Whatever Happened to France's Voice in Europe?

Reuters, April 24, 2013
BRUSSELS/PARIS (Reuters)—A few hours after midnight one Sunday last month, as negotiations over a rescue for Cyprus dragged into a second day, French Finance Minister Pierre Moscovici fell asleep.

Most euro zone ministers in Brussels that night failed to notice, continuing to pore over the details of the multi-billion-euro deal. It fell to Christine Lagarde, French director of the International Monetary Fund, to approach Moscovici and nudge him awake, according to witnesses at the March 24 talks.

The sight of the IMF head waking up France’s top finance official in a crisis meeting neatly illustrates a question that is troubling European diplomats: what has happened to France’s voice in Europe?

For decades France has been central to the European project that was born out of World War Two and now reaches from Europe’s Atlantic coast to beyond the former Iron Curtain.

Straddling north and south, France has a unique perspective on Europe. It is the European Union’s largest economy after Germany. One of six founders of the original European coal and steel community in 1951, it has shaped and often led, the institutions that make the EU tick.

The readiness of successive French and German leaders to work together has for decades created a consensus among two former enemies that has steered Europe through crisis and change—from the end of the Cold War and Germany’s reunification, to the expansion of the EU to the east and the introduction of the single European currency in 1999.

For much of the past four years, during which the euro zone was nearly torn apart by a debt crisis, the Franco-German axis has held true. But in the past six months, questions have arisen about what France is offering in terms of fresh ideas, and how it is dealing with the rest of Europe.

“You can see a shrinking presence, a progressive disappearance of France on most issues that concern the economic agenda,” said Fredrik Erixon, director of the European Centre for International Political Economy, a Brussels think tank.

European diplomats from a range of member states, speaking on condition of anonymity, are more blunt.

“You don’t hear France’s voice at all. They are nowhere, just nowhere,” said a senior European diplomat who is in frequent contact with other member states.

“This is a critical country and yet it seems absent,” he said, mentioning as an example a lack of sustained French input to the debate on how to strengthen economic and monetary union.

“It’s not just strange, it’s worrying,” he said. “Everyone is aware of the problem. There’s concern at multiple levels.”

Even France accepts something is wrong. Prime Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault told parliament this month it was time the country reasserted itself so that “what it says counts in Europe, and that it can rediscover the leadership role it has lost”.

Diplomats, officials and analysts interviewed by Reuters offered a range of theories for the ebbing French influence—from the style-change since the consensual Francois Hollande took over from the more combative Nicolas Sarkozy, to the fact that English is displacing French as Brussels’ lingua franca.

There is broad agreement that one root of the problem lies in France’s inability so far to follow Germany’s lead in reforming its economy. A lack of economic competitiveness has undermined France’s ability to project influence in Brussels.

Hollande insists early reforms such as a deal with trade unions to loosen labour law should be given time to work, and points to the fact that he has already managed to reduce France’s public deficit from its Sarkozy-era levels.

Yet critics say the pace of reform is not fast enough, especially when it comes to pensions reform and overhauling a centralised economy.

Away from the economy, France remains vocal. On foreign and defence policy, its intervention to help combat Islamist rebels in Mali and its diplomatic efforts to end the Syrian conflict show the veto-holding U.N. Security Council member remains a powerful voice, and one able to make an impact. In such matters, France is as confident as it was a decade ago when it galvanised European resistance to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.

But on Europe’s most pressing economic issue—how it sees off the debt crisis and puts itself on a footing to compete with the United States and Asia—the weakness of France’s economy and public finances means its voice is muffled.

“If you don’t have your house in order, it’s very difficult to influence others,” said Erixon of the ECIPE think tank. “This is not the sort of France we’ve grown used to having in the European Union.”

Just how the European Union will evolve if French influence is durably muted and Germany is pushed against its will into a lone leadership role is hard to predict.

But it did not go unnoticed in Paris that it was the prime minister of Britain and his family who were recently invited to spend the weekend with Merkel at a country estate.

“These days it is with David Cameron that Angela Merkel tries to build a common position,” wrote Le Point weekly with a hint of pique. “And not with Francois Hollande.”

Read More

Photographer's loss offers hope for Boston wounded

By Emilio Morenatti, AP, Apr 23, 2013
BARCELONA, Spain (AP)—In the first horrific moments after the Boston bombing, with smoke still billowing around the wounded, I know what is going through the minds of the maimed victims.

