tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5896824106005543598.comments2010-02-13T00:35:57.047-05:00Musings "de muchos colores" . . .Roger P. Felipehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15474327138108376392noreply@blogger.comBlogger39125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5896824106005543598.post-32958735444324994922009-11-27T10:09:17.866-05:002009-11-27T10:09:17.866-05:00Hi Roger: OnTheMarc has said it all. I, too, hope ...Hi Roger: OnTheMarc has said it all. I, too, hope you keep blogging.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18191143932030856195noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5896824106005543598.post-19330917283733133162009-02-20T02:18:00.000-05:002009-02-20T02:18:00.000-05:00Hi Roger! You know, I thank God for you. We have...Hi Roger! You know, I thank God for you. We have been force-fed these far reaching parallels drawn by the left comparing Obama with Lincoln. I assure you that this quote would not see the light of day on any mainstream media outlet. Yet, with all of Obamas assertions as to his faith and his claim to be a man that believes in and follows Christ, I think that someone should read this quote to him and ask for his reaction. We would likely get a laundry list of platitudes and rhetoric but certainly no condemnation of sin or even an admission that sin exists. I hope you keep blogging. I stopped. I don't have much stomach for it anymore.OnTheMarchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09947275179353211135noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5896824106005543598.post-9912348022078289432009-02-11T19:45:00.000-05:002009-02-11T19:45:00.000-05:00I took the representation of the Trinity to be a w...I took the representation of the Trinity to be a way of presenting the trinity to break stereotypes we have that are untrue. I was skeptical at first, but found the point was the message behind it, not the male vs. female issues.Cohrs Compilationshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00130466011262115786noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5896824106005543598.post-74477306471486339442009-02-05T11:10:00.000-05:002009-02-05T11:10:00.000-05:00I'm taking my time to read through Ehrman's book r...I'm taking my time to read through Ehrman's book rigtht now. I would consider the time I have for reading and the interest in the subject matter before me as factors for intensive reading. The book will be discussed among some circles and its conclusions will fill the air. We can't get to everything, but again Ehrman is read by the public and it might be to our best interest to be aware of his beliefs and conclusions.Roger P. Felipehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15474327138108376392noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5896824106005543598.post-55673439442019956712009-02-05T10:19:00.000-05:002009-02-05T10:19:00.000-05:00Although the answer to the problem of evil isn't i...Although the answer to the problem of evil isn't in the Bible, it is right under our noses.<BR/><BR/>http://www.the-god-question.com/theodicy.html<BR/><BR/>I read both Sam Harris books and Richard Dawkins's "The God Delusion" last year. Is the Ehrman book worth the read even though its theme, that the Bible doesn't explain why we suffer, is something we already know?<BR/><BR/>R.D.Roman Daweshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07238117732805645998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5896824106005543598.post-83904192521486066372008-11-28T20:45:00.000-05:002008-11-28T20:45:00.000-05:00Happy thanksgiving.When you get a chance please ch...Happy thanksgiving.<BR/><BR/>When you get a chance please check out: www.thegiftrevolution.com<BR/><BR/>thankyouAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5896824106005543598.post-49457604439173851372008-11-24T14:02:00.000-05:002008-11-24T14:02:00.000-05:00Great post.It's sad, however, that the same pe...Great post.<BR/><BR/>It's sad, however, that the same people who wish to uphold (1) the sanctity of marriage and therefore (2) the traditional definition of marriage are the very same group of people whose divorce rates are (embarrassingly) high. On the whole, it seems that there is no true sanctity in their very own marriage to legitimize or substantiate their own efforts to uphold (1) & (2). We need to remove the log in our eye by humbly exemplifying the true sanctity of marriage in our own concrete lives, rather than reprimanding others whose speck in their eye is largely the result of our inability to be living examples of "holy matrimony". The question of the "definition" of marriage, while important, only touches the surface of the true problem: Phariseean hypocrisy.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5896824106005543598.post-90229639352921016872008-11-19T22:03:00.000-05:002008-11-19T22:03:00.000-05:00Trust He is in charge no matter what we thinkTrust He is in charge no matter what we thinkAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5896824106005543598.post-36633753511734547682008-11-17T14:28:00.000-05:002008-11-17T14:28:00.000-05:00Well said Roger. I agree with everything you wrote...Well said Roger. I agree with everything you wrote. It is about time the Christian Church in the United States wake up, and starts working more in the mission field. And not only that, but I think we also need to spend more time reading and studying the Word of God, and training new believers so they can live according with the Christian’s principles we find in the Bible. This is probably why some believers vote for the wrong candidate in the presidential elections; because they didn’t know what they were doing. Thanks for your article.