’m alive again!” - Alive Again by Matt Meher

“He rose & conquered the grave, Jesus conquered the grave” “We're singing for the glory of the risen King” - Mighty to Save

And the most obvious song:

“Christ is risen from the dead, trampling over death by death, come awake come awake, come and rise up from the grave, Christ is risen from the dead, we are one with Him again, come awake come awake, come and rise up from the grave” - Christ Is Risen by Matt Maher

Apologetics

The book does cover the resurrection from an apologetic approach as well. Given their premise, it is obvious that their apologetic approach is to focus on the resurrection. They do have some innovative ways of engaging with culture and non-believers and this flows into their apologetic approach.

As for a defense of the resurrection, they summarize Gary Habermas’ ‘’commonly agreed facts” approach and N. T. Wright’s “six essential detail” approach. In addition, they address four of the top questions raised about the resurrection.

Also, their contextualizing approach to apologetics is also covered but not to a great degree.

Recommendation

I highly recommend this book for its fresh view on the resurrection. I think for many people it will be a fresh approach with deep insights.

Tribal Leadership

This is a good book. I recommend it to anyone with a job or a career. The book covers 5 levels of corporate culture along with suggestions on how you can help move your organization up a level or two. The funny thing is once you read this book you will see people in your organization at different levels. In addition, you will see that those people who are more influential in an organization will have a greater impact on the corporate culture than others within the organization.
(I use the term corporate not to mean a business per se; I mean a group of people with a common goal.)

• Level 1: The mood is ‘life sucks’ and the atmosphere is that of despairing hostility.
• Level 2: The mood is ‘my life sucks’ and the atmosphere is that of an apathetic victim.
• Level 3: The mood is ‘I am great and you are not’ and the atmosphere is that of a lone warrior.
• Level 4: The mood is ‘We are great and they are not’ and the atmosphere is of tribal (corporate) pride.
• Level 5: The mood is ‘Life is great’ and the atmosphere is about having a higher noble purpose.

The book gives examples of people and organizations at each of the levels. I can see in my career that I have worked for places at almost all of the levels except level 5. I also noticed that in my own life, on a personal level, I have progressed through many of these levels. Personally, I feel like I am between 4 and 5 but often find that my actions may at times dip down to level 3. I wish they made an app that could track my current level in real time. Wouldn’t that be nifty? It would change how we react and push us toward level 5.

I think one area the book should have touched on is non-profits. I can see that these pinciples are applicable for Churches, Veterans Organizations, and even government entities. The concepts of the book should be easy to extrapolate to non-profit organizations, but would have been nice to have the book cover them. I would be interested more in examples of those types of organizations and how they apply these ideas. I volunteer much of my time to Veterans’ organizations and, I have to admit, I see Veterans’ service organizations at all different levels.

This book will also make you rethink how you look for a new place of employment. Instead of looking at the money aspect (not that it is not important) you would look for employment at an organization that is at or beyond your level. For example, I would not want to work for a level 1 or 2 organization. Been there done that. I would be ok at a level 3 but I would really like to be with an organization that has a level 5 corporate culture. I say I would be ok with a level 3 only because the job market is competitive and I have living expenses to consider. The level 5 is, of course, where we would all want to be, even if we don’t know it. Everyone wants their work to have meaning and purpose. We all want our lives to have meaning and purpose. This is where we find true happiness.

In order to achieve high levels, the book talks about values and cultivating values for your corporate culture. In fact, they even discuss hiring people not only for their skills but also for their values. How many HR people evaluate a candidate’s values when they are screening applicants? One example given in the book is the team takes the candidate out for lunch and they all talk to the candidate to see if they will be a good ‘fit’.

What is interesting for me is this book has me reevaluating how I think one should look for employment and how an organization should look for candidates. It even challenges me to implement these ideas in the context of non-profits. Over all this book is good for anyone.

Take a look at Zappos Values as an example: http://about.zappos.com/our-unique-culture/zappos-core-values

The audio version of the book is available free and they have setup a companion website with additional information and supporting materials. www.triballeadership.net

Book Review:

The Water That Divides (Mentor Imprint), by Donald Bridge and David Phypers

I have to say, this is an excellent book. It gives you the history of baptism and chronologically follows the changes of views on baptism throughout Christian history. Not only that, it gives you the context of the situations that played a role in the changes throughout the centuries.

