The death of Prince in Biblical perspective.

I was driving earlier today to pick up two of my children when on the radio comes the report that Prince was dead at the age of 57. At first, I couldn’t believe it.  What Prince is he talking about? He can’t be talking about the recording artist Prince?  I guess what shocked me was the suddenness of it.  Was he killed?  Was he in an accident?  Was he sick?  You know, even as a follower of Christ, I will NEVER get used to this death thing.  One day a person you love is here and the next day they're gone. It’s crazy.

What helps me makes some sense of the craziness experienced in this life is to ask myself, “what does God’s word have to say about this”? And you know what? There is a word from the Lord. In the Book of Hebrews, chapter nine, verse 27, the writer states, “And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment”. In order to make sense of this “death thing,” we MUST understand God’s perspective on death.

Before I dig any deeper, I must say that what you read here may not bring you immediate comfort or encouragement. This exposition may not alleviate your fear or angst about the subject of death. But, what I hope happens is that you gain some clarity on what takes place when a person you love dies. 

Hebrews 9:27 uncovers for us FOUR (4) important realities about death that we all need to know.

Reality #1
Death is CERTAIN (“And as it is appointed….”)
The word “appointed” means, something that is reserved, certain, and destined. Therefore, the writer declares that death (physical death) is reserved, certain and mankind’s destiny. Folks, there is no surer reality in life than physical death. Someone asked me, “Why do people have to die? The Bible is clear. The reason why mankind is subject to death is because of SIN. When Adam violated God’s righteous standard (Gen 2:15-17) the Bible states sin thereby entered the world of humanity followed by death (Rom 5:12). Because of sin, death is reserved, certain and destined for all humanity. Why did the 9 people in that Charleston South Carolina A.M.E church die?  Because they were black? Well, their ethnicity may have been the Catalyst, but the true cause is because they like you and me, are sinners and therefore subject to the curse of sin, namely death. Why did Prince die?  Because like the rest of us, he was a sinner (Rom 3:23). Let me add this.  Everybody is NOT guaranteed to die quietly in their sleep like my grandfather, many of us will die kicking and screaming like his passengers. Again, the point is NOT how we die, but WHY we die.  The Bible clearly states, "the wages of SIN is death"(Rom 3:23).

Reality #2
Death is certain FOR ALL MEN (“….for men…”)
The word “men” here is a generic term which speaks of “ALL humanity”. Every Human being regardless of gender or age is subject to physical death. Friends, death is no respecter of persons, death is not racist, death doesn’t play favorites, death is not politically correct.
   
                                                        EVERYBODY IS GOING TO DIE. 

     The Book of Hebrews, chapter 11 verses 36-38 states, “Still others had trials of mocking’s and scourging’s, yes, and of chains and imprisonment. 37 They were stoned, they were sawn in two, were tempted, were slain with the sword. They wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins, being destitute, afflicted, tormented— 38 of whom the world was not worthy. They wandered in deserts and mountains, in dens and caves of the earth”. 

Reality #3
Death is an ONETIME event (“…once to die...”)
Folks, concepts like reincarnation are FALSE. We don’t get several shots at this life, men and women are not born with 9 lives. In light of this fact, we should take the Apostles Paul’s advice seriously, “make the most of your time” (Eph 5:16).

Reality #4
Death leads to CERTAIN judgment (“…….but after this the judgment”)
Physical death is NOT the end. When people die they don’t cease to exist. The Bible is clear, following death comes judgment. This is the divine judgment carried out by Christ. The Bible speaks of judgment for BOTH the believer and unbeliever when they die.

Allow me to briefly explain what happens to a person when they die.

FIRST, what happens when the BELIEVER dies?
A. His/her, soul/spirit goes to Heaven to be with Christ (2 Cor 5:8).

B. At the Rapture of the Church the believer’s soul/spirit is reunited with his/her resurrected body (1 Thess 4).

C. All believers are reunited with each other and the Lord in Heaven during the time of Tribulation on the earth (1 Thess 4; John 14:6). It’s in heaven that the believer’s works are judged in order to determine his/her degree of reward (2 Cor 5).

D. At Christ’s Second coming all the saints return from Heaven with Him to live and reign on the earth during His Millennial Kingdom reign (Rev 20:4-6).


SECOND, what happens when the UNBELIEVER dies?
A. His/her, soul/spirit goes to Hell where in conscious torment they await the Judgment of God (Luke 16:19-31); Rev 20:11).

B. After the Millennial reign of Christ, the Dead are brought before the “White throne” of judgment where their works will be judged, not to determine whether they go to heaven, but to determine their degree of punishment in the “Lake of Fire” (Rev 20:11ff).

When I think about the death of Prince my hope is that he truly knew Christ as Lord and Savior. What I mean is this.  I hope that at some point in his life he was able to REPENT of his sin and put his whole weight upon Christ. Because if he did, the Bible assures us that he is more alive today than he ever was in his life on earth. Jesus put it this way, “...I am the resurrection and the life; he who believes in Me will live even if he dies” (John 11:25).  The plain truth is that many folks are not ready to die.  How about you?  Are you ready?  If you died today, do you know where you would go?

Listen, the real tragedy is NOT Prince dying.  The real tragedy is if he died NOT having trusted Christ as Lord and Savior.

It's not too late, Trust Jesus Now.

Todd.

Song title: So in Love

Artist(s): Jason Nelson

Reviewer: CoolImprov

Chorus

I'm madly, insanely, desperately in love with you.
And nothing will ever distract me from loving you

I'm in love with you, you Jesus
You, you
I'm in love with you, you Jesus
You, you

Verse 1

You graced me, embraced me, you stayed with me when everybody walked away
You loved me, unconditionally that's why I will forever give you the praise

Chorus

I'm madly, insanely, desperately in love with you.
And nothing will ever distract me from loving you.

I'm in love with you, you Jesus
You, you
I'm in love with you, you Jesus
You, you

Verse 2

You see me, you know me, you still love me
Thanks for your amazing grace
And my heart is turned toward you that's why I love for the rest of my days.