They are at once conscious and unconscious. They want to scream, but they cannot scream. They want to wake up from a nightmare, but they are awake.

I lost my leg in a bomb blast. I know the violent shock of a day that begins well and ends with an amputation, the fog of drugs and surgery, the months of painful rehabilitation.

I know the suffering that lies ahead for these people in Boston. And I know the possibilities, too.

For those who lost a limb or more in the Boston Marathon, Monday, April 15, 2013, was the day their world changed forever.

Mine changed on Tuesday, Aug. 11, 2009. I had been embedded with the U.S. military for two weeks in southern Afghanistan as a photographer for The Associated Press, and this was to have been my last patrol before going home. It had been a long day in the open desert of Kandahar province and I was whipped, barely awake, in fact, when our eight-wheel armored Stryker vehicle hit a roadside bomb and flipped over, knocking me unconscious.

When I came to, I tried to get up but couldn’t; my left foot was hanging by a few tendons. I felt brutal pain, like an electric shock, that began in my leg and swept through the rest of my body. Lying inside the vehicle, I thought of my wife, and willed myself to stay alive.

Eventually, a soldier found me and tied on a tourniquet.

In my years as a photojournalist, I’d taken many pictures of wounded soldiers and victims of suicide bombers. I had covered medical evacuations from Afghanistan, Pakistan and the Palestinian territories, and found it odd to suddenly be among those pulled from an inferno and carried on a stretcher—along with two other soldiers and AP Television News videographer Andi Jatmiko.

They loaded me onto a helicopter next to a soldier who had lost both of his legs and we locked hands as the chopper took off for the provincial capital of Kandahar. The solidarity in that moment is the last thing I remember before waking up in a hospital tent to find my left leg had been amputated below the knee. There was no option to save it, doctors told me. Bone and tissue were destroyed by shrapnel. But fortunately my knee was intact, and that would make a substantial difference in my future mobility, they explained.

That offered little comfort as I lay alone and exhausted in a hospital bed in Afghanistan. I had so many questions about life with just one leg but I preferred sleep to thinking about my uncertain future.

The difference between those who lost limbs in Boston and me is that I knew I was taking a risk in a war zone and assumed it willingly, while they had merely gone out to cheer friends and relatives at a family sporting event.

I was a photographer documenting soldiers at war and everyday life for civilians under fire. But before violence grabs you, does anyone really believe he will become one of the dead or wounded? No. Nothing had happened to me on dozens of previous patrols with the military through hostile lands. And while I suspected I was playing a kind of Russian roulette, I also told myself that car accidents happen every day and most people don’t stop driving because of that.

For months after the explosion I was tortured by so many “what ifs.” What if I had stayed back to pack rather than going on patrol that day? What if I had sat a little bit to the right, would the shrapnel have missed my leg? Or if I had sat to the left, would I have lost both legs like the soldier next to me?

I imagine those in Boston whose bodies were torn up by nails or the blasts have similar thoughts: Why didn’t I stand at mile 25, go for water, leave earlier, stay home? I would like to tell them that these questions fade as one begins to accept the reality of losing a limb.

The morphine they gave me to dim the pain of my amputation sapped my energy. I wanted off it so I could start my recuperation with all my strength and walk as soon as possible. I am a Spanish citizen, not American, and was lucky that the AP was able to work bureaucratic miracles to get me admitted to the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, one of the world’s best rehab hospitals.

I was 40 years old, agile and in good shape from exercise and work as a photographer in rough terrain. I even used to jog in the Afghan capital of Kabul when I lived there. So just a month after the explosion, I threw myself into rehab. Although my wounds were still fresh, I put on my first prosthesis and took my first steps. I was determined.

And I was completely unprepared for the difficulty.

It took tremendous strength to learn to walk again. I needed practice, but practice rubbed my wounds raw. Exercise was essential and exercise produced blisters where the prosthesis was joined to my leg—more hot pain.

I was frustrated and felt useless on the days I couldn’t exercise, waiting for the blisters to drain and heal. Then I would put the prosthesis back on and push myself to my limit until the skin broke again.

