A Poem about my Father slipping away.



It's 10 miles to the numbing pool
Where relentless sorrow stays
And 8 miles to the cabin bed
Where I know you sleep today

It's 9 miles to the meadow brook
Where I will kneel to pray
And far off to another job
Where I drive to get away

The villian's at the break-line
Where death combines her force
To catch the sleepers who malign
With Jusice to inforce

Oh Lord, to descend near the water's edge
And halt the torrent there
To dive beneath the darkened deep
And raise you from dispair!

But three more weeks I'll leave ETown
Without a difference made
A year from now, maybe settle down
With cards I could have played

I'll wish that I could hold you
One more time to ease the pain
But my time's run out and I've got to go
Got to run away again

Still I'll always be a listen'n
To the voice that draws me here
I'll sit right down at the water's edge
And add to the torrent, I'll add to the torrent my tears

Introduction

The Bible is a book containing many of God’s words, covenants, and laws. All of it is inspired scripture that details God’s communication and interactions with man. However, the Bible is too frequently misunderstood by three classes of people:

• Bible believers who claim the Bible to be “inerrant” and to contain all of God’s words,


• Unbelievers who reject its entire scriptural record as a consequence of real or alleged discrepancies,


• Non-practicing believers who may acknowledge the truthfulness of the Bible but fail to consistently apply its principles.

After the Apostles

The Bible in its present form was not compiled for several centuries after the death of the apostles. The first complete manuscripts of the New Testament (Sinaiticus and Vaticanus) date from the fourth century, with all early New Testament manuscripts in Greek.

At the end of the second century AD, only the Gospels of Matthew and Mark were universally accepted as canonical. The third century apologist, Origen, classified writings into three categories: the uncontested (the four gospels and 13 Pauline epistles), the doubtful (2 Peter, Hebrews, James, Jude, and 2 and 3 John), and the rejected. Eusubius (330 AD) categorized writings as accepted, disputed, or rejected. Disagreement existed in the writings accepted as genuine by various church authorities, with the authenticity of the Revelation of John continued to be disputed.

The first agreement upon 27 books of the New Testament is seen at the Synod of Laodicea (363 AD) and the Synod of Carthage (397 AD. Many prominent Christians continued to disagree. A universal consensus regarding the “canonical books” of the Bible was never achieved, and the biblical canons of the world’s oldest Christian religions – the Roman Catholic, Greek Orthodox, Coptic Orthodox, Ethiopic Orthodox, Syrian Orthodox, and Armenian Apostolic Churches -- are all different.

Debate erupted again with the Protestant Reformation. Even today, the authenticity of some books, such as the second epistle of Peter and the Revelation of John, continues to be widely debated by Biblical scholars.

Part II: The Complaints of the Ancients who were Ignored

Source website

Megachurches are doing to orthodox Christianity, what Wal-Mart has done to retail. Just as the gross national product as applied to retail has not changed, neither has national Christian church attendance. Just as the Mom and Pop stores of yesteryear have become extinct, so may be your community church.

The megachurch is not a new element in Christianity. However, what has recently surfaced has been the increasingly steeped in feel good Graeco-Roman mythology. This borderline neo-pagan worship has become increasingly necessary for a market driven church within the American entertainment driven society. The diving force of the Megachurch is the generation of capital. Thus, it gives as many with personal wealth the entertainment they expect. No wonder then, with its liberalizing theologies, today's America is its breeding ground.

If the megachurch phenomena were a denomination unto themselves, they would be the third largest in the United States alone.

Christians around the world are bewildered about the apparent direction of American Christians and their growing attraction to the theologies of Megachurches. British online newspaper writers express disappointment at the growing tradition where doctrine is “shopping mall theology”, where traditional hymns are conspicuously absent, where pastors have forgotten appropriate language of reverence and where patrons learn that through God they are victors not victims, and no one is called a sinner. They rightly belief this does not porduce a humble, teachable people. They might be right given the typical megachurch is populated by adults of many assorted faiths.

If you are Protestant or nondenominationally inclined, there is a megachurch for you. The technologically savvy megachurches are the fastest growing phenomena in religious life in the U.S. One per week is springing into existence.