Chorus

I'm madly, insanely, desperately in love with you.
And nothing will ever distract me from loving you

I'm in love with you, you Jesus
You, you
I'm in love with you, you Jesus
You, you

Oh, oh you have my love forever

Jason Nelson is a well-recognized voice in Christian music. Besides being a Stellar award winning artist, He is also a Pastor, Husband, and Father. For those of you who have read my reviews in the past know that I have a love-hate relationship with contemporary Gospel music. Some of it I love and a lot of it I hate.

The song that captured my attention for this review is a ditty entitled, "So in Love". A few days ago I'm driving in my vehicle and on comes this tune. It starts off, "I'm madly, insanely, desperately in love with you...." I thought to myself, "Oh, a Christian love song". Again, I said to myself (since I'm the only one in the car) "You know, we need MORE romantic, Christian based love songs". The song continued and that's when I put on the brakes and almost caused a 10 car pileup (Just kidding). Jason wasn't singing about some woman, He was singing about JESUS.

Hold up, hold up. I have a big problem when we romanticize the Saviour. "He's my heavenly boyfriend", "He's my lover", "He's my husband". I did a little research and discovered that there is a movement out there called, "The Romancing Jesus movement". Here is an example from many, of the Romancing Jesus ideology, "I fly to Paris and discover how to make love to God.” This closing chapter, “The Joy of Intimacy,” is her discovery of God through something akin to sexual intimacy. In a chapter laden with intimate imagery she falls in love with God again, but this time, hears him urging to respond. She wants more of him. And then, at last, she experiences some kind of spiritual climax, some understanding of what it means to fully live, of what it means to be one with Christ, to experience the deepest kind of union. “God makes love with grace upon grace, every moment a making of His love for us. Couldn’t I make love to God, making every moment love for Him? To know Him the way Adam knew Eve. Spirit skin to spirit skin?” (From Ann Voskamp's book, One thousand gifts).

Much of Jason's song I can get with, "You graced me, embraced me, you stayed with me when everybody walked away
You loved me, unconditionally that's why I will forever give you the praise.....You see me, you know me, you still love me
Thanks for your amazing grace and my heart is turned toward you that's why I love for the rest of my days".

Amen to the above sentiments. BUT, I have a BIG problem with, "....I'm madly, insanely, desperately in love with you...." especially coming from a MAN. I don't mean to go off topic, but this Romanticizing Jesus movement in our churches is ONE of the MANY reasons men treat church like the plague. A'int no red-blooded, meat-eating, HETEROSEXUAL brother gonna be caught dead telling another MAN, "I'm in love with you", Jesus or not (No disrespect Lord).

There is a world of difference between "Loving the Lord" and being, "in love with the Lord". One is Biblical and the other is Sensual and Unbiblical.

Let me close with a quote from a blogger named Erin. She puts a nice cap on this subject. "Romanticism cannot express the essence of the Christian life accurately or Biblically. It's usefulness as a way of describing the Christian life has been greatly exaggerated, and based mostly on a wrong reading of the Song of Solomon. The theme of the Bride of Christ is important in the New Testament, but it never resulted in expressions of romanticism in the life and worship of the church. Instead, images like the bride resulted in higher esteem for the church as a redeemed community, not a more personalized and emotional individual experience for the believer. Romanticism is not a significant Biblical expression of praise, certainly not worthy of becoming a regular part of our worship, prayer, and communication of the Gospel. As understood and experienced today, romanticism is a flawed metaphor for delighting in and loving God. It is vastly inferior to scripture's own description of love for God as seeking our joy in obedience to the Lord. "Come fall in love with Jesus," is not an invitation to faith that we should endorse or repeat" (donotbesurprised.com)

In His grip,
CoolImprov

What "I can do all things through Christ" really means.

Let me introduce you to one of the most misunderstood, misinterpreted, misquoted verses in ALL of the Bible. It’s Philippians 4:13. The Apostle writes, “I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me”. I don’t know about you, but I’ve heard this verse used to justify every conceivable idea and endeavor known to man.

What is this verse really teaching? Is Paul teaching us that no matter what we put our minds and efforts to we CAN DO IT, we CAN achieve it?

Let’s see.

Philippians 4:13 is surrounded by a CONTEXT. Let me address this important concept for just a moment. In Bible college, one of the things that were drilled into our heads in exegesis class was this, “CONTEXT IS KING”. You cannot, you should not attempt to understand any verse of scripture apart from the context from which it derives. It is believed that the Professor and Bible Teacher D.A Carson is credited with saying, “"A text without a context is a pretext for a proof text." In the words of one writer, “without examining the context in which something (in this case, Scripture) was said, one can easily (or even intentionally) misappropriate or misuse or misapply or misrepresent a text to support a position that it, in fact, does not support”.

Folks this kind of Bible mishandling happens ALL the time by very well meaning folk. Let me give you another example. Folks often want to feel good about the size of their Tuesday night prayer meeting. Exactly 4 people showed up and one of them was a child. So, in order to help us feel better, we tell each other, “Where two or three are gathered in His name……” You know the rest. That verse found in Matthew 18:20, I hate to tell you has nothing to do with prayer meetings. In fact, this verse is not even talking about prayer, in other words, prayer is NOT the subject matter. This is why CONTEXT is king.

So, what is Paul teaching in Philippians 4:13?

The CONTEXT of verse 13 begins in verse 10 and runs through verse 20. Paul tells the Philippians that he's excited that their concern for him has reignited (vs 10). He goes on to say that he knows that they always cared, but the problem was that they lacked opportunity. In verse 11 he states that he’s not referring just to physical need and that through his neediness he has learned the awesome lesson of CONTENTMENT (vs. 12).

