Category: Christianity

Being a Biblicist Trumps Creeds and Confessions

~ vainjanglings ~ Leave a comment

Vain Jangling
I am a Biblicist.

Being called a Biblicist is not a bad thing. A Biblicist is someone who believes the Bible is to be taken literally, word for word. They claim to hold to its authority, as the Word of God, over their own.

However, sometimes a Biblicist can dismiss Creeds and Confessions as if they are of little or no importance, with little or no value. Because Creeds and Confessions are not the Word of God, they are not the authority but are rather the words and works of men. But this is merely vain jangling.

Creeds and Confessions have been written by those who hold to the authority of Scripture. Their works do not provide a new authority outside of the Word of God, but an explanation and defense of the doctrines within the Bible. Thus, their works can be read, studied, argued for/against, as presented to those who desire to know spiritual things.

If one easily dismisses Creeds and Confessions by claiming to be a Biblicist, then it could potentially lead to an authoritarian leadership. How so? With no defined Confession, only the pastor, teacher, or person’s beliefs may become the authority of what Scripture teaches. And when their beliefs change, all are expected to follow without question.

Trump MAGA

~ vainjanglings ~ Leave a comment

Vain Jangling
Trump will make America great again.

America has spoken and reelected the 45th President to serve again as the 47th President.

A lot of people are excited for the White House, House, and Senate to be majority Republican, conservative, etc. with the hope of bringing balance to the force —I mean— a balanced budget, balanced morality, balanced reality to our Republic.

It is true that the President, House, and Senate have elected power to do certain things to bring about a better America. However, they are only one (federal, political) level and one (physical, spiritual) aspect. We still have elected and non-elected persons throughout America (and elsewhere) who will continue to fight that which is good and sew that which is evil. In reality, “these three” may not always make the right decision or at least choices that align with what (we) would prefer and hope for. So, it is mere vain jangling to think (we) can sit down (now that we have voted who we wanted into office). Evil never rest. Therefore, every one of us need to remain vigilant and continue to stand to ensure good, morality, and the like continue to increase throughout our land.

Mothers Innocent of Murder

~ vainjanglings ~ Leave a comment

Vain Jangling
Only medical professionals who perform abortions are murderers.

There appears to be some debate —among those who declare themselves pro-life, who profess a desire to end abortion— as to who should and should not be held accountable for murder. Even when focusing only on those who believe abortion (the ending of a baby’s life within the womb) is murder at any point after conception.

In agreement with Scripture, individuals are understood to be human at the moment of creation (conception), within the womb. (see Esau & Jacob [Genesis 25:23], Jeremiah [Jeremiah 1:5], and John the Baptist [Luke 1:15]) Equally, the Bible defines murder as the taking of another’s life, is punishable by death [Genesis 6:9], and worthy of the judgment of God [Revelation 21:8]. Likewise, we have laws that condemn and sentence those who take another’s life.

The consensus seems to be clear: any medical professional who performs or takes part in an abortion (the murder of a child) is considered a murderer and should be prosecuted by the law as one.

Where the dissension comes: is whether a mother who (uncoerced) decides to have an abortion (to have her unborn child murdered at home with pills or by a medical professional in an office) is likewise guilty of murder.

Then proceeds the vain jangling:
(1) coerced: we have laws that determine murders forced by coercion and how they are dealt with. (2) miscarriage: we have laws that determine one’s innocence when accused wrongfully. (3) victim: we have laws that determine if being a victim of an act against you deems you innocent (or not punishably guilty) for an act against (whether related or unrelated) another person. (etc.)

When asked directly: is a mother innocent if she chooses to murder her children outside of the womb —some will go to countless obscure measures to avoid simply answering the question. Why? Because if a mother is guilty of the murder of her child by murdering her child or paying for someone to murder her child outside of the womb, then what kind of vain jangling does it take to believe a mother who murders the child at home with a prescription or seeks the help of a medical professional is not also guilty of murder?

Then: if she be guilty, why do we only believe the medical professionals should be held accountable? Or, perhaps more importantly: who will God hold accountable? Neither shall the father who desires such murder in his heart be blameless. Thankfully —by the grace of God— there is forgiveness through repentance and faith in Jesus Christ for all who have taken another’s life. However, consequences for the living remain and the lives lost are gone from this world forever.

My Misfortune is Proof There is No God

~ vainjanglings ~ Leave a comment

Vain Jangling
My [misfortune] is proof there is no God.

Human pride will allow all sorts of nonsense to spew forth from our tongues of vanity.

