Pass It On:

I was reading one of the blogs that I lurk on and I saw a post from the author on Christians and Homosexuality.  It was so full of biblical and category errors that I honestly think I know what the author meant, but I cannot even be sure what it would look like because the author is so far removed from making coherent, biblical sense.  Here’s a choice quote (talking about homosexuals):

We will debate the few biblical texts that are relevant to homosexuality for a few years yet [and we should], but the overwhelming weight of the biblical narrative, indeed the very core of the Gospel message is that God loves and accepts people unconditionally, especially those on the margins.

Stop and consider that for a moment.  That’s what I call the “liberal lobotomy”; it’s where you simply toss out self-contradictory words to describe your self-contradictory ideas about something and hope nobody asks any questions because you have some $0.02 biblical allusion in there somewhere (i.e. toss in “God is love” and people will be afraid to say anything because who in their right mind would doubt that God is love, right?).

The author is essentially saying “we’ll debate the passages that directly address the issue of homosexuality and marriage, but the passages that don’t directly address the issue are the ones that will define the range of acceptable interpretations”.  So, the plain and clear meaning of 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 is somehow overthrown by the “overwhelming weight of the biblical narrative”, which is usually shorthand for “whatever idea is en vogue in my circle”.  That’s not Christian thinking and it’s not even in the same area code as responsible biblical exegesis.  True Christians have been fighting the en vogue ideas from the very beginning of the church (temple prostitution, idolatry, gnosticism, etc.).

Until Next Time,

Lyndon “No, I won’t link to it” Unger

Pass It On:

Last night my wife and I had a realization that we need to be being more serious and intentional in learning how to be parents since, well, even though nobody likes to admit the fact no parents start off having a clue what they’re doing and fall into lazy and sinful habits without any effort.  So, I’ve changed around the contents of my “to listen to at work” stuff on my phone (like some good preaching on passages of scripture relevant to parenting – i.e. Eph. 6:1-4 or Deut. 6:4-9) and have changed around my current reading list to shift gears for the next while.  I’ve been thinking about Deuteronomy 6:7 this morning:

You shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise.

I’ve been realizing that, lo and behold, this is something I haven’t been doing nearly as much as I should (anyone else ever had that experience reading the scriptures?  No?  I’m alone on this?  Really?).  Also, I spent the morning wondering more about the meaning of “teach them diligently”, so on my lunch break I made a bee-line for my laptop to do a little word study and help me understand a little more what that entails.  So what does it mean?

Well, the Hebrew word is shanan, and it’s a rare term in the OT: it first appears in Deut. 6:7 and then only in Deut. 32:41; Psalm 45:5, 64:3, 73:21, 120:4, 140:3; Prov. 25:18; Is.5:28.

All the passages except Deut. 6:7 and Psalm 73:21 refer to either a sword/arrow being sharpened, or being sharp.  Psalm 73:21 says “When my soul was embittered, when I was pricked in heart“, but I’d possibly suggest another good translation would be “cut” (obviously related to “sharpness”).  So the idea of “teach them diligently” is actually the idea of sharpening, as one sharpens a sword/arrow/spear.  Let’s look at the expanded passage with that word picture in our mind:

 “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.  You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might. And these words that I command you today shall be on your heart. You shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise. You shall bind them as a sign on your hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes. You shall write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates.” (Deut. 6:4-9)

So the idea is that Israel was to love the Lord with their entire being, both inner and outer selves.  They needed to have the word of God living in their hearts, and they needed to sharpen their children in the art of obedience to Yahweh (vs. 4-7a)  This is done with repetition and constant exposure (vs. 7b-9).  So the idea is that the parent takes the child, who is a dull blade and in the same manner that one brings a dull blade repeatedly up against a whetstone to sharpen the blade to a point, the parent repeatedly brings the child up against the word of God to bring the child into obedience and submission to the Lord.

Knives don’t get sharp after one pass over a whetstone, and children don’t become godly after a few prayers or bible stories.  The idea in Deut. 6:4-9 is one of repetition and precision (you don’t smack a blade against a whetstone as well; anyone who’s ever manually sharpened a blade knows that it’s a precise work or the blade becomes mangled).  And that’s my lunch break.