Bam!! This is what verse 13 is all about. When Paul states that, “he can do ALL THINGS through Christ who strengthens him.” He’s talking about CONTENTMENT, NOT Ability or Opportunity. The "ALL THINGS" are found in verse 12, which are the varied circumstances of life. Paul states whether rich or poor, hungry or full, I know how to be CONTENT. Contentment can be defined as, "sufficient to self" (self-sufficient and competent) and so to be independent of external circumstances and independent of all people. One secular writer used autarkes in reference to a country that supplied itself and had no need of imports. True contentment comes only from our Lord, and enables believers to be satisfied and at ease in the midst of any problem. Autarkes therefore describes the man who needs nothing externally to be satisfied in life for all he needs is within. the believer who has Christ dwelling within”.

Let me say this, and I don’t mean to be offensive. The reasons why so many Christians are running around like chickens with cut off heads looking for the next thing, the next level, the next blessing, the next outpouring, the next, the next, the next, is because unlike Paul they have not learned this critical skill of CONTENTMENT. The reason why divorce is running rampant through the Christian community is because we have not learned the critical skill of CONTENTMENT. The reason why Christians are chasing experience after experience is because we have not learned the critical skill of CONTENTMENT.

So, what is Paul talking about in Philippians 4:13 when He says, “I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me”? He’s talking about CONTENTMENT.

The great Bible Teacher John Calvin wrote, “"Whatever my condition may be, I am satisfied with it. "Why? because saints know that they thus please God. Hence, they do not measure sufficiency by abundance, but by the will of God, which they judge of by what takes place, for they are persuaded that their affairs are regulated by his providence and good pleasure."

Amen!!

Todd

Christian Music Review

Song title: Wanna be happy

Artist(s): Kirk Franklin

"Kirk Dwayne Franklin (born January 26, 1970) is an American gospel musician, choir director, and author. He is known for leading urban contemporary gospel choirssuch as The Family, God's Property and One Nation Crew (1NC), and has won multiple awards, including seven Grammy Awards. Early years. A native of Fort Worth, Texas, Franklin was raised by his aunt, Gertrude, having been abandoned as a baby by his mother. Gertrude collected and resold aluminum cans to raise money for Kirk to take piano lessons from the age of four. Kirk excelled in music, being able to read and write music, while also playing by ear.

He received his first contract offer at the age of seven, which his aunt turned down. He joined the church choir and became music director of the Mt. Rose Baptist Church adult choir at the age of twelve.

Despite his strict religious upbringing, Franklin rebelled in his teenage years, and in an attempt to keep him out of trouble, his grandmother arranged an audition for him at a professional youth conservatory associated with a local university. He was accepted and, while his life seemed to be on track for a while, the announcement of a girlfriend's pregnancy and his eventual expulsion from school for behavioral problems proved otherwise.

Kirk Franklin studied music with Jewell Kelly and the Singing Chaparrals at Oscar Dean Wyatt High School. He was under her tutelage for music direction as she allowed him to be the pianist for the choir.

After the shooting death of a friend, Franklin returned to the church, where he began to direct the choir once again. He also co-founded a gospel group, The Humble Hearts, which recorded one of Franklin's compositions and got the attention of gospel music legend Milton Biggham. Impressed, Biggham enlisted him to lead the DFW Mass Choir in a recording of Franklin's song "Every Day with Jesus." This led to Biggham hiring Franklin, just 20 years old at the time, to lead the choir at the 1990 Gospel Music Workshop of America Convention, a major industry gathering" (Wikipedia).

Kirk just released a new solo album called "Losing My Religion". This is his twelfth studio album. This album was produced by RCA Inspiration a division of RCA Records alongside Fo Yo Soul Recordings, Kirk's label.

The song being reviewed today is one of the cuts off his new album, "Losing my religion" it's called, "Wanna be happy". It is currently numero uno on Billboards Hot Gospel songs chart. "....The recording artist, songwriter and producer explained the concept of his new song, Every human being was wired with the desire for happiness. And we will try different things all in the pursuit of that feeling. With this song, I'm saying, if you really want to be happy, you have to start with the originator, Franklin said in a statement shared with The Christian Post. My goal is to try to lead people to the manufacturer of their souls" (The Christian Post).

Here are the lyrics to Kirk's song:

The truth can hurt you
Or the truth can change you
What would truth do to you

I just wanna be happy
But if I keep on doing the things
That keep on bringing me pain
There's no one else I can blame
If I'm not happy
Wasted time but now I can see
The biggest enemy it was me
So I'm not happy

Cry yourself to sleep
Shout and raise your hands
It wont change a thing child
Until you understand

If you're tired of being the same
If you're tired of things not changing
It's time for you to get out the way
Don't get stuck in how you feel
Say Jesus take the wheel
He knows the road that you need to take
(But it only works if)
If you wanna be happy
(Look at yourself and say)
Don't you wanna be happy
I just wanna be happy

But if I keep on giving my heart
For people to tear apart
The healing will never start
So I can be happy
Will I ever be happy

if I'm talking to you then say)
If you're tired of being the same
If you're tired of things not changing
It's time for you to get out the way
(You been down too long)
Don't get stuck in how you feel
Say Jesus take the wheel
He knows the road that you need to take
(I feel different right here)
It's so easy to complain
Addicted to the pain
You give you heart, they push it away
(But I got good news for ya)
Jesus knows just how you feel
Just let him take the wheel
The love you need, he already gave
(But the question is)
Do you wanna be happy
(If you're tired of you then say)
I just wanna be happy
(Now if you really mean that, open up your heart and say it)
If you're tired of being the same
If you're tired of things not changing
It's time for you to get out the way
(Are you ready, come on)
Don't get stuck in how you feel
Say Jesus take the wheel
(What you doin')
He knows the road that you need to take
(So easy to complain)
It's so easy to complain
(Come on)
Addicted to the pain
You give you heart, they push it away
(There's somebody that'll never leave ya)
Jesus knows just how you feel
Just let him take the wheel
The love you need, he already gave
(But the question is)
Do you wanna be happy
(Took a long time but I'm ready)
I just wanna be happy
(Thank you Lord, every day ask yourself)
Do you wanna be happy
(Yes, pull over, let him drive)
I just wanna be happy

Okay, it is clear from the reading of these lyrics that the central theme of this song is the desire to be happy. Earlier in this review Kirk stated, "..."Every human being was wired with the desire for happiness. And we will try different things all in the pursuit of that feeling....." Kirk is right. Every Human being desires happiness and will indeed try different things in pursuit of that FEELING. This is where the rubber hits the road. How one defines happiness is critical.