In those first days, I could only take a few steps. In the first weeks, it took me an hour to walk a mile. I worked out on a bicycle, on a treadmill and with weights. And month by month, I increased my speed so that finally I could walk the 2 1/2 miles from my rented home to the hospital in 25 minutes.

If those maimed in Boston were to ask me what was harder, the physical or psychological recovery, I would say the two go hand-in-hand.

At first I thought it was enough to recover physically, and that learning to walk and work again would naturally produce a psychological recovery.

I was wrong.

The strength of the wounded soldiers at Walter Reed helped me a great deal. Even though many of their injuries were so much worse than mine, I never heard them complain about pain or withdraw in self-pity.

I lost only the lower half of my left leg and came to understand that important distinction alongside soldiers who had lost a leg up to the hip, both legs, or legs and arms. We shared our daily experiences and hardships, often with humor. When a soldier who had lost both arms and legs teasingly called me “Paper Cut” for my lesser wounds, I called him “Trunk” and we laughed.

The soldiers, and some of my Spanish friends with amputations, also taught me the difference between losing a leg and missing a leg. The missing leg can be replaced with a prosthetic, but a loss is permanent. If you don’t confront the feelings of loss—the fact that your world has changed—you never fully recover from the amputation.

The support of my family and friends was crucial. My relationship with my wife after the accident changed to a deeper love. I could see that the patients who didn’t have as many visitors, as much love and reassurance around them, did not respond to physical therapy as quickly.

And then there was my camera. The very instrument that had gotten me into this mess, if you will, became my inspiration and part of my salvation. I carried it with me all the time to photograph the recovery of my hospital mates and to test my own. It took a lot of practice to be able to look through the lens and maintain my balance while walking, as I had done before the amputation.

With a prosthetic, you have to watch for bumps and dips in your path because you have no feeling in your false foot. If you take a wrong step, it is easy to fall, and I fell many times before learning to compensate. Running is much harder, as the body struggles to adjust to a prosthetic leg. When I was 15, I ran a marathon. Now, I am running three miles once a week and I am exhausted. My goal is to run again and recapture the runner’s high, the feeling of strength that I used to experience.

The new amputees in Boston will discover, as I did, that there is a whole world of prosthetics to choose from. Who would know if you didn’t need one? There are feet made for running, walking, climbing, cycling, even for swimming and golfing. But it turns out there’s no such thing as an all-terrain prosthesis, so in the end, I accumulated several.

I normally wear a versatile, durable foot, but I also carry a couple of extras in a backpack, one spare foot and a special one for running. I even have one for roller skating, which, after multiple clashes with trees, parked cars and the pavement, is now one of my favorite sports.

In the same way I have always tended to my cameras, I now must care for my prosthetics, making sure they are always in perfect working condition.

Like the amputees in Boston today, 3 1/2 years ago I joined a community to which no one wishes to belong. I have changed over the years, as they will.

For better or worse, I am more vulnerable now. If I were to offer advice, it would be that it’s possible to accept help without feeling dependent. I would tell them what I tell myself, “Emilio, you’re missing a foot so don’t be too hard on yourself, and when someone offers you a seat on the bus, take it.”

I would tell them the greatest truth I have learned is that I am a man who had a leg amputated, not an amputee. I am still a whole person.

I have returned to work as a photojournalist with the AP. I have tried to become a better person, sharing my small successes with all the people who have helped me in critical times. I appreciate that I live in a nice house in Barcelona with my wife, who is pregnant. I am looking forward to becoming a father for the first time.

I know they cannot imagine this in Boston now, but I want them to know that while certainly I miss my leg, I feel very fortunate.

Read More

Pope Francis' preaching style is low-key and mostly private

Alessandro Speciale, Religion News Service, Apr 22, 2013
VATICAN CITY (RNS) When you’re the pope, few things matter as much as what you say and, especially, where you say it.

From the pulpit of St. Peter’s Basilica or an outdoor altar erected in St. Peter’s Square, popes can command global media attention. Pope Francis, however, has settled in with a smaller congregation for his homilies that’s more in keeping with his low-key style.

Every day at 7 a.m., Francis celebrates Mass in the chapel of the Casa Santa Marta, the Vatican’s hotel-style guesthouse he has chosen to call home instead of the luxurious papal apartments. His brief, colorful homilies are delivered to small groups of Vatican workers, from policemen to doctors and bank employees.