Until Next Time,

Lyndon “Shananigans prevent Shenanigans” Unger

P.S. – I was fighting off a “shanan” pun.  Honestly I was.  I’m a weak and sleepy man…

Pass It On:

I’ve received a reader question from somebody that I love dearly so as I’ve got around 30 minutes of free time to do a little writing, I’ll answer the question.  The question has to do with whether or not Jesus went to Hell after the cross and why the Apostle’s Creed reads that Christ “descended into hell” (descendit ad inferna).  The problem is confounded in that not only does the phrase appear in the Apostles Creed, but it also is arguably insinuated in Acts 2:25-31, Romans 10:6-7, Ephesians 4:7-10, 1 Peter 3:18-20 and 1 Peter 4:6 (though due to time I won’t tackle the biblical texts but rather leave that to people who have already done a superior job to my possible offerings).[1]  So how do we unpack this idea and figure out what is going on in the Apostles’ Creed?

Well, let’s start with the Apostles Creed itself.   The Apostles Creed is unlike the Nicene Creed or the Chalcedonian definition in that it wasn’t a creed written by a church council but rather a summary statement of belief that evolved from a Roman Baptismal formula in the 2nd century and was expanded and edited for roughly 5 centuries.  The phrase “descended into hell” didn’t become a standard element of the Apostle’s Creed until at least the mid 7th century.[2]  The first recorded occurrence of the phrase “descended into hell” appears in the version of the creed used in the church in Aquileia that is commented upon by Rufinus in his Commentary on the Apostle’s Creed (written around 404 AD).  A digital and searchable copy of Rufinus’ work is here and he writes on the phrase “descended into hell”, saying:

Those who have handed down the Creed to us have most carefully specified the time at which these things were done, namely, ” under Pontius Pilate,” so that the tradition of these things should never in any respect vary, as though being vague or uncertain. Yet it should be known that the Creed of the Roman Church does not include the words ” He descended into Hell,” nor is this clause found in the Churches of the East. The meaning of the phrase, however seems to be the same as that of the words “He was buried.” (page 26)

So, even in Rufinus’ day there were multiple versions of the creed, some of which did not include the phrase, and even when it was included the phrase “descended into hell” was understood to refer to the grave.  One reason for this would be that in the Old Testament, the place of the dead was called by the Hebrew term “She’ol”, which had a wide semantic range that included the place of post-mortem suffering, the place of post-mortem blessing, and the grave itself.  In the day of Rufinus, She’ol was translated into Latin as inferna.[3]  The person reading the Latin Old Testament (known as the Vulgate) would regularly see inferna used as the term referring the both the place in which the bodies of the dead were placed, as well as the place to which dead people went, and it would have been a relatively common term in the Latin Old Testament (She’ol occurs 65 times in the Hebrew Old Testament).

So, I’ll cut the Apostle’s Creed discussion short here since, well, that essentially answers the question.  Now admittedly there’s lots of scholarly ink spilled here on which Early Church Fathers thought that Christ descended into Hell itself, whether or not they thought of inferna as “the grave” or something else, and what Christ did while in the inferna.  This whole debate is interesting, but I’d suggest that the weight of the evidence clearly lies in favor of the understanding of Rufinus; that Christ’s descending into hell simply is another way of restating that he actually, physically died (and consequently was actually, physically resurrected).

Until Next Time,

Lyndon “You got me.  This took more than 30 minutes” Unger

---

[1] These passages are all thoroughly dealt with by Wayne Grudem and he convincingly argues the conclusion that the idea of Christ’s descent into Hell is nowhere to be found in the scripture.  Wayne Grudem, “He Did Not Descend Into Hell: A Plea for Following Scripture instead of the Apostles Creed”, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, 34 no. 1 (March 1991), 103-113.  Also, for a comprehensive take on 1 Peter 3:18-20 (the main text that people appeal to for biblical support on this question), one should pick up William Kelly’s book Preaching to the Spirits in Prison, which goes through all 22 competing interpretations of 1 Peter 3:18-20 and gives the passage an exhaustive treatment.

[2] Michael D. Williams, “He Descended Into Hell?  An Issue of Confessional Integrity” Presbyterion 25 no 2 (Fall 1999), 82.

[3] James F. Kay, “He Descended Into Hell,” Word & World 31 no 1 (Winter 2011), 19.