Psychology researcher Sonja Lyubomirsky elaborates, describing happiness as “the experience of joy, contentment, or positive well-being, combined with a sense that one’s life is good, meaningful, and worthwhile.” (http://greatergood.berkeley.edu/).

Wow, if you do a search on the Internet for keys to being happy, you are going to be overwhelmed with suggestions. Allow me to mention a few:

1. Build relationships
2. Give thanks
3. Practice kindness
4. Give up grudges
5. Don’t focus on material wealth
6. Embrace Change
7. Have Your Own Back

What does Kirk in his song have to say about obtaining happiness? He says that the way that you get happiness is by SAYING, "Jesus take the wheel" which by the way is the title of a Carrie Underwood tune. Kirk also states that if you want to be happy, you need to look at yourself and SAY, "Don't you wanna be happy, I just want to be happy". Sounds like positive confession to me.

Unfortunately this is not a biblical formula for true happiness. The Bible is clear, Happiness IS NOT a pursuit, it is the result of a certain kind of life. In Matthew 5:3-12 the word "Blessed" is used 9 times. This word can be translated "Happy". But Check this out!! Jesus in this passage NEVER commands his disciples to pursue the blessed/happy life. Instead He teaches his followers that the blessed/happy life is the result of a certain kind of life lived. For the Christian, Happiness is not some temporary fix for a season, rather happiness is an ongoing permanent state of being. So Todd, does this mean that I'm always going to be laughing and smiling and High-fiving everybody, everyday? No, but what it does mean is that as a follower of Christ I can EVERYDAY experience in the words of Rob Morgan, "...inward contentedness that is not affected by circumstances. That is the kind of happiness God desires for His children, a state of joy and well-being that does not depend on physical, temporary circumstances".

The reason so many of our marriages are nose diving into the toilet is because we've bought into the myth of the pursuit of HAPPyNESS. When we stop experiencing that "loving feeling" for our significant other, we call it quits. Listen, happiness is not found in the pursuit, it's in the process. By process I'm speaking of the process of "Sanctification".

The kind of Happiness that Christians should be experiencing is the, "...inner satisfaction and sufficiency that does not depend on outward circumstances...This is what the Lord offers those who trust Him!

I like this song musically, but lyrically and theologically, this song gets a big thumbs DOWN. Kirk, we've waited four years for this? Maybe another four years will make a difference

In His grip,
Todd

Ephesians, The big picture

Before you ever begin a detailed verse by verse study in any book of the Bible, it's important that you first get a handle on the historic and cultural context of said book. In other words, before you go scuba diving in a particular book, it's first necessary to do a fly over in order to take in the big picture (i.e., get a feel for what took place; historically, politically, socially, culturally and geographically). When I do the contextual study of a particular book, I ask the same key questions:

1. To whom was it written?
2. By whom was it written?
3. When was it written?
4. Where was it written?
5. What was the purpose for writing it?
6. What is the theme of this book?
7. Around what circumstances/occasion was it written?

Now, there may be other questions, but these are the main ones that I use. As we tackle these questions it's important for you to know that you will not find the answers to all these questions in the actual text of Scripture. You will have to go outside of Scripture and use other resources to glean this information. I suggest that you get your hands on some good Bible introductions, handbooks, commentaries, atlases, etc. Listen men, without this big picture background work, you will have a much more difficult time understanding the details of a given book. Another reason why I'm focusing on the Book of Ephesians is to demonstrate the importance of book studies versus topical studies. If you have a teaching ministry to God's people there is no better approach than verse by verse book studies. Your people will rise up and call you blessed because they're learning the Word of God. Dr David Howard makes the following point concerning the importance of book studies, " I recommend that pastors practice expository preaching through books of the Bible (or portions of books, if the books are extraordinarily lengthy) as their primary approach to preaching. With this approach, preachers and congregations can be immersed in the overall message of a book in its context, along the lines suggested above, and not just isolated verses or passages".

Now, looking at the book of Ephesians, let's get a big picture:

I. To whom was Ephesians written? Ephesians was written according to verse 1 of chapter 1, "To the Body of Christ (i.e., Saints) in Ephesus".

II. By whom was Ephesians written? Both internal and external evidence point to the Apostle Paul as the author of this epistle.

III. Where was it written? Paul clearly wrote as a prisoner in Rome (cf. Ephesians 3:1, 4:1, 6:20).

IV. When was it written? All external conservative evidence points to the date of A.D. 61 (Colossians and Philemon were written during the same year, possibly the same time).

V. The Purpose of Paul writing this letter? Kenneth Boa writes, "Ephesians was not written to correct specific errors in a local church, but to prevent problems in the church as a whole by encouraging the Body of Christ to mature in Him. It was also written to make believers more aware of their position in Christ because this is the basis for their practice on every level of life". I'm convinced that many of the problems that exist in the Body of Christ today are the result of:
1. Immaturity
2. Lack of understanding of our position in Christ which inevitably affects our practice in life.

VI. What is the theme of this letter? The theme of Ephesians revolves around who we are positionally in Christ. In this epistle Paul makes it clear that we (those in Christ) are the church, the body of Christ. The Church is NOT a denomination, nor an institution, nor a building on the corner. The church is a new community purchased by Christ to carry out the purposes of God in this world.

A word about the city of Ephesus. As I study Paul’s writings, I'm convinced that Paul loved the city. He loved the sites the sounds the hustle and bustle of urban living. Ephesus was a major seaport destination. Ephesus was a hub of entertainment, trade, politics, education as well as religion. The famed Temple of Diana, one of the seven wonders of the Ancient world was housed in Ephesus. This was a very strategic city and Paul knew that. Of course as you know city living brings city problems and Ephesus had her share of problems.