What makes them so attractive? You will be surprised at the accommodations they provide. One factor driving growth is cost. You have to go to a larger church to get quality, such as a youth minister and more programs, or better facilities. Then there are the telecom and Web applications that allow churches to reach outside their walls and start satellite campuses as well as manage national associations that can include thousands of other churches. Throw out the notion of tradition church experience. Expect truly high technology entertainment complete with e-ticketing so you can be sure to have a seat. They are no less marketers than Wal-Mart – working to get existing members elsewhere to join their ranks.

Without leaving your own church you may find the megachurch concept brought to you. Take a page out of “branch banking”. Megachurches grow beyond their own facilities by establishing satellite locations which have no geographical boundaries. The megachurch Senior Pastor records his sermon on Saturday nights, and the local pastors at their locations download it from a prescription Web page and, on Sunday mornings, play the sermon in their churches on large video screens. And you get to experience something of the megachurch feeling while sitting in your hardwood pews while saving the cost of a minister.

"Technology is essential for a church of our scale," says Duncan Dodds, executive director of Lakewood Church, in Houston, with a weekly attendance of 40,000+ people, 60,000-name e-mail list, and meets in a renovated basketball arena once used by the NBA's Houston Rockets. "You could not do church the way we do without it." In agreement is A.R. Bernard, pastor of the 24,000-member Christian Cultural Center, in Brooklyn, N.Y.. Megachurch worshippers typically use the in-house wireless network to chase down Bible verses on their laptops and Palms as they follow along with Bernard's big-screen, PowerPoint presentations, while comfortably lounging in their stadium seats.

"So much work goes into the preparation of the weekend message. Our team is so talented and they create work of great value," says Shawn Wood, Seacoast's creative communications pastor. Establishing satellite campuses in shopping centers and underused retail space is a cost-effective way of meeting demand. Here at Blogstream's “Theology for Dummies” Jän van Oosten , a senior minister in the the building of such a megachurch, spent many years planting new churches for the Northern California Baptist Conference.

You can start your own megachurch for under $100K and leverage technology to make exceptional investment return. They tend to be less political than most of their smaller brethren. "The wave of the future is not megabuildings that hold 100,000 people, the wave is taking the message to the people in their communities," says Pastor Bernard; just like Wal-Mart, don't you think? His church has already spawned a church in Syracuse, N.Y., and he plans to launch video-supported satellites in the future.

So, if you shop Wal-Mart, give your local megachurch or its affiliate a visit. Or, like Wal-Mart, they will come even closer to you.

THE MISSING PARTS WILL BE RESTORED THROUGH LATTER-DAY SCRIPTURE

Through vision and an angel’s explanation, the Lord showed Nephi that the record he was beginning—the Book of Mormon—would later come forth and include the pure gospel of Jesus Christ. Additionally, it was explained to him that there would also come "other books" that would convince those in the latter days, that the records of the prophets and the Twelve Apostles are true. The angel instructed Nephi that these "last records," which will be among the Gentiles, shall "establish the truth of the first, which are of the twelve apostles . . . and shall make known the plain and precious things which [had] been taken away from them; and shall make known to all kindreds, tongues, and people, that the Lamb of God is the Son of the Eternal Father, and the Savior of the world" (1 Ne. 13:40).
These "last records" would appear to be the Doctrine and Covenants, the Pearl of Great Price, the Joseph Smith Translation, and records yet to be revealed. Although the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Nag Hammadi library and other similar documents are enormously valuable for scholarly research and historical evidence for the time of Jesus, they are not authorized records prepared by designated prophets or apostles of Jesus Christ. They are not the sources of doctrine for the latter-day Church.

Thus in 1 Nephi 13 and 14 we find a correct perception of the Bible and realize how greatly it has been depleted. Consequently, we will also see the true character of the Restoration.

Being guided by latter-day scripture, we discover that among the losses to the Bible are such things as the understanding that the gospel of Jesus Christ was taught to Adam and to all the patriarchs; that baptism, priesthood, and the gift of the Holy Ghost were had among the ancient patriarchs; and that the gospel and the ordinances have always been the same. Also missing from the present Old Testament are the clear teachings of the divinity of Jesus Christ, the doctrine of the fall of Adam, and the resurrection of Jesus Christ. There are hints remaining, but the Bible was once as unmistakable as the Book of Mormon on these points.