Often quoting anecdotes from his time as a pastor and archbishop in Buenos Aires, Francis has used his morning homilies to offer spiritual reflections in an accessible, down-to-earth style—a far cry from the lengthy and highly intellectual public homilies of his predecessors.

According to the Vatican’s chief spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, Francis regularly speaks off the cuff at Santa Marta, without any prepared text.

It is unclear whether these homilies are official papal texts; in fact, they are not published on the Vatican website.

But Vatican Radio and L’Osservatore Romano, the Vatican’s semiofficial newspaper, have been reporting on them regularly, publishing extracts of Francis’ texts.

Their recurrent themes—the risks of gossip and slander among Christians, the virtue of meekness, the threats of the devil—offer an insight into the pope’s main concerns, framed in simple imagery that a parish priest might use. The impression is reinforced by frequent photos of Francis sitting in prayer in the back seats at the end of the Mass.

The pope’s morning homilies are “fascinating, a kind of mini Magisterium,” according to John Thavis, a former Rome bureau chief for Catholic News Service and a frequent Vatican commentator. “They seem designed to provide food for thought at a very accessible level.”

In some cases, though, it is possible to find hints on how Francis might handle the bigger challenges he faces as pope.

On April 9, talking about gossiping and criticizing others as “temptations of the evil one who does not want the Spirit to come to us and bring about peace and meekness,” he advised a course of action to deal with a community’s internal problems: “Keep quiet, and if you have something to say, say it to the interested parties, to those who can remedy the situation … not to the entire neighborhood.”

On April 16, Pope Benedict XVI’s 86th birthday, Francis discussed the 50th anniversary of the Second Vatican Council (1962-65), whose modernizing reforms became a point of contention after his predecessor tried to reconcile with ultra-conservative traditionalists who reject the council’s reforms. Francis criticized “those who wish to turn the clock back” within the church.

The morning homilies at Santa Marta started on March 21, just a week after Francis’ election. The first “guests” were the staff of the guesthouse itself, followed by Vatican garbage collectors and gardeners.

Here are some choice nuggets from Pope Francis’ morning homilies:

March 22: “If our heart is closed, if our heart is made of stone, then the stones will end up in our hands, and we will be ready to throw them at someone.”

April 2: “Sometimes in our life tears are the glasses to see Jesus.”

April 5: “In order to solve their problems, many people resort to fortune tellers and tarot cards. But only Jesus saves and we must bear witness to this! He is the only one.”

April 15: “The age of martyrs is not yet over, even today we can say, in truth, that the Church has more martyrs now than during the first centuries.”

April 17: When the church doesn’t empower the laity it is “not the mother, but the babysitter, that takes care of the baby—to put the baby to sleep. It is a church dormant.”

April 18: Christians don’t believe in “an ‘all over the place’—god, a ‘god-spray’ so to speak, who is a little bit everywhere but who no-one really knows anything about … We believe in persons, and when we talk to God we talk to Persons.

Read More

My Best Mistake: Not Telling My Boss He Stank

By Charlene Li, April 23, 2013

My boss stank. And I mean, he literally smelled bad. At the start of the day, he’d be freshly showered, but by the end of the work day, a horrible body odor hung around him. I knew I wasn’t the only person noticing this as other people in the office began mentioning it to me. The worst part: he was a really awesome boss and no one could bring it upon themselves to tell him.


I stressed about this for days—and then weeks had gone by. All the time, the gossip kept building. I finally got up the courage to tell him during an upcoming check-in meeting. We spent most of the meeting going over things we each needed to do, and he then asked, “So, is there anything else that we should discuss?”


The moment had finally come. I cleared my throat and said. “Yes, there is one more thing. At the end of the day, you have really bad body odor. I realized you didn’t know this, or you would have done something about it.” Then I sat there, absolutely mortified.


Without missing a beat, my boss said, “Well, that’s good to know. I’ll put on my list to pick up a really strong deodorant.”


And that was it. The next day, no more body odor.


On the surface, this doesn’t seem like a big mistake, only a highly embarrassing professional moment both for me and my boss. My colleagues and I stressed about it for weeks, leading to who knows how many hours of lost productivity. My big mistake wasn’t telling my boss that he stank, but waiting so long to finally getting around to it.