I won't go much further than this brief introduction. Next time we'll put on our scuba gear and dive into the text.

But before I close allow me to summarize some lessons learned from our intro:

1. Context is King. A Historical, cultural background study is necessary for effective Bible study.
2. The Bible was given not to denominations nor to institutions. The Bible was given to the Church, the people of God (the body of Christ).
3. The Bible was not given to make us smarter, but mature.
4. Strategy plays a part in ministry. Someone has well said, "If you aim at nothing, you will surely hit it"

Soli Deo Gloria

Charleston S.C in Biblical perspective (Hebrews 9:27)

Whether you live in Charleston or not, everyone has been impacted by the tragedy that took place on Wednesday evening at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal (AME) Church. Nine people including the Pastor lost their lives in a senseless attack by 21 year old Dylann Roof. The responses to these killings shoot the gamut from anger to forgiveness, to debates as to whether churches should now “arm” the Ushers. My response as a follower of Christ is always to ask, “What does God’s word have to say about this”? And you know what? There is a word from the Lord. In the Book of Hebrews, chapter nine, verse 27, the writer states, “And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment”. In order to make sense of this senseless tragedy, we MUST understand God’s perspective on death. Before we dig deeper, I must say that what you read may not bring you immediate comfort or encouragement. This exposition may not alleviate you anger and frustration. But what I hope happens is that you gain some clarity on what took place in Charleston.
Hebrews 9:27 uncovers for us four (4) important realities about death that we all need to know:

Reality #1
Death is certain (“And as it is appointed…..”)
The word “appointed” means, something that is reserved, certain, and destined. Therefore the writer declares that death (Physical death) is reserved, certain and mankind’s destiny. Folks there is no surer reality in life than physical death. Someone asked me, “Why do people have to die? The Bible is clear. The reason why mankind is subject to death is because of SIN. When Adam violated God’s righteous standard (Gen 2:15-17) the Bible states sin thereby entered the world of humanity followed by death (Rom 5:12). Because of sin, death is reserved, certain and destined for all humanity. Why did the 9 people in this Charleston South Carolina A.M.E church die, because they were black? Well their ethnicity may have been the Catalyst, but the true cause is because they like you and I were sinners and subject to the curse of sin, namely death.

Reality #2
Death is certain for all men (“…….for men…….”)
The word “men” here is a generic term which speaks of “ALL humanity”. Every Human being regardless of gender or age is subject to physical death. Friends, death is no respecter of persons, death is not racist, and death doesn’t play favorites. Everybody is going to die. But here’s the deal, there is not a set prescribed way that people are going to die. For example, everybody’s not’s going to die at 88 yrs. old peaceably in their bed. The Book of Hebrews, chapter 11 verses 36-38 states, “Still others had trial of mockings and scourgings, yes, and of chains and imprisonment. 37 They were stoned, they were sawn in two, were tempted, were slain with the sword. They wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins, being destitute, afflicted, tormented— 38 of whom the world was not worthy. They wandered in deserts and mountains, in dens and caves of the earth”. This also includes churches.

Reality #3
Death is a onetime event (“…..once to die……”)
Folks, we must understand that based on this verse concepts like reincarnation are false. We don’t get several shots at this life, men and women are not born with 9 lives. In light of this fact we should take the Apostles Paul’s advice seriously, “make the most of your time” (Eph 5:16).

Reality #4
Death leads to certain judgment (“…….but after this the judgment”)
Physical death is NOT the end. When people die they don’t cease to exist. The Bible is clear, following death comes judgment. This is the divine judgment carried out by Christ. The Bible speaks of judgment for BOTH the believer and unbeliever when they die.

First, what happens when the believer dies?
a. His/her, soul/spirit goes to Heaven to be with Christ (2 Cor 5:8)
b. At the Rapture of the Church the believer’s soul/spirit is reunited with his/her resurrected body (1 Thess 4)
c. All believers are reunited with each other and the Lord in Heaven during the time of Tribulation on the earth (1 Thess 4; John 14:6). It’s in heaven that the believer’s works are judged in order to determine his/her degree of reward (2 Cor 5).
d. At Christ’s Second coming all the saints return from Heaven with Him to live and reign on the earth during His Millennial Kingdom reign (Rev 20:4-6).

Second, what happens when the Unbeliever dies?
a. His/her, soul/spirit goes to Hell where in conscious torment they await the Judgment of God (Luke 16:19-31); Rev 20:11).
b. After the Millennial reign of Christ, the Dead are brought before the “White throne” of judgment where their works will be judged, not to determine whether they go to heaven, but to determine their degree of punishment in the “Lake of Fire” (Rev 20:11ff).

When I think about the deaths of these folks in Charleston S.C. my hope is that each of these nine precious souls knew Christ as Lord and Savior, because if they did, they are more alive today than they ever have been in their entire lives. The plain truth is that many of us who name the name of Christ are not ready to die because we either have a non-existing or underdeveloped theology of death. Listen, when one knows the truth of God's word related to death, no matter what the circumstances we can and will experience the hope that's ours in Christ.

Amen.

"Sex Change" Surgery: What Bruce Jenner, Diane Sawyer, and You Should Know

by  Walt Heyer
within Culture

April 27th, 2015

The dark and troubling history of the contemporary transgender movement, with its enthusiastic approval of gender-reassignment surgery, has left a trail of misery in its wake.

Bruce Jenner and Diane Sawyer could benefit from a history lesson. I know, because I suffered through “sex change” surgery and lived as a woman for eight years. The surgery fixed nothing—it only masked and exacerbated deeper psychological problems.

The beginnings of the transgender movement have gotten lost today in the push for transgender rights, acceptance, and tolerance. If more people were aware of the dark and troubled history of sex-reassignment surgery, perhaps we wouldn’t be so quick to push people toward it.