Pass It On:

I have had an e-mail exchange going on with someone recently, and the topic turned to grieving and comfort.  I wrote the person something that I thought I would share as a little reminder on my blog.  It seems that often, in difficult situations where we’re around people who are suffering, we tend to forget the following:

Christians are supposed to “Love one another with brotherly affection.” (Rom. 12:10), “rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep” (Rom. 12:15) since in the body of Christ “if one member suffers, all suffer together…” (1 Cor. 12:26).  We’re supposed to comfort one another in our suffering (2 Cor. 13:11) and be kind and tenderhearted to one another (Eph. 4:32).  We’re supposed to encourage and build up one another (1 Thess. 5:11) and “consider how to stir up one another to love and good works” (Heb. 10:24).  God comforts us in our affliction so that the comfort that we receive from God may overflow into the lives of fellow believers who are afflicted around us (2 Cor. 1:3-4).  God is marked as being one who “comforts the downcast” (2 Cor. 7:6) and  of course he’s unquestionably our example to follow.  One must remember the new commandment that Christ gave believers: “A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another: just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another. By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.” (1 John 13:34-35).

There’s more than a few verses there that I need to commit to memory as I definitely don’t do those things as much as I ought.  When in doubt around someone who is suffering (not someone who is willfully sinning though), err on the side of love and comfort.  That, and I’m so thankful that I’m part of a church filled that has so many examples of love and comfort that I can learn those things from.

Until Next Time,

Lyndon “The Down Comforter” Unger

Pass It On:

I got an e-mail from someone recently who wanted to discuss issues related to pacifism and I wrote him a quick response, which I figured that I’d post on my blog as well.  Perhaps this can stimulate some discussion here, so here’s my response:

Mr. Richard Dawkins (name changed to prevent exposure of identity),

Good question!

Well I was raised in Mennonite Brethren circles where absolute pacifism was the rule.  This included non-resistance and opposition to any and all uses of violent force for any reason on any scale, and even people who were policemen were looked down upon.  My study of scripture has led me away from my theological upbringing.  As I understand the scripture, there are some ethical distinctions between the rules for personal violence/force and governmental/national violence/force:

1. On a personal level, there is a biblical expectation that Christians be people who are not marked by violent lifestyles.  We see this passages like 1 Peter 2:18-25 where we’re told to endure unjust treatment by corrupt masters without rebellion or revilement, for such is following the example of Christ.  We see this in the requirements for a biblical elder in 1 Timothy 3:3 and TItus 1:7, where part of the list of moral requirements for an elder includes him not being violent (one who strikes with the fist).  We see this in Romans 12:14-21 where Paul admonishes the believers in Rome to live as peaceable lives as possible, repaying evil with good and leaving personal vengeance up to the Lord.  Christians are to be marked as persons of peace, characterized by grace and compassion (even to those who hate and persecute them).

2.  On a national/corporate level, there is a biblical understanding that God has established the law (and those who uphold the law) for both cultivating fear in the wicked and the dispensation of justice to them (1 Tim. 1:8-11; Rom. 13:1-4).  God honoring justice purges evil from a society by punishing criminals for their wickedness (Deut. 19:15-21), and it is the Christians’ duty to support the right dispensation of justice in the form of paying taxes (Rom. 13:5-7).  The courts are not to be places peace, characterized by grace and compassion but rather justice.  As far as military action goes, it’s pretty hard to look at the Old Testament in a broad scope and suggest that somehow God doesn’t utilize national conflict unto similar ends (punishing the wicked and defending the righteous).  One sees that even the conquest of Canaan by the Israelites was actually both God giving the land of Canaan to the Israelites and God punishing the Canaanites for their idolatry; he warned the Amorites and gave them 400+ years to repent (Gen. 15:12-16).

So, I have no problem with Christians being police officers or soldiers, simply because applying personal ethical rules to the government, or any arm of the government, is a naive flattening out of the ethical teaching of scripture; the ethical standard of the pastor isn’t the same as the ethical standard for the paratrooper.  Yet, the Bible holds both pastor and paratrooper to an ethical standard but the Bible also has nuance to it’s ethics; for example it’s sinful for people to lie and yet in a time of war, deception is permissible (i.e. deception in the form of an ambush – like Joshua 8:1-9).

I hope that’s a helpful start to the discussion, and maybe that gives you a helpful hook to hang your thoughts on.

Longing for the day,

Lyndon

So, there are some quick thoughts about the issue.  I’ve often heard that Jesus’ ethic in Matthew 5 is the universal Christian ethic for all times, people and places, but the Bible doesn’t paint such a simplistic picture of people, government and the sword.  Either way, feel free to chime in with comments and questions.