This is a mistake that I’ve continued to make throughout my career—waiting far too long to deliver bad news to people. This odiferous affair taught me that people are far more resilient than we give them credit for, and that we are all so much better to be forthright with each other than to avoid hard truths.


I hope you learn from my big career mistake and take it upon yourself to tell share quickly something that you’ve been meaning to say. You’ll be a far better friend and colleague for doing this, and I’ll bet you’ll kick yourself for not having brought it up sooner.

Read More

“Imagine There’s No Religion”

By Dennis Edwards:

The following is a conversation I had with some friends recently. I am posting it because I think it may be you may find it interesting! I am trying to share my faith without coming across self-righteous. Let me know what you think. we are all learning! Dennis

Ethan: John Lennon said, "Imagine no religion." I agree, totally. Religion is an unnatural, divisive force separating people into antagonistic groups, who cling desperately to beliefs based on their fear of death, salvation and the afterlife. We need to live in the moment. When those irrational beliefs are questioned, people "of faith" become disoriented and violence is their only option. That's what happened in the Roman siege of Gaul, the Crusades, the Inquisition and... Boston. Debate is not an option, because religion is not at all based on logic - it's based on fear. Pathetic, really. Sorry, Dennis, but Religion is a myth. God may or may not be real, but the rest is just crap.

Dennis : False religion was the opium of the masses until we got TV and shopping malls and computers. I agree in living in the moment. That´s what one of the prophets said. "Take no thought for tomorrow for tomorrow will take thought for itself, sufficient unto the day are today´s troubles."[1] And another said, “Forgetting those things that are behind, I reach forth for those things that are before."[2] The evidences you mention above about religion´s bad conduct are from the false hypocritical religionists who have always persecuted the real followers of love and peace. If God is love like the good Book says and we do unto to others like we want them to do unto us, which basically means to treat others like we would want to be treated, then that´s all the religion we need. But that idea so infuriated the religious leaders of the past, that they killed the prophet hoping it would wipe out those revolutionary ideas. You are right, friend. Religion is not an option. But religion and faith are not equals. Real faith is logical. The reason we can do science is because we are in a universe that operates on rational or reasonable laws. Where do those laws come from? Scientists confess that there are around 100 physical variables that need to be perfectly fine-tuned for the universe and life on earth to exist. Can we explain that fine-tuning?

Dennis: How did they get fine-tuned within the first sixty seconds after the "singularity"? The speed of light, the strong nuclear force, the weak nuclear force, electromagnetic field, gravity, the vigor of the "big bang," etc. How come water is perfectly "made" to make life possible? When the "big bang” occurred where did the matter that was spinning around in that little small dot smaller than a period come from? Why did it start to spin? Who or what made it spin? Where did the energy come from that gave the "big bang" just the perfect amount of force so that the universe did not fall back upon itself, or disappear completely and be unable to form galaxies etc. Evolution has no answers for these questions except nothing exploded and made everything. To me, that is not logical. The scientific law of causality states that if something has a beginning it has a cause, the First Cause. Einstein´s theory of relativity led to the scientific mathematical conclusion that the universe had a beginning. This fact led Einstein to abandon his belief in the Steady-State Theory of the universe which said the universe has no beginning or end. He said the bigger mistake from being wrong would be to not acknowledge that he was wrong and not change. But he did acknowledge it even though it had theological implications. He changed his belief system based on the physical evidence. He confessed the universe had some kind of creator though he stayed away from traditional religion. He also said when men discovered the Universal Theory that it would be both beautiful and simple. Most people today do not even realize the illogicality of their belief system. But Faith is in fact logical. True science leads to faith as many great scientists of the past have acknowledged. Most people can see the faults and hypocrisy of the man-made religions of today and therefore many conclude there is no God. However, has anyone ever thought that maybe the religious ceremonies and systems we observe may have very little or nothing to do with the creator of the universe?

Dennis: I do not want to be part of that false religious/ political system that wages war against the true followers of love and peace. The true followers of love and peace will always be in the minority, because though many are called, so few will pick up the call and follow. The voice of conscience is "God´s" voice speaking to our heart. Do you hear his voice? Or have you hardened your heart, because of so much pain, suffering, and injustice, that you see in the world around us? Friend, once when I was young and the FBI was after me, because I did not show up for my physical or induction, I called out to "God," though I did not believe "He" existed. Usually there is some catalyst that causes us to seek "Him." But the prophet Jeremiah said, "You shall seek "Me" and find "Me" when you shall search for "Me" with all your heart."[3] Have you really sought for "Him" with all your heart? Or are you letting your concept of religion get in the way of finding out if there really is a creator of the universe?