The setting for the first transgender surgeries (mostly male-to-female) was in university-based clinics, starting in the 1950s and progressing through the 1960s and the 1970s. When the researchers tallied the results and found no objective proof that it was successful—and, in fact, evidence that it was harmful—the universities stopped offering sex-reassignment surgery.

Since then, private surgeons have stepped in to take their place. Without any scrutiny or accountability for their results, their practices have grown, leaving shame, regret, and suicide in their wake.

The Founding Fathers of the Transgender Movement

The transgender movement began as the brainchild of three men who shared a common bond: all three were pedophilia activists.

The story starts with the infamous Dr. Alfred Kinsey, a biologist and sexologist whose legacy endures today. Kinsey believed that all sex acts were legitimate—including pedophilia, bestiality, sadomasochism, incest, adultery, prostitution, and group sex. He authorized despicable experiments on infants and toddlers to gather information to justify his view that children of any age enjoyed having sex. Kinsey advocated the normalization of pedophilia and lobbied against laws that would protect innocent children and punish sexual predators.

Transsexualism was added to Kinsey’s repertoire when he was presented with the case of an effeminate boy who wanted to become a girl. Kinsey consulted an acquaintance of his, an endocrinologist by the name of Dr. Harry Benjamin. Transvestites, men who dressed as women, were well-known. Kinsey and Benjamin saw this as an opportunity to change a transvestite physically, way beyond dress and make-up. Kinsey and Benjamin became professional collaborators in the first case of what Benjamin would later call “transsexualism.”

Benjamin asked several psychiatric doctors to evaluate the boy for possible surgical procedures to feminize his appearance. They couldn’t come to a consensus on the appropriateness of feminizing surgery. That didn’t stop Benjamin. On his own, he began offering female hormone therapy to the boy. The boy went to Germany for partial surgery, and Benjamin lost all contact with him, making any long-term follow-up impossible.

The Tragic Story of the Reimer Twins

The third co-founder of today’s transgender movement was psychologist Dr. John Money, a dedicated disciple of Kinsey and a member of a transsexual research team headed by Benjamin.

Money’s first transgender case came in 1967 when he was asked by a Canadian couple, the Reimers, to repair a botched circumcision on their two-year-old son, David. Without any medical justification, Money launched into an experiment to make a name for himself and advance his theories about gender, no matter what the consequences to the child. Money told the distraught parents that the best way to assure David’s happiness was to surgically change his genitalia from male to female and raise him as a girl. As many parents do, the Reimers followed their doctor’s orders, and David was replaced with Brenda. Money assured the parents that Brenda would adapt to being a girl and that she would never know the difference. He told them that they should keep it a secret, so they did—at least for a while.

Activist doctors like Dr. Money always look brilliant at first, especially if they control the information that the media report. Money played a skilled game of “catch me if you can,” reporting the success of the boy’s gender change to the medical and scientific community and building his reputation as a leading expert in the emerging field of gender change. It would be decades before the truth was revealed. In reality, David Reimer’s “adaptation” to being a girl was completely different from the glowing reports concocted by Money for journal articles. By age twelve, David was severely depressed and refused to return to see Money. In desperation, his parents broke their secrecy, and told him the truth of the gender reassignment. At age fourteen, David chose to undo the gender change and live as a boy.

In 2000, at the age of thirty-five, David and his twin brother finally exposed the sexual abuse Dr. Money had inflicted on them in the privacy of his office. The boys told how Dr. Money took naked photos of them when they were just seven years old. But pictures were not enough for Money. The pedophilic doctor also forced the boys to engage in incestuous sexual activities with each other.

The consequences of Money’s abuse were tragic for both boys. In 2003, only three years after going public about their tortured past, David’s twin brother, Brian, died from a self-inflicted overdose. A short while later, David also committed suicide. Money had finally been exposed as a fraud, but that didn’t help the grieving parents whose twin boys were now dead.

The exposure of Money’s fraudulent research results and tendencies came too late for people suffering from gender issues, too. Using surgery had become well-established by then, and no one cared that one of its founders was discredited.

Results from Johns Hopkins: Surgery Gives No Relief

Dr. Money became the co-founder of one of the first university-based gender clinics in the United States at Johns Hopkins University, where gender reassignment surgery was performed. After the clinic had been in operation for several years, Dr. Paul McHugh, the director of psychiatry and behavioral science at Hopkins, wanted more than Money’s assurances of success immediately following surgery. McHugh wanted more evidence. Long-term, were patients any better off after surgery?

McHugh assigned the task of evaluating outcomes to Dr. Jon Meyer, the chairman of the Hopkins gender clinic. Meyer selected fifty subjects from those treated at the Hopkins clinic, both those who had undergone gender reassignment surgery and those who had not had surgery. The results of this study completely refuted Money’s claims about the positive outcomes of sex-change surgery. The objective report showed no medical necessity for surgery.

On August 10, 1979, Dr. Meyer announced his results: “To say this type of surgery cures psychiatric disturbance is incorrect. We now have objective evidence that there is no real difference in the transsexual’s adjustments to life in terms of job, educational attainment, marital adjustment and social stability.”  He later told The New York Times: “My personal feeling is that the surgery is not a proper treatment for a psychiatric disorder, and it’s clear to me these patients have severe psychological problems that don’t go away following surgery.”

Less than six months later, the Johns Hopkins gender clinic closed. Other university-affiliated gender clinics across the country followed suit, completely ceasing to perform gender reassignment surgery. No success was reported anywhere.

Results from Benjamin’s Colleague: Too Many Suicides

It was not just the Hopkins clinic reporting lack of outcomes from surgery. Around the same time, serious questions about the effectiveness of gender change came from Dr. Harry Benjamin’s partner, endocrinologist Charles Ihlenfeld.