Until Next Time,

Lyndon “The Armchair Hulkamaniac” Unger

P.S. – (Old school, mid 80′s TV wrestling was fully pacifist, right?  It was all acting!)

Pass It On:

So with my wife and I being in the throws of having a newborn, we’ve decided to read through the book of Acts at night (something familiar that our sleepy brains can grab).  Last night, we read Acts 1, and we ended up having quite a series of discussions, though not every idea we had ended up getting shared as we were fighting to stay awake.  Here’s some fruits of our reading and talk last night:

And while staying with them he ordered them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father, which, he said, “you heard from me; for John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now. – Acts 1:4-5

In Acts 1:5, Jesus makes a simple contrastive comparison between the baptism of John and the coming baptism that was imminent.  Looking at the verse a little closer, we see the contrast:

for John (the agent of baptism) baptized (immersed/dipped) with  (by means of) water (the  substance into which the baptism is performed)

but (in contrast to John’s baptism)

you (the apostles and listening audience) will be baptized (passive action; something done to them) with (by means of/into) the Holy Spirit (the person into which the baptism is performed) not many days from now (soon).

In John’s baptism, there was a man sent by God (John 1:6) who baptized people for the repentance of sins (Mark 1:4-5), immersing them in water (Mark 1:10) to emerge from the water into living righteous lives (Luke 3:10-13).

In the coming baptism, God the Father would send God the Spirit (John 14:26) due to his promise (Acts 1:4) and at the request of God the Son (John 14:16), and God the father would immerse believers into the Holy Spirit to become free from the bondage of sin and death (Rom. 6:1-14) and part of the church; the body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:13), never to emerge (since believers are forever “in Christ” and “in the Spirit” – Rom. 8:1-39).

All this to say that the baptism of the Holy Spirit isn’t something esoteric or mystical, and it definitely isn’t someone standing up in church and jabbering nonsense verbiage (even out of a sincere heart that desires to do nothing but please the Lord).  The Baptism of the Holy Spirit is a one time event that all believers experience, and it’s a unilateral act of God the Father and God the Son that is done to believers.  We don’t earn it or force God’s hand to get it; even in Acts all that they were doing was sitting and waiting for it to happen.  Finally, we don’t ever emerge from it; we’re baptized into the Spirit, period.

Some food for reflection.

Until Next Time,

Lyndon “The Dipped Doulos” Unger

Pass It On:

Quick thought as my wife and I were getting in a few burning-eyed moments in the scripture before attempting to get half-half-dozen hours of sleep while our newborn slept.  Right after the ten commandments in Exodus 20:1-21, comes this rather interesting section:

And the Lord said to Moses, “Thus you shall say to the people of Israel: ‘You have seen for yourselves that I have talked with you from heaven. You shall not make gods of silver to be with me, nor shall you make for yourselves gods of gold. An altar of earth you shall make for me and sacrifice on it your burnt offerings and your peace offerings, your sheep and your oxen. In every place where I cause my name to be remembered I will come to you and bless you. If you make me an altar of stone, you shall not build it of hewn stones, for if you wield your tool on it you profane it. And you shall not go up by steps to my altar, that your nakedness be not exposed on it.”

Now at first glance, it seems like God is stringing together a bunch of relatively unrelated thoughts, but upon a closer and more careful inspection, you discover that this passage deals with the logical questions following the ten commandments.  The ten commandments were the summation of God’s self-revelation to Israel under Moses; a very broad picture of who he is by describing what he’s like. God let Israel know more about him by revealing several dozen of his characteristics.

Several dozen?  But there’s only 10 commandments!

Yup.  Several dozen, if not a hundred or more.

Consider just Exodus 20:2 and consider what he says about himself as you take only the first clause in the verse:

- “I am the Lord your God…”

1. He is self revealing – The quotation mark at the beginning is significant; there’s no other (self-proclaimed) deity that has revealed himself to mankind through actual speech.  Remember Elijah and the prophets of Ba’al?  The didn’t have a clue why Ba’al didn’t show up to defend himself because Ba’al hadn’t made his ways known to him, so much so they even took Elijah’s mocking suggestions seriously! (you never know…maybe Ba’al is on the pot!)

2.  He is imminent – The very fact that there are quotation marks also suggests that God is not too “above us” to make himself known to us.  He’s not the deistic God hated by atheists who wound the watch and wandered off, only to return when he needs to hurt things for sport.  He’s in the midst of mankind, making himself known to them.