Dennis: The book In Six Days: why 50 scientists (Doctorates) believe in creation, edited by John Aston, may give you some logical answers to questions you may have. Dr. Lee Spetner, who holds a PHD in physics from MIT, has a book called Shattering the Modern Theory of Evolution which you may also find interesting. Then there is Werner Gitt an information scientist who poses some very good questions about the information code found in the DNA molecule in his book In the Beginning Was Information. I hope you will investigate further by reading one or more of them. Religion may be illogical and based on blind faith, but real faith is based on reason. Will you reason with me for the answers? 

( The above posts to Ethan I shared privately but then he re-posted the Lennon quote again.)

Ethan: Believe what you want, or need, to believe. DO NOT try to change what your neighbor believes, no matter how alien it seems to you, and DO NOT hate them for their equally irrational beliefs. If you do, the world will slip further and further into terminal darkness.( Dennis - I do not agree with the idea of not trying to change people. As Christians we are commanded by Christ to loving preach and live the gospel to affect change in others. Peter also says we should be ready to give an answer to every man that asks us of the reason of the hope that is in us with meekness and fear. Paul told us to vigorously contend for the faith, but it is important that we do so humbly and with kindness.)

Jane: Spot on!

Dennis : To Ethan: I believe we are all in the business of moving people, influencing people. Why did you put that post if you did not want to influence others to your way of thinking? We all try and influence others, but the way we do it makes the difference. Love is getting down where someone else is and trying to lift and help him up. Much of the progress of the pass came from a few individuals who were willing to stand up and fight for some unpopular issue, like emancipation for the blacks, equality for the Jews, etc.

Jane: Dennis I think of the Christmas song....just be good for goodness sake....to define a way of believing eliminates all those who think differently ... live and let live

Ethan: The only law we need is the Golden Rule. "Do unto others as YOU WOULD HAVE others do unto you." Not, "Do unto to others BECAUSE (Jesus, Allah, Yahweh) say so..." Why doesn't matter. Be good for goodness sake is a wonderful phrase; a perfect phrase. (Dennis -  I agree with that first line that all we need is the golden rule. If we followed that we find it is even harder than the ten commandments.)

Ethan to Jane: Thanks, Jane.

Jane: Just heard on NPR..an apathist.....it doesn't matter what the "story" is after we die..we will die..I'm not expecting anything afterwards.... I make my happiness one day at a time...if there's anything after..bonus time...if not I won't be disappointed...(Jane told me she was a Unitarian.)

Dennis : To Jane: If there are absolutes then one of the purposes in life is to find out what those absolutes are and live according to their dictates. If someone finds a way to light a candle in the darkness, then his moral conscience obligates him to try to teach others how they too can light a candle. Let´s say someone invents a baby food that is more nutritious than the traditional, then he feels morally obligated to try to influence others to use that product. Love is sharing the knowledge and experience that life has taught us in a loving way. We cannot legislate righteousness but as believers we should shine forth the truth with love and tolerance.

Ethan: What a load. Who’s to say that that particular baby food is the best? What if experts disagree (as do “holy men“)... and I use the words in their most sarcastic tone.

Leave people alone and teach them to respect themselves and others, and god becomes a useless appendage to our lives. ( Dennis - I mentioned the Baby food because he sells his own brand that is suppose to be better for babies and even shared it on my photo page, which I left there because he is a friend and I want him no harm.)

Kathy: Explaining the existence of God to someone who has never experienced Him is like trying to describe an orgasm to someone who has never had one. Does that mean that orgasms do not exist or are useless? (Dennis - Excellent example!)

Jane: I think I'm going to leave this conversation. Addressing Dennis ..absolutes...I absolutely know I'm going to die..what happens after is based on belief as no one on this earth knows what comes next. I don't waste my time worrying about the hereafter. ( Dennis - I am not worrying. I have that question worked out. Jesus has given me eternal life because I believe in Him.)

Ethan: There is, female friend, no assurance that the orgasm you experience is like anyone else's. If a Muslim experiences Allah, is it different from Christian experiencing Jesus? But this conversation is not at all about the existence of god... it is about the rules.