<BR/>José A. AlbaredaAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5896824106005543598.post-74907960431499975122008-11-14T09:39:00.000-05:002008-11-14T09:39:00.000-05:00Roger; Thanks for emailing me your Blog site. I en...Roger; Thanks for emailing me your Blog site. I enjoyed your reflection very much. Keep me in your email list when you post something new.Good Job! May God Bless your efforts to spread the Gospel.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5896824106005543598.post-5000242026980418482008-11-14T00:21:00.000-05:002008-11-14T00:21:00.000-05:00I really enjoy reading your blog Roger. You wrote,...I really enjoy reading your blog Roger. <BR/><BR/>You wrote, "The church, if it is anything, must be a missionary church, or missional (if you want to be edgy) in its perspective on people. It must be willing to seek the lost (sorry if you don’t like the word), invade secular space, get in the mire, and enter darkness so that the light of the gospel has an opportunity to beam into the lostness."<BR/><BR/>Well said my friend. The church is not the place of arrival but the vehicle for the message... the means, not the end. <BR/><BR/>I will have to pick up a copy of this book.Tommyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09140602151615474383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5896824106005543598.post-6421582477580110612008-11-13T20:10:00.000-05:002008-11-13T20:10:00.000-05:00Roger I really enjoy reading your blog. You wrote...Roger I really enjoy reading your blog. <BR/><BR/>You wrote, "The church, if it is anything, must be a missionary church, or missional (if you want to be edgy) in its perspective on people. It must be willing to seek the lost (sorry if you don’t like the word), invade secular space, get in the mire, and enter darkness so that the light of the gospel has an opportunity to beam into the lostness."<BR/><BR/>Well said. I couldn't agree more.Tommyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09140602151615474383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5896824106005543598.post-25172743233096265512008-10-14T20:47:00.000-04:002008-10-14T20:47:00.000-04:00Roger I wish I could of been there to see that dia...Roger I wish I could of been there to see that dialogue...God Bless You.orlando cabrerahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00291864856545251079noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5896824106005543598.post-16599039321280369612008-10-07T17:11:00.000-04:002008-10-07T17:11:00.000-04:00I love to learn knew things. It is a blessing that...I love to learn knew things. It is a blessing that you take the time to share what you have read with others(US) Thank youFocus Uphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15206936271247047633noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5896824106005543598.post-33629353550851255552008-09-13T10:55:00.000-04:002008-09-13T10:55:00.000-04:00My blog on Monday, August 11, 2008"If God is Sover...My blog on Monday, August 11, 2008<BR/>"If God is Sovereign, then Evil?" touches on this subject of God's sovereignty. I think it is helpful in answering, in part, the question of those who suffered in Cuba as a result of the hurricanes. A passage for your consideration is Luke 13. I wonder if God is trying to show his "vengeance" over the sins of the people in Galveston and Houston. Some in Cuba today believe that God is sending these storms for the explicit reason of leading the nation to repentance (I've received some emails this week). Others believe that God will use the storms to help them think of their need to him and of eternal matters. Now, can someone help us understand the purpose(s)for hurricanes? Doesn't it have to to with dispersing the heat concentrated and accumulating in one area, and pushinhg the heat upward from the tropics to the north pole? I believe the Bible does teach that at times God is intentional in sending things directly by his divine will. He is God, Sovereign, and will accomplish his purpose for us and the planet. When a hurricane, a tornado, and earthquake, or someting else is directly sent by God, or allowed by God, I can't tell you. That he is in control and has a purpose (which many times I can't understand or figure out)is something clear in Scripture.Roger P. Felipehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15474327138108376392noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5896824106005543598.post-5915293283615295982008-09-10T22:06:00.000-04:002008-09-10T22:06:00.000-04:00Hey Roger, God Bless you for this blog... always t...Hey Roger, God Bless you for this blog... always the professor! I have a comment on your post too.<BR/><BR/>I don't understand the anger at the Left's hypocrisy on this. I believe it is expected and beyond that... I believe it has a very positive reason for existing. Just as the Bible warns that teachers of the Word will be held to higher standards, a parallel can be drawn to Christians and non-Christians.