For example, I did not know that the controversy between infant baptism and adult-only baptism goes back to the very earliest church fathers. The controversy is, by no means, a recent issue of contention.

I was also surprised to learn that the controversy between submersion and sprinkling is also not a recent debate; it goes back to the early church fathers as well. It is documented that they did both. For some early churches, baptism would often include exorcism as well as anointing with oil. You get the impression that baptism may have been unique to each group, maybe, based on their culture. You could make the case it is that way today.

This information has changed my point of view. Not that I have changed my view on baptism, but it has made me less dogmatic about my position. Many theologians, such as C S Lewis, G K Chesterton & James Packer, feel the different views should be held on creative tension and not destructive competition. I think that might be the answer. I mean, what about letting other explore the issue for themselves? Maybe a person’s baptism is part of their story, part of their relationship with God, and part of their unique journey and revelation.

"In necessariis unitas, in non-necessariis libertas, in utrisque caritas." "In essentials unity, in nonessentials liberty, in all things charity." - Attributed to St. Augustine.

One of the important points brought out in the book was the use of the word sacrament in conjunction with baptism with the early church fathers. Because the term has very specific and legal connotations in ancient Latin, it may help us understand how the early church fathers viewed baptism.

The word sacrament comes from the Latin word sacramentumj which in ancient times, it was a deposit of money for a legal case held in escrow at a temple or it was also an oath of allegiance for soldiers. In either case, the word sacramentum involved a religious ceremony in a sacred place. Augustine defined sacramentum as 'a sign of a sacred reality'. By the second century, baptism was called a sacramentum. This is an import fact in understanding the early Churches view and understanding of Baptism.

This early understanding of the word flows through even to today. In the sacrament of Baptism in the Church of England, the ceremony follows like a Roman soldier's oath of allegiance. The person performing the Baptism will say:

"Do not be ashamed to confess the faith of Christ crucified."

In reply the person being baptized will say:

"Fight valiantly under the banner of Christ against sin, the world, and the devil, and continue his faithful soldiers and servants to the end of your lives."

This understanding of the word sacramentum supports the case that baptism is a response to faith in Christ and is a way people can signify their belief or pledge allegiance to Christ.

Does baptism have anything to do with a person’s salvation? If faith is most important why baptize?

To answer why we baptize is easy, because Jesus said too. (see Matthew 28:19) End of case on that question. However, it leaves behind an issue that many people feel strongly about. Mainly, that baptism, in some way, plays an important role in a person’s salvation. If the original meaning for baptism was that it was a sign or pledge, where did the idea that baptism is necessary for salvation come from?

Think of it this way, if you believe Jesus is the Messiah and savior and He says to go and make disciples by baptizing them, why wouldn't you? Baptism, then, is the obedience of faith so closely linked that you almost can't have one without the other. (Almost) Not that baptism bestows salvation, but that it is an evidence for salvation.

This intimacy between baptism and faith leads to some confusion. In the 12th century, sacraments, because they were so closely linked with faith, began to be described as a means of grace. This is often described as 'ex opere operato' or 'by the work being worked' or 'baptism saves you,’ which means that baptism automatically saves you. People often say that this is what Catholics believe. However, from the Middle Ages on, the Catholic Church has not held to this view. For Catholics today, belief in the doctrine 'non ponentibus obicem' (in case of those who place no impediment). This basically means that baptism brings God's grace so long as there is nothing to stop it, such as a lack of faith.

Thus, calling baptism a sacrament, gives us some insight into the intended meaning of those who used the word so long ago.

X-Men First Class, (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1270798/) is one of those movies that is penetrating with deeper meaning. For example did you notice the interaction and philosophical differences between Professor Charles Xavier (Professor X) and Erik Lehnsherr (Magneto) regarding the situation and rising tensions between humans and mutants? Erik, a victim of the Nazi holocaust, believes that mutants should force humans to accept them and further sees the mutants as a superior race. I find this ironic in light of the fact that he was a victim of intolerance and hatred by people claiming to be a superior race. Erik takes the approach that the ends justify the means and might makes right. Charles, on the other hand, focuses on the peaceful solution. Not joining humans necessarily, but protecting them and treating them as equals. He takes the high road, or what we might call high ethical standards.

I see parallels in this tension between Magneto and Professor X’s worldviews and the civil rights movement here in America. If you parallel Martin Luther King Jr. with Professor X and Malcolm X with Magneto, you may begin to see what I mean. I am reminded of a great play I saw in college. I forget the name of it, but the play was a mythical meeting between Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X and the discussion that followed. Each one of them arguing (or better debating) passionately for their solution to the problem.