3.  He is condescending – The phrase “I am the Lord your God” isn’t a phrase that is some sort of “Behold, the one who cannot be named who is above all description and beyond all knowing!” language.  God talks about himself in language that is accessible.  In his self revelation, God condescends to mankind; he speaks to us like us for us to know him.

4.  He is powerful – God uses words, and the implicit assumption is that words will be sufficient.  God has all the power needed to accurately reveal himself to us in words, since words is what he chose to use.  There is a modern manifestation of contempt for the Bible that comes in the form of postmodern thought saying “God is bigger than the words that we use about him”.  The idea sounds clever, for who would want to suggest that God can be accurately described in a paragraph, or a page, or even a thousand pages?  God has to be bigger than we can ever imagine, right?  The error is that God has not chosen to reveal his entirety to us, and what he has revealed is sufficient to arrive at his purpose in our knowing him.  God’s purpose in our knowing him isn’t to give us an insight into his whole life story or answer all the questions we could ever have about him; that could only come in eternity (if it even comes then) and would take all of eternity (i.e. we’ll never “fully arrive” at knowing God).  Nobody could possibly exhaustively know God now because nobody lives anywhere long enough to acquire that level of knowledge!  God’s main concern is sharing himself with us for eternity and that means reconciling rebellious sinners to himself through the atoning work of Jesus Christ on the cross of Calvary.  All knowledge that God has revealed to us is ultimately and solely revealed unto the end of salvation.  God doesn’t really offer a whole lot of window-dressing along the way.

5. He is relational- The Lord is the personal God of Israel; “your God”.  The Lord is not someone who is “out there” and you hope, through your various efforts at impressing him, that he notices you.  Yahweh has not only made himself known to you, he’s let you know that you’re personally connected and he has and interest in you.

6. He is asceitic (asceity = the quality of self-existence) – His name is “Yahweh”, which means “I am”.  The idea behind the name is that God is self-existent.  He is the one who existed when nothing else did, and he makes himself known as such.

7.  He is personal – He uses personal pronouns (“I”); he doesn’t speak of himself in third person out of some sort of silly attempt at sounding spiritual, and he isn’t above talking about himself in personal terms that we can someh. He talks like a person to other persons.

So, just in the first clause of one verse, I grabbed out seven characteristics that God had made known.  I could go on and on, but I won’t for the sake of finishing this post this year.  Needless to say, the people of Israel would have had a whole lot of knowledge of God coming from their meditating on the 10 commandments, not to mention what they learned from the experience of being around the mountain.  One of the big lessons that came from being around the mountain was that God is not approached lightly:

- “And you shall set limits for the people all around, saying, ‘Take care not to go up into the mountain or touch the edge of it. Whoever touches the mountain shall be put to death.’” – Exodus 19:12

So as God has made himself known and you realize that anyone who takes him lightly ends up dead, the logical question springs to mind:

So how do we approach God without dying?

Glad you asked, and God is knows that’s on everyone’s mind!  He is compassionate in making that the next thing he talks about after talking about himself.  So he reminds the Israelites to not make images “to be with me” (22:23), meaning to not try to portray him in any sort of figurine or statue or any other representation (God knows how quickly the image of what’s worshiped becomes the image that is worshiped).  He tells the Israelites how to make his altars (22:24).  He gives them consolation in knowing that he will work in their hearts to produce worship of himself when he states “in every place where I cause my name to be remembered” (22:24) and knowing that they will want to make stone altars, he lets them know how that is to be done as well (22:25).  Finally, he reminds them of the utter importance of fleeing from every semblance of sin, especially in his official ceremonies of worship.  He warns the Israelites to pay close attention to how they build and orchestrate the structures and activities of his worship, lest in their thoughtlessness they do things that may cause them to sin (22:26).

There is so much take-away here.  I could talk about how compassionate God is in answering our questions before we even know to ask them.

I could talk about worship and how we need to “ramp up” (no pun intended…okay, kinda) our alertness in church to be mindful and intentional in the hundreds of little details that compose our services of worship (how we dress, what we say, how we walk, etc.).

I could talk about postmodernism and how stupid it is.

I won’t do any of those things.  I’ll just let you ruminate a little and go take care of a very needy baby.