Ihlenfeld worked with Benjamin for six years and administered sex hormones to 500 transsexuals. Ihlenfeld shocked Benjamin by publicly announcing that 80 percent of the people who want to change their gender shouldn’t do it. Ihlenfeld said: “There is too much unhappiness among people who have had the surgery…Too many end in suicide.” Ihlenfeld stopped administering hormones to patients experiencing gender dysphoria and switched specialties from endocrinology to psychiatry so he could offer such patients the kind of help he thought they really needed.

In the wake of the Hopkins study, the closure of the flagship Hopkins clinic, and the warning sounded by Ihlenfeld, advocates of sex change surgery needed a new strategy. Benjamin and Money looked to their friend, Paul Walker, PhD, a homosexual and transgender activist they knew shared their passion to provide hormones and surgery. A committee was formed to draft standards of care for transgenders that furthered their agenda, with Paul Walker at the helm. The committee included a psychiatrist, a pedophilia activist, two plastic surgeons, and a urologist, all of whom would financially benefit from keeping gender reassignment surgery available for anyone who wanted it. The “Harry Benjamin International Standards of Care” were published in 1979 and gave fresh life to gender surgery.

My Experience with Dr. Walker

I myself suffered greatly to come to terms with my gender. In 1981, I sought out Dr. Walker to ask him, the man who wrote the standards of care, for help. Walker said I was suffering from gender dysphoria. A mere two years after both the Hopkins study and the public statements of Ihlenfeld drew attention to the increased suicide risk associated with gender change, Walker, even though he was completely aware of both reports, signed my approval letter for hormones and surgery.

Under his guidance, I underwent gender reassignment surgery and lived for eight years as Laura Jensen, female. Eventually, I gathered the courage to admit that the surgery had fixed nothing—it only masked and exacerbated deeper psychological problems.The deception and lack of transparency I experienced in the 1980s still surround gender change surgery today. For the sake of others who struggle with gender dysphoria, I cannot remain silent.

It is intellectually dishonest to ignore the facts that surgery never has been a medically necessary procedure for treating gender dysphoria and that taking cross-gender hormones can be harmful.  Modern transgender activists, the descendants of Kinsey, Benjamin, and John Money, keep alive the practice of medically unnecessary gender-change surgery by controlling the flow of published information and by squelching research and personal stories that tell of the regret, unhappiness, and suicide experienced by those who undergo such surgery. Negative outcomes are only acknowledged as a way to blame society for its transphobia.

Transgender clients who regret having taken this path are often full of shame and remorse. Those who regret their decision have few places to turn in a world of pro-transgender activism. For me, it took years to muster the courage to stand up and speak out about the regret.

I only wish Dr. Paul Walker had been required to tell me about both reports when I consulted him: the Hopkins study showing surgery did not alleviate severe psychological problems, and Ihlenfeld’s observation of the continuing transgender unhappiness and high incidence of suicide after hormones and surgery. This information might not have stopped me from making that disastrous decision—but at least I would have known the dangers and pain that lay ahead.

Walt Heyer is an author and public speaker with a passion to help others who regret gender change. Through his website, SexChangeRegret.com, and his blog, WaltHeyer.com, Heyer raises public awareness about the incidence of regret and the tragic consequences suffered as a result. Heyer’s story can be read in novel form in Kid Dakota and The Secret at Grandma’s House and in his autobiography, A Transgender’s Faith. Heyer’s other books include Paper Genders and Gender, Lies and Suicide.

Transgenderism: A Pathogenic Meme

by  Paul McHugh
within Bioethics, Culture, Science

June 10th, 2015

The idea that one’s sex is a feeling, not a fact, has permeated our culture and is leaving casualties in its wake. Gender dysphoria should be treated with psychotherapy, not surgery.

For forty years as the University Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins Medical School—twenty-six of which were also spent as Psychiatrist in Chief of Johns Hopkins Hospital—I’ve been studying people who claim to be transgender. Over that time, I’ve watched the phenomenon change and expand in remarkable ways.

A rare issue of a few men—both homosexual and heterosexual men, including some who sought sex-change surgery because they were erotically aroused by the thought or image of themselves as women—has spread to include women as well as men. Even young boys and girls have begun to present themselves as of the opposite sex. Over the last ten or fifteen years, this phenomenon has increased in prevalence, seemingly exponentially. Now, almost everyone has heard of or met such a person.

Publicity, especially from early examples such as “Christine” Jorgenson, “Jan” Morris, and “Renee” Richards, has promoted the idea that one’s biological sex is a choice, leading to widespread cultural acceptance of the concept. And, that idea, quickly accepted in the 1980s, has since run through the American public like a revelation or “meme” affecting much of our thought about sex.

The champions of this meme, encouraged by their alliance with the broader LGBT movement, claim that whether you are a man or a woman, a boy or a girl, is more of a disposition or feeling about yourself than a fact of nature. And, much like any other feeling, it can change at any time, and for all sorts of reasons. Therefore, no one could predict who would swap this fact of their makeup, nor could one justifiably criticize such a decision.

At Johns Hopkins, after pioneering sex-change surgery, we demonstrated that the practice brought no important benefits. As a result, we stopped offering that form of treatment in the 1970s. Our efforts, though, had little influence on the emergence of this new idea about sex, or upon the expansion of the number of “transgendered” among young and old.

Olympic Athlete Turned "Pin-Up" Girl

This history may clarify some aspects of the latest high-profile transgender claimant. Bruce Jenner, the 1976 Olympic decathlon champion, is turning away from his titular identity as one of the “world’s greatest male athletes.” Jenner announced recently that he “identifies as a woman” and, with medical and surgical help, is busy reconstructing his physique.

I have not met or examined Jenner, but his behavior resembles that of some of the transgender males we have studied over the years. These men wanted to display themselves in sexy ways, wearing provocative female garb. More often than not, while claiming to be a woman in a man’s body, they declared themselves to be “lesbians” (attracted to other women). The photograph of the posed, corseted, breast-boosted Bruce Jenner (a man in his mid-sixties, but flaunting himself as if a “pin-up” girl in her twenties or thirties) on the cover ofVanity Fair suggests that he may fit the behavioral mold that Ray Blanchard has dubbed an expression of “autogynephilia”—from gynephilia (attracted to women) and auto (in the form of oneself).