One oddity of this parallel is the "X" in their names is in opposition. Professor “X” taking the pacifist approach and Malcolm “X” the by all means necessary approach.

X-Men the First Class movie explores these same tensions and debates. With this story, it starts with them working together for a greater good. Later, they see that their philosophies are not compatible and they part ways. Knowing the rest of the story and what follows, we see they become enemies. This is because they realize their two approaches are incompatible.

Check out the movie and let me know what you think. If you have seen the movie, do you see where I am coming from?

Notes of a Baptist Exorcist: New Testament Teachings and Examples for Exorcising Demons Today
by Dr. Roderick H. Pyatt Ph.D.

I really liked this book and the balanced approach of Dr. Pyatt. The problem of most Protestants is they tend to gravitate to the extremes on the topic of possession and exorcism. Either they ignore the topic politely out of some sort of embarrassment or concern of how they will look to others or they see demons in everything and anything bad that happens to you is a direct action of the devil. Neither of those positions is supported by scripture. Dr. Pyatt addresses the topic in a manner that is biblical and not to the extreme. The book is more or less his notes on the subject. I think it would get better reception if it was more academic. For example, I would like to see it include footnotes and endnotes and if he spent time teasing out some of the finer points.

Characteristics of Possession

Pyatt also relates one way in which people can be possessed. Demons have to have some type of entry, in other words, they are invited. Often people will consult items such as Ouiji boards for some selfish reason. The items do not necessarily have power, for example the Demon is not in the Ouija board. He does however recommend disposing of such items. Not because they have power but for the sake of others.

Dr. Pyatt’s relates the following characteristics of possession. People, while possessed, will speak in a voice that is not their own. The demons typically show themselves intermittently with no set schedule. Demons will have some type of entry, typically using the spiritual or paranormal for selfish reasons. During active possession, the person is usually locked out by the demon that is in total control. The activity, duration and intensity of possessions are variable. When the demon is not active, we don't know if it leaves or becomes dormant. Dr. Pyatt’s position is that locations can be possessed (or infested [my word]) in addition to people. Does that mean animals can be possessed? He also believes that ghosts are disembodied human spirits and that ghosts can be tormented be demons. In one story he relates a story of a ghost that was hiding from what the ghost communicated was the "Dark Man" (demon). When a demon is present, people can sense an instant subtle change in the atmosphere of the house or location. Once a demon is cast, out it may return and may bring friends. Dr. Pyatt also believes that property can be possessed.

Pyatt's Approach to Exorcism

Pyatt believes people can have the God-given gift of discernment. With this sense of discernment, people can sense when demons are near and when a person or property is possessed. We should look to God for guidance on all things, including exorcism. Catholics require diocese bishop approval "Official Permission" to perform exorcism. Dr. Pyatt feels all Christians have the authority. In contradistinction to Catholic exorcism, ritualism is not Biblical. In the Bible, exorcisms were plain and simple. For Pyatt, Christians don't need anything more than Jesus and the Holy Spirit. Not by our power but the power of Christ, simple faith on what Jesus promised He would do for us. Likewise, he views Holy or blessed items, such as crosses or Holy water, as having no innate power. In addition he feels knowing the name of the demon has no bearing what-so-ever on the success or failure of an exorcism.

For Pyatt the purpose of exorcism is to bring glory to God and not the exorcist. He warns anyone who uses paranormal or metaphysical powers for selfish means or profit should be avoided.

Pyatt has a Shot-gun exorcism (his definition) he uses when there is no definite target. He asks the Holy Spirit to touch everyone in the room. He references God as the One to whom he represents, the One who is with him. When he addresses the demons, he talks to them as if they are human adversaries. He takes the fight out of them by making them expend lots of energy by getting them angry and upset. Not sure if it is the demon that gets tired or the host. This may take many hours. Typically, the demon will leave suddenly and everyone will notice a sense of lightness in the room.

Demons

Pyatt relates a number of characteristics of demons in his book. First off, in secular paranormal genre, they are often referred to as elementals or poltergeists. Demons have a hierarchy. Prime demons are the most powerful of the demons and the subordinate, or lesser demons are less powerful. In spite of popular belief, demons are not in Hell. They are roaming around hunting. Not only do demons have the ability to speak but they have a will, intelligence, emotions and they are self-aware. Demons can make mistakes and have negative reactions.