<BR/>We should not follow or apply the world's rules in our lives. We are not of this world and we have been warned that we are hated by it. When we as Christians act like those that are of the world, we need its' scrutinizing, evil eye upon us. <BR/>Getting angry about it makes us seem like we are desirous of being measured by secular standards. Instead, I say lets thank God for this constant source of accountability. With the right mindset, these hypocrites can be a huge blessing in this regard. We are measured against the standards set by the Lord of the Universe. All in all, considering the diseased nature of the God-less, "hypocrite" is of the mildest accusations one could raise.<BR/><BR/>In conclusion, let us thank those who persecute us for our sins.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5896824106005543598.post-53673664475348875582008-09-10T00:29:00.000-04:002008-09-10T00:29:00.000-04:00"it seems to me we have to be extra careful when m..."it seems to me we have to be extra careful when making these judgment calls, even if they may be true."<BR/><BR/>I have always wondered why people seem to struggle with the truth or falsehood of such a statement.<BR/>If it is true statement, then it is not a mere judgment but rather a statement of fact, i.e. truth. A judgment call is an opinionated thought and may not be true at all. It thus cannot be classified as a fact. <BR/><BR/>So either God sends hurricanes to Cuba because of the people's sin, or he does not. If it is true then there need not be any concern with it being a judgment call. If it is true, then why are we apologetic about it. I think that the concerns thoughtful Christians may have with making such a statement are born, not out of the truth of the comment, but rather with the obvious moral implications of such a thought.<BR/><BR/>First I don't think God "sends" hurricanes to Cuba or New Orleans to punish sinners, rather he "allows" these natural disasters to occur. There is a very important distinction between "sending" and "allowing". That very difference was a major point of Roger's analysis of Jeremiah. The danger in turning from God is not necessarily the "sending" of chaos but rather the "allowing" of it. <BR/><BR/>That being said there is an obvious problem with my argument. There are examples in the Bible of what seems to be God "sending" death and destruction towards a sinning people. The book of Exodus is a prime example. God "sent" the plagues to Egypt. I suppose these could be reconciled by pointing to the fact that this was a very special circumstance, an exception to the general rule that God does not take an active part in sending death to humans.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5896824106005543598.post-1953045310549259572008-09-09T10:09:00.000-04:002008-09-09T10:09:00.000-04:00Roger, thanks for your insightful posts.With the h...Roger, thanks for your insightful posts.<BR/><BR/>With the hurricane-ravaged state of Cuba in mind, a lot of Christians are saying that God sends hurricanes toward Cuba out of "vengeance," due to the sins of its people; for turning away from God.<BR/><BR/>It seems to me we have to be extra careful when making these judgment calls, even if they may be true.<BR/><BR/>In light of your readings of Jeremiah, what do you think?<BR/><BR/>I pray for Cuba, and hope God shows mercy on its people.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5896824106005543598.post-11554857907151858872008-09-04T08:30:00.000-04:002008-09-04T08:30:00.000-04:00This is great food for thought. I think I will wr...This is great food for thought. I think I will write about this as well. Thank you for stirring my brain!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5896824106005543598.post-54848225475508005722008-09-03T12:28:00.000-04:002008-09-03T12:28:00.000-04:00That's why I like you, Tommy. You are always objec...That's why I like you, Tommy. You are always objective. I understand that we too can be accused of hypocrisy. My main point in the post is about criticism based on teenage pregnancy when this is assumed and encouraged by our society. In terms of the care of her children, Gov. Palin is a working mom who apparently has a system in place for the care of her children that will be extended further if she and McCain are elected. In addition, you (and others) are assuming that the family crisis in her home is out of control. Sarah and Todd are loving their daughter through this period in her life and are supportive of her and the unborn child. Sarah has chosen to stay with the child and will soon get married. This is the tension and reality of the modern family, whether Christian or not. Should are lives be better? Yes. Many families have been able to navigate through modern pressures and come out with less emotional injuries. But, think about this for a moment. Absolute truth remains contant, whether or not someone wants to abide by it or refuses to submit to it. The rejection of the truth behind abstinence doesn't nullify the morality taught at home. Many are the pastors who have preached the pure gospel and yet their children have rejected the ways of Christ and have gone wayward (Billy Graham and Franklin Graham, for example). I concede that we can be attacked for hypocrisy. But, we are Christians, not necessarily because our lives can be better (they often are), but because Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life.Roger P. Felipehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15474327138108376392noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5896824106005543598.post-83973750472869902702008-09-03T11:19:00.000-04:002008-09-03T11:19:00.000-04:00Could have not said it better. Great work.Could have not said it better. Great work.