The Emperor’s New Clothes

But the meme—that your sex is a feeling, not a biological fact, and can change at any time—marches on through our society. In a way, it’s reminiscent of the Hans Christian Andersen tale, The Emperor’s New Clothes. In that tale, the Emperor, believing that he wore an outfit of special beauty imperceptible to the rude or uncultured, paraded naked through his town to the huzzahs of courtiers and citizens anxious about their reputations. Many onlookers to the contemporary transgender parade, knowing that a disfavored opinion is worse than bad taste today, similarly fear to identify it as a misapprehension.

I am ever trying to be the boy among the bystanders who points to what’s real. I do so not only because truth matters, but also because overlooked amid the hoopla—enhanced now by Bruce Jenner’s celebrity and Annie Leibovitz’s photography—stand many victims. Think, for example, of the parents whom no one—not doctors, schools, nor even churches—will help to rescue their children from these strange notions of being transgendered and the problematic lives these notions herald. These youngsters now far outnumber the Bruce Jenner type of transgender. Although they may be encouraged by his public reception, these children generally come to their ideas about their sex not through erotic interests but through a variety of youthful psychosocial conflicts and concerns.

First, though, let us address the basic assumption of the contemporary parade: the idea that exchange of one’s sex is possible. It, like the storied Emperor, is starkly, nakedly false. Transgendered men do not become women, nor do transgendered women become men. All (including Bruce Jenner) become feminized men or masculinized women, counterfeits or impersonators of the sex with which they “identify.” In that lies their problematic future.

When “the tumult and shouting dies,” it proves not easy nor wise to live in a counterfeit sexual garb. The most thorough follow-up of sex-reassigned people—extending over thirty years and conducted in Sweden, where the culture is strongly supportive of the transgendered—documents their lifelong mental unrest. Ten to fifteen years after surgical reassignment, the suicide rate of those who had undergone sex-reassignment surgery rose to twenty times that of comparable peers.

How to Treat Gender Dysphoria

So how should we make sense of this matter today? As with any mental phenomenon, what’s crucial is noting its fundamental characteristic and then identifying the many ways in which that characteristic can manifest itself.

The central issue with all transgender subjects is one of assumption—the assumption that one’s sexual nature is misaligned with one’s biological sex. This problematic assumption comes about in several different ways, and these distinctions in its generation determine how to manage and treat it.

Based on the photographic evidence one might guess Bruce Jenner falls into the group of men who come to their disordered assumption through being sexually aroused by the image of themselves as women. He could have been treated for this misaligned arousal with psychotherapy and medication. Instead, he found his way to surgeons who worked him over as he wished. Others have already commented on his stereotypic caricature of women as decorative “babes” (“I look forward to wearing nail polish until it chips off,” he said to Diane Sawyer)—a view that understandably infuriates feminists—and his odd sense that only feelings, not facts, matter here.

For his sake, however, I do hope that he receives regular, attentive follow-up care, as his psychological serenity in the future is doubtful. Future men with similar feelings and intentions should be treated for those feelings rather than being encouraged to undergo bodily changes. Group therapies are now available for them.

Most young boys and girls who come seeking sex-reassignment are utterly different from Jenner. They have no erotic interest driving their quest. Rather, they come with psychosocial issues—conflicts over the prospects, expectations, and roles that they sense are attached to their given sex—and presume that sex-reassignment will ease or resolve them.

The grim fact is that most of these youngsters do not find therapists willing to assess and guide them in ways that permit them to work out their conflicts and correct their assumptions. Rather, they and their families find only “gender counselors” who encourage them in their sexual misassumptions.

Those with Gender Dysphoria Need Evidence-Based Care

There are several reasons for this absence of coherence in our mental health system. Important among them is the fact that both the state and federal governments are actively seeking to block any treatments that can be construed as challenging the assumptions and choices of transgendered youngsters. “As part of our dedication to protecting America’s youth, this administration supports efforts to ban the use of conversion therapy for minors,” said Valerie Jarrett, a senior advisor to President Obama.

In two states, a doctor who would look into the psychological history of a transgendered boy or girl in search of a resolvable conflict could lose his or her license to practice medicine. By contrast, such a physician would not be penalized if he or she started such a patient on hormones that would block puberty and might stunt growth.

What is needed now is public clamor for coherent science—biological and therapeutic science—examining the real effects of these efforts to “support” transgendering. Although much is made of a rare “intersex” individual, no evidence supports the claim that people such as Bruce Jenner have a biological source for their transgender assumptions. Plenty of evidence demonstrates that with him and most others, transgendering is a psychological rather than a biological matter.

In fact, gender dysphoria—the official psychiatric term for feeling oneself to be of the opposite sex—belongs in the family of similarly disordered assumptions about the body, such as anorexia nervosa and body dysmorphic disorder. Its treatment should not be directed at the body as with surgery and hormones any more than one treats obesity-fearing anorexic patients with liposuction. The treatment should strive to correct the false, problematic nature of the assumption and to resolve the psychosocial conflicts provoking it. With youngsters, this is best done in family therapy.

The larger issue is the meme itself. The idea that one’s sex is fluid and a matter open to choice runs unquestioned through our culture and is reflected everywhere in the media, the theater, the classroom, and in many medical clinics. It has taken on cult-like features: its own special lingo, internet chat rooms providing slick answers to new recruits, and clubs for easy access to dresses and styles supporting the sex change. It is doing much damage to families, adolescents, and children and should be confronted as an opinion without biological foundation wherever it emerges.

But gird your loins if you would confront this matter. Hell hath no fury like a vested interest masquerading as a moral principle.

Paul McHugh, MD, is University Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins Medical School and the former psychiatrist in chief at Johns Hopkins Hospital. He is the author of The Mind Has Mountains: Reflections on Society and Psychiatry.