If one chooses to dismiss the general revelation of nature, history, scripture, and personal testimony of the converted—to continue their faith (or hope in unbelief) that there is no God—that is their choice. However, it only shows their ignorance or willful foolishness when they try to attribute their misfortune as proof God does not exist. As if they are somehow so important, if God did exist, he would ensure their happiness, their success superseded and overcame any trial, obstacle, or disappointment they might (yet do not want to) experience.

However, this is not something only non-Christians convey. When we declare (verbally or internally) that our misfortune is somehow proof that God does not exist, God does not love us, or God is not truly sovereign, we actually display a lack of faith, belief, and understanding of Christianity and what it means to be a follower of Christ. It is mere vain jangling for the purpose of bringing attention to our high view of self and our dissatisfaction (low view) of God. 

Fear of Debate

~ vainjanglings ~ Leave a comment

Vain Jangling
unnecessary debates

It should be quite telling when persons (political or otherwise) who spout accusations, information (or mis/disinformation) from their (political/media) platforms —where they can ignore or control the narrative and questions— yet refuse to debate with those who disagree with them. Especially, if they feel empowered enough to call out their “opponent” (by name or association) in their rhetoric.

If there is a conversation in church, society, political arena, important enough to be expressed via platform/media, etc., important enough to name call or warn, then why is it not important enough to have dialogue in an open forum where persons can hear the information, listen to the arguments, and draw their own conclusions? This would encourage thinking, involvement, communication.

To claim such discussions are “unnecessary debates”, while indulging them in a “safety bubble” is mere vain jangling.

Consistent with [named] Faith

~ vainjanglings ~ Leave a comment

Vain Jangling
What I believe is conistent with [named] faith.

Organized faiths, religions, denominations, cults, etc. have at least a basic set of foundational beliefs, confessions, catechisms; whereby, they are often known and distinguished from the others. One may find various discrepancies among individuals, but it does not change the consistent, core principals of said faith, etc. 

One cannot rightly say, “The fundamental tenets of my faith compel me to…” say or do something that does not aligned with that faith’s core tenets. That is mere vain jangling. It is true that you may believe it (whatever it is), but you cannot associate it with the faith whereby it disagrees. It would be a personal conviction (or preference), which may or may not align itself with said faith.

Example: (baptism)
Some faiths believe in infant baptism and others do not. Some practice full immersion and others sprinkling. I am free to say I believe in infant baptism, immersion, or sprinkling, but I cannot say my belief is one of my faith’s “fundamental tenets” if it is not. That is vain jangling.

If my belief is condemned by my said faith, then I should change my said faith or change my belief. I cannot nor should not expect said faith to validate or accept my departure from their core tenets.

The Vote Was Racist

~ vainjanglings ~ Leave a comment

Vain Jangling
“Their vote was racist.” And a result of a “White supremacist system.”

A “White supremacist system” voted in non-Whites to serve. So, it is fair to ask, how “White supremacist” can it be? Any vote or non-vote based on a person’s color could be racist, whether done by Whites or non-Whites. Credentials and character should be considered. Can/will they do a good job? Do/will they promote my views, morals, etc.?

A “racist vote” was because persons (who happen to be two non-Whites and a female) were found to have broken (standing) “House rules.” That is not the definition of a “racist vote.” It seems rather a vote based on persons breaking the rules set forth to have productive dialogue (in a time when silencing or cancelling the opposition is preferred). However, (silencing, cancelling, racist) does not seem to be the case, because there is a process the three could have followed that adheres to “House rules.”

Comparing the three individuals to Christ and the two thieves crucified, because the expulsion apparently took place on the eve of Good Friday is mere vain jangling. Who is the Christ? Who is the theif who said, “If thou be Christ, save thyself and us”? Insinuating that one cannot be a Christian, while supporting the 2nd Amendment and being a Republican, is likewise vain jangling. Let us remember that the religious crowd —those screaming the loudest “Crucify him” to stir up the people—crucified Jesus. Everyone of us who has ever committed a transgression is reason Christ hung upon that tree. Jesus —neither Black nor White— was not “lynched by the government on Friday” but “laid down his life” (it was not taken from him) for those who will repent of sin and put faith in him.

Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren. [1 John 3:16]

Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father. [John 10:17-18]

It is interesting that such statements (seemingly) stem from the recent school shooting in Tennessee. One can only hope that the same amount of time, energy, and emotion is being given to taking care of the families who just endured horrific murders and are working to equip schools and law enforcement to protect against such murderers. Focusing on banning guns and racism is a distraction, mere vain jangling.