Pyatt's Take on Ghosts

Pyatt does not have a problem with ghosts being disembodied spirits, although Some Churches teach the belief that ghosts are demons. There is no proof-positive either way and there is nothing pro or con in the Bible about ghosts being departed humans. Pyatt also makes the claims that ghosts cannot be exorcised because they are not demons.

Pyatt’s take on Sensitives

People that are 'Sensitive' can sense demons and ghosts. He warns us to be wary of them and extremely cautious because many are charlatans. He says there is nothing wrong with someone who is a sensitive. The only wrong part is if they use their gift for personal gain.

The Rite: The Making of a Modern Exorcist
by Matt Baglio

This was a good book, well written and engaging. I really liked the Catholic treatment of exorcism. They seem to have a very balance approach, not falling into the extremes such as seeing every illness as possession and not denying all possessions as frauds or myth. I have seen other Protestants criticism of Catholics for relying too much on the superstitious use of relics like crucifixes as if they were somehow endowed with magical power or having some spiritual energy or force in and of themselves. According to Baglio the focus is on the power of God and the faith of the exorcist and that the Rite and relics are only aids. Baglio quotes Father Candido Amantini, "We can do only our best, and then we must leave the final decision up to God."

Book: Secrets from Beyond the Grave, By Perry Stone

I actually never finished reading the book; I just could not get myself to finish it. I might add I am fairly open minded about differing points of view and willing to hear someone out. While some assertions where logical many where unsubstantiated. The hermeneutics are poor throughout the book. For example his claim that hell is under the Dead Sea or that it is one of many gateways to hell from here on Earth. The passages (biblical references) he uses are out of context and many require an illogical leap. Other points he makes in the book I have no issue with, however there is nothing new or groundbreaking on those topics. Sorry, I wanted to like it.

Secrets from Beyond The Grave

Post from previous blog. 

 

In reply Jesus declared, "I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again." "How can a man be born when he is old?" Nicodemus asked. "Surely he cannot enter a second time into his mother's womb to be born!" Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit. Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit. You should not be surprised at my saying, 'You must be born again.' The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit." - John 3:3-8 (NIV)

Parenting is such a hard job. I have to admit that being a parent sounds like a good idea until the weight of the responsibility kicks in. I was thinking the other day about how the apple does not fall far from the tree and that reminded me of far too many examples in my life. I could not help but pray that God would protect my children from my mistakes and shortcomings. I want the best for them and often feel I don't do enough. Of course, some parents do too much and that ends up bad for the children too.

I recently finished reading, "The Devil's Delusion, Atheism and it Scientific Pretentions" by David Berlinski. His book covers a number of topics and issues with current research posing as scientific. Science will never be able to prove the existence of God or the non-existence. Yet Atheists will tell you that science disproves God. It does not. It also does not 'prove' evolution. A common misconception.

Kevin Bacon plays a marine again. He is a Lt. Col. who decides to take a fallen Marine home. The movie starts off showing the care the US military takes in moving those who have given the last full measure back to their family. Along the way the Coronel meets mostly sympathetic people and the occasional jerk.  

Knowing & The Day the Earth Stood Still

Crazy Love, what a crazy book! The book does a great job of focusing on the important things of life. I think Christians should spend more time focused on the Love of God and not all the other crap we get tied to. Francis Chan starts the book with this question, "How many of you have read the New Testament and wondered if we in the church are missing it?" He also brings up the story that he almost joined the Marines. He would have made a great Marine. 

Even Almighty (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0413099/) starting Steve Carell, Morgan Freeman and Lauren Graham, is actually a great movie. Generally when you have someone create a movie about God there is often major theological issues with it. Not so much with this movie. Some of that main themes are pro environmentalism and family and it is against government waste and corruption. The story is about Even Baxter a modern day Noah and his journey to build an ark. His wife ends up upset over his building of the ark and decides to leave when she runs into God posing as a waiter at a restaurant. One of his statements to her was so profound I wanted to watch it again. This is what he said.

"Let me ask you something. If someone prays for patience, you think God gives them patience? Or does he give them the opportunity to be patient? If he prayed for courage, does God give him courage, or does he give him opportunities to be courageous? If someone prayed for the family to be closer, do you think God zaps them with warm fuzzy feelings, or does he give them opportunities to love each other?"

I need sleep but can't sleep because I need to write this.