In Theology for Dummies (Topic "God and Eternality"), Thomisguy takes to heart the God of Buddha and attempts to define their present Christian/Buddha God. All of it is possible with the use of, the magic art, the doctrines enabled by greek philosophy. This is necessarily an extension of the precepts that Thom requires, so they are not repeated here. If the reader is unfamiliar with the post at Theology for Dummies, please read it first to gain a foundation on the topic. The following thankfully defeats the Christian Buddha God. Unfortunately the philosophers require their language. Elitist as it seems be patient and plod through it. The following is extracted from Mansel's Limits of Religious Thought

As a result of Thom's post, God and Eternity, we have no alternative but to regard this First Cause as Infinite and Absolute, as Thomisguy has detailed. So we have First Cause, the Infinite, and the Absolute. All are equally indispensable. Do they not imply contradiction to each other when viewed together as one and the same being? A Cause cannot, as such, be absolute: the absolute cannot, as such, be a cause. After all, the cause, as such, exists only in relation to its effect: the cause is the cause of the effect. On the other hand the conception of the Absolute implies a possible existence out of all relation. Thom attempts to escape from this apparent contradiction by introducing the idea of succession of time. The Absolute exists first by itself, and afterward because of the Cause. But there we are checked by the third conception, that of the Infinite. How can the Infinite become that which it was not at first? If Causation is a possible mode of existence, that which exists without a causing in not infinite; that which becomes a cause has passed beyond its former limits.

Supposing the Absolute to become a cause, it will follow that it operates by means of freewill and consciousness. For a necessary cause cannot be conceived as absolute and infinite. If necessitated by something beyond itself, it is therefore limited by a superior power; and if necessitated by itself, it has in its own nature a necessary relation to its effect. The act of causation must therefore be voluntary; and volition is only possible in a conscious being. But consciousness again is only conceivable as a relation. There must be a conscious subject, and an object of which he is conscious. The subject is a subject to the object; the object is an object to the subject; and neither can exist by itself as the absolute. This difficulty, again, may be for the moment evaded, by distinguishing between the absolute as related to another and the absolute as related to itself. The Absolute it may be said, may possibly be conscious, provided it is only conscious of itself. But this alternative is, in ultimate analysis, no less self-destructive than the other. For the object of consciousness, whether a mode of the subject's existence or not, is either created in and by the act of consciousness, or has an existence independent of it. In the former case, the object depends upon the subject, and the subject alone is the true absolute. In the latter case, the subject depends upon the object, and the object alone is the true absolute. Or if we attempt a third hypothesis, and maintain that each exists independently of the other, we have no absolute at all, but only a pair of relatives; for coexistence, whether in consciousness or not, is itself a relation.

The corollary from this reasoning is obvious. Not only is the Absolute, as conceived, incapable of a necessary relation to anything else; but it is also incapable of containing, by the constitution of its own nature, an essentia relation within itself; as a whole, for instance, composed of parts, or as a substance consisting of attributes, or as a conscious subject in antithesis to an object. For if there is in the absolute any principle of unity, distinct from the mere accumulation of parts or attributes, this principle alone is the true absolute. If, on the other hand, there is no such principle, then there is no absolute at all, but only a plurality of relatives.

The almost unanimous voice of philosophy, in pronouncing that the absolute is both one and simple, must be accepted as the voice of reason also, so far as reason has any voice in the matter. But this absolute unity, as indifferent and containing no attributes, can neither be distinguished from the multiplicity of finite beings by any characteristic feature, nor be identified with them in their multiplicity. Thus we are landed in an inextricable dilemma. The Absolute cannot be conceived as conscious, neither can it be conceived as unconscious: it cannot be conceived as complex, neither can it be conceived as simple; it cannot be conceived by difference, neither can it be conceived by the absence of difference: it cannot be identified with the universe, neither can it be distinguished from it. The One and the Many, regarded as the beginning of existence, are thus alike incomprehensible.

The fundamental conception of Rational Theology being thus self-destructive, we may naturally expect to find the same antagonism manifested in their special applications. . . . How, for example, can Infinite Power be able to do all things, and yet Infinite Goodness be unable to do evil? How can Infinite Justice exact the utmost penalty for every sin, and yet Infinite Mercy pardon the sinner? How can Infinite Wisdom know all that is to come, and yet Infinite Freedom be at liberty to do or to forbear? How is the existence of Evil compatible with that of an infinitely perfect Being; for if he wills it, he is not infinitely good; and if he wills it not, his will is thwarted and his sphere of action limited.

Must I say the LDS do not believe in the Christianized God of Buddha.