Until Next Time,

Lyndon “Is 1400 words still a little bite? Not according to Wagner!” Unger

Pass It On:

Writing this on my coffee break, but I wanted to tell you all who’ve been praying for me over these last few months that on May 2, at 8:30am our daughter Kajsa Ruth Unger was born.  She was 8 pounds, 15 ounces and was delivered naturally (without any c-section)!

My wife and I are definitely praising the Lord on many fronts and are now officially in newborn time.  I think I slept 4 hours last night and mama got less sleep than me!  Yikes!

I’m writing this on my coffee break at work and will toss up some thoughts from time to time as my zombie-brain has them.  Tomorrow, if any of you wake up after having 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep, praise the Lord.  I now have a totally new perspective on Psalm 127:

¹ Unless the Lord builds the house,
those who build it labor in vain.
Unless the Lord watches over the city,
the watchman stays awake in vain.
² It is in vain that you rise up early
and go late to rest,
eating the bread of anxious toil;
for he gives to his beloved sleep.

³ Behold, children are a heritage from the Lord,
the fruit of the womb a reward.
⁴ Like arrows in the hand of a warrior
are the children^[a] of one’s youth.
⁵ Blessed is the man
who fills his quiver with them!
He shall not be put to shame
when he speaks with his enemies in the gate.

Is it any mystery that David says that the Lord gives sleep and then talks about how the Lord gives children?  David understood well the things that I’m just starting to really piece together.

Until Next Time,

Lyndon “The Armchair is now my bed” Unger

Pass It On:

In 2 Samuel 23:2-7, King David’s last oracle from God is recorded; the final words of the man after God’s own heart.  What does a wise king, a man who has seen so terribly much, have to say at the final curtain of his life?

² “The Spirit of the Lord speaks by me;
his word is on my tongue.
³ The God of Israel has spoken;
the Rock of Israel has said to me:
When one rules justly over men,
ruling in the fear of God,
⁴ he dawns on them like the morning light,
like the sun shining forth on a cloudless morning,
like rain that makes grass to sprout from the earth.

⁵ “For does not my house stand so with God?
For he has made with me an everlasting covenant,
ordered in all things and secure.
For will he not cause to prosper
all my help and my desire?
⁶ But worthless men are all like thorns that are thrown away,
for they cannot be taken with the hand;
⁷ but the man who touches them
arms himself with iron and the shaft of a spear,
and they are utterly consumed with fire.”

Quickly breaking it down, here’s a brief summation:

Vs. 2 – This is a great 1-sentence definition of “prophecy” in the Old Testament: God’s words on a man’s tongue.

Vs. 3a – David’s words are divine revelation, so listen up!

Vs. 3b-4 – The Universal Order of Rule: The ruler who fears the Lord is exalted by the Lord and esteemed by the people.

(The rule for all those who govern)

Vs. 5-6 – The Universal Order of Reality: God establishes and blesses the righteous, but God curses the wicked…

(The underlying reason for the rule)

Vs. 7 – The Universal Ordinance to Rulers: Stay away from the wicked or you’ll get burned.

(The implications of the rule and the underlying reality).

For some reason, at the end of his life, the only thing on David’s mind was living a righteous life and avoiding both wickedness and wicked men.  This is after surviving a few thousand Philistines, a national manhunt, a betrayal and coup, a murderous and adulterous scandal, and a few other (thousand) events of note.  After all the headlines were dusty, after all his enemies were dead or disinterested, after all the dust had settled, David only had one thing on his mind, kinda like his wise son who followed him:

“Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man.For God will bring every deed into judgment, with every secret thing, whether good or evil.” – Ecclesiastes 12:13-14

Write it down…in ink on your arm.

For real.

If you want to get a tattoo, don’t get something stupid, cliche, horribly dated, or temporarily cool/significant.

Get something written on your flesh that you will always need to remember.

Until Next Time,

Lyndon “The Arm-decorating Theologian” Unger

Pass It On:

If you look along the top bar of this blog, there is a new tab: Index.  I’ve been working to index my biblical/theological posts in order to make specific ones easier to find, and to accommodate my new subscribers who may want to dig through the archives without going month-by-month.   Now that I’ve got well over 200 posts up, my archives are becoming a bit annoying to search when you’re looking for something specific.  So in response to that, all my word studies are together in my index, as are my posts on many other topics.  I hope that my readers will be continually be edified and educated by the posts that no longer appear on the front page!

Until Next Time,

Lyndon “The Armchair Theologian” Unger