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5896824106005543598.post-55218242134312647552008-09-03T10:55:00.000-04:002008-09-03T10:55:00.000-04:00Hey Roger -- I hear what you're saying, and I agre...Hey Roger -- I hear what you're saying, and I agree with most of your post, but I do think we need to be careful here, lest WE be the ones who sound like the hypocrites talking out of both sides of our mouth. It cuts both ways, and I would've stayed away from defending this issue with a ten-foot pole for these reasons:<BR/><BR/>1) WE are the ones who talk about the fact that the abstinence message works better than the "Safe Sex" message. Oops! So much for abstinence; from a family that claims to be a conservative, Godly, Christian household. It plays right into the other side's hands that maybe they should've also taught about the importance of Safe Sex. I agree that parents can't control the behavior of their children; nor should be held responsible for the actions of their kids -- but it just doesn't bode well to our argument that "our way" works better. It's an ancedotal argument, but it puts the issue out-front-and-center; and they will use it against us.<BR/><BR/>2) Secondly, WE are the ones who preach the virtues of the "traditional" home, and the importance of mothers making children the priority of their lives. We are the ones who criticize the Left when they place career over family, and personal ambition over the high priority of raising their children.<BR/><BR/>Here is a mother who has 5 children -- most still at home; a baby who has Down Syndrome; and a troubled teenaged daughter who obviously is "acting out," and the mother thinks it is more imprtant to be the Vice President of the United States than taking care of her children? Hello? I'm sorry, but I have serious issues with this, and I think we are the ones who look like huge hypocrites.<BR/><BR/>Where are the Family Values here? Where is the dedication to Biblical principles of home and family especially in the light of the mother's role as we understand it from the Bible? This ticket is certainly not winning the vote of Christian home-schooling parents! <BR/><BR/>Again, my issue is not that the daughter got pregenant -- It is how they have chosen to deal with it; and how conservatives will be portrayed with handling this. The children need their mother!! And that's the issue here. We have to be consistent here -- Do we believe in the traditional roles of parenting or no? Do we believe it is more important to raise your children or run a State / country? Sorry -- I want to be seen as a little more consistent in my talk / walk.<BR/><BR/>That's my 2-cents :-)Tommy Carringtonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02357689700461097820noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5896824106005543598.post-80751275362175987882008-08-29T11:20:00.000-04:002008-08-29T11:20:00.000-04:00Thanks for keeping me anonymous, Just kidding Not ...Thanks for keeping me anonymous, <BR/>Just kidding Not sure why it posted like that I did sign my name.<BR/><BR/>BTW when I said I was teaching the kids I meant, kids for real, elemantary.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5896824106005543598.post-32786819119540241572008-08-28T16:34:00.000-04:002008-08-28T16:34:00.000-04:00Hey Alex, Yes, both sets of the 10 commandments we...Hey Alex, <BR/><BR/>Yes, both sets of the 10 commandments were represented by Jesus' answer: The selling of the possessions represented the second part of the Commandments which deal with others, and the following part dealt with commitment to God, or the first section of the C. The RYR was unwilling to do either; he really wasn't as righteous as he thought. <BR/> <BR/>It would be good with the youth to take them back to this passage in the future and help them wrestle with the "works" aspect of the passage in relationship to inheriting the kingdom or eternal life, or abundance of life, now and in the future. A lot of people believe that the RYR passages teach complete submission before one can receive salvation. <BR/> <BR/>Thanks for your input. <BR/> <BR/>RRoger P. Felipehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15474327138108376392noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5896824106005543598.post-31305063024744065382008-08-28T16:30:00.000-04:002008-08-28T16:30:00.000-04:00Hey bro, I have been going over this passage latel...Hey bro, <BR/><BR/>I have been going over this passage lately and today I read your blog.<BR/><BR/>Here are some of my thought with some help from Walvoord and Zuck.<BR/><BR/>Interestingly, when Jesus makes reference to the commandments the rich guy says, 'yeah, i got those covered'<BR/><BR/>Jesus does not point out the ones he has broken. ie. Don't have false gods and don't covet.<BR/><BR/>Instead he tells him to show he does not covet and give away his possesions which eventually proves that he has a false god too.<BR/><BR/>****************<BR/><BR/>On another point this story is great to compare and contrast with the story of Zacheus which is the next chapter. That is how I got into this I was talking to the kids about the RYR and noticed that this story followed.<BR/><BR/>*Both rich and somewhat rulers<BR/>*both addressng Jesus for salvation<BR/>*Totally different attitudes towards Jesus' responseAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com