Blogs

When God created man in the person of Adam, He used inanimate matter to create that man.  Most of us who are “believers” must consider that statement, in some form, as a component of our credo (a Latin word meaning, “I believe’).  In other words, in order to be a believer, one must have a set of beliefs – a set of things one believes to be true.  If, for example, one professes to be an atheist, part of that person’s belief set (credo) is the proposition that there is no god.  When we use the term believer, though, we generally refer to the large body of persons who “believe” in God and in the redemptive work of Jesus the Christ.  Our beliefs may vary considerably in the specific details and in the degree of commitment to them, but these are somewhere in the individual credo.  Interestingly, they are not necessarily viable in the set of persons who acquiesce to some creed which does not require they be considered and examined. I say this because such a person cannot actually believe that which he/she has not examined in light of the other things such a person also professes to believe. In the case before us is the simple statement: “So God created man in his own image . .” (Genesis 1:27, NIV, [...]

Often, when we contemplate Eden, we are disappointed by the behavior of Adam and Eve in the matter of the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.  In spite of his failure, though, Adam was designed to be a “pattern of the one to come” (Romans 5:14, NIV) in the intentions of God.  Moses was given a pattern to follow in the building of the tabernacle and its accoutrements, and God warned him to adhere to the pattern (Exodus 25:40, NIV).  In a prophetic vision, Amos saw the Lord with a plumb-line in His hand (Amos 7:7-9, NIV).  Patterns and plumb-lines – what do they mean to us?  Let’s consider that question for a moment. It was the Lord, Himself, who had the plumb-line in His hand when Amos encountered him in the vision.  It wasn’t Amos.  It wasn’t an angel.  It wasn’t a leader of the people.  It was the Lord, Himself.  When God shows up in a vision, it might be an important vision; at least that’s my take on it.  By implication, the plumb-line would be used to find out how accurately Israel was adhering to some standard(s) God had established.  If a standard were known, then the measurement of something relative to that standard would indicate whether the standard was being [...]

Often when we hear the word “primal” we think of something that is primitive or unrefined.  In our modern minds, that implies something inferior.  We may view the word as referring to something that is even impermissible in its simplicity, implying such other terms as “naïve” as synonyms.  It is not my intent to get into semantic disputes or to challenge a sophisticated and nuanced worldview.  Rather I intend to use the word “primal” in a particular way in what follows because we can thereby keep the discussion fairly pure. Herein, when I use the word “primal,” I mean original.  In this case we will discuss love in its original form.  I use primal to prevent any corruption of meaning from the outset because it is so uncommon to use the word in this (perfectly correct) form.  Further, in this blog, I use primal to mean absolutely “pure.”  Pure means untainted.  It means that the use escapes, to the extent I am capable, any adulteration by common usage of the term “love.” I am aware that both the terms “primal” and “love” are very abused in common parlance.  I hope herein to return some of the stature that belongs to them, if only momentarily. Their juxtaposition is very important to us in understanding the nature of God, and in [...]