Abby: So interesting that I'm reading your conversation just after reading a NYT editorial that states..."religious attendance boosts the immune system and decreases blood pressure." (P. 9 in Sunday Review section. If you wish to read the rest for a good laugh!)

Dennis : Jane: Pascal´s famous wager. Live a good life following the golden rule is the best bet. But it is sad that people wait until they die to find out if God is real when He wants to have a personal relationship with us today and help us through the struggles of life. He wants to be a friend that sticks closer than a brother. For those who have experienced that friendship, it is hard for us to shut up about it. Like a Near Death Experience, it totally changes your life and your life´s goals. Like Paul said, "I am not ashamed: for I know whom I have believed and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day."

Dennis : Ethan: Where does universal morality come from? I agree with you, Ethan, that the endless following of religious rules means nothing and this is what the prophet said and showed with his life style. The religious leaders of his day where so infuriated with him that they had him accused of political crimes against the state and killed.

Ethan: I'm out of this. When I start heeding scripture... whatever scripture it may be... I am at peace with life and I am at peace with the inevitable prospect of death. Invictus: I am captain of my fate, master of my soul. QED ( Dennis - And a few lines earlier the quote says..."My head is bloodied, but unbowed!)

Dennis : But Ethan: Where does objective right and wrong come from if it doesn´t come from God? You see we all know that there are absolutes, there is an objective morality and that objective morality must come from somewhere. Our conscience is God´s presence which brings about objective morality. It´s like the information within the DNA. It did not just get there by itself. Information always goes back to a sender. The tremendous amount of information in the DNA molecule cries aloud of a supernatural creator much more intelligent than you or I. He has put His signature in the cell for all to see. He has put it in the beautiful sunset, in the sky at night and the experience of sexual pleasure with someone we love. He can be seen in all these things and so many more. And He wants us to enjoy life and gives us a simply rule to live by: love.

Ethan: Dennis, it's referred to as "evolutionary conscience". We would not have been able to form ever larger and more complex civilizations were we without that aspect of our psychological makeup. It is as essential as opposable thumbs, language and stereo vision in our development. If we didn't have it, we'd simply kill each other willy-nilly. It was here before we even thought about one god... or any gods. Pagan civilizations possessed it. Primitive man possessed it. You argue against evolution, and even radio-carbon dating, based on a book written before willow bark was known as an anti-inflammatory; before real "empirical science" existed. There is no book, Dennis. There is only life and death. I do not need, seek or desire a "relationship" with god. Never have (I was literally forced to be bar mitzvahed), never will. I am an agnostic. I don't say a god or gods don't exist. I just don't care, and I'm sick and tired of being told I should care about what I have every human right to consider biblical smoke and mirrors. We "prohibit" gay marriage, marijuana, prostitution and a host of other personal choices which are none of anyone else's business. In the name of religion, we burned witches, slaughtered Muslims during the Crusades and committed countless genocides. We prohibited alcohol based on a radical, party-pooping group of Christian women called the Temperance Movement. That was a disaster, in every respect. Every prohibition is. Keep religion, god and biblical precepts out of our lives and legal system. Let logic be the rule of law and intelligence based on fact (rather than fear based on belief) reign supreme. (Dennis - My faith is based on reason not on fear. The evidences in nature and in life and in science point me to a eternal God infinitely superior to man.)

Ethan: If you believe it, that's great. I hope you find strength, solace and meaning in it. I don't, and most of us are sick of hearing about it. DO NOT try to "sell" it to anyone else, or insist that you're beliefs (or what you label "knowledge") are for everyone else to follow, believe in or care about. That sort of blind, self-centered insistence is exactly what a just god would NOT want. ( Dennis - Well, I do not want to come across self-righteously, but neither do I want to let others make claims that I believe are false and not speak up.)

Ethan: BTW, to Kathy, I know a lot more about orgasm than I know about god... more experience. LOL Seeking out THAT knowledge has served me better than Hebrew school ever did.

Kathy: I thought this was a conversation where anyone could jump in and pick up a thread. You mentioned that you don't think that God exists and I stated I did. I agree that religion divides men, because men, who are fallible, make up rules of religion; such as not eating bacon or drinking coffee. I don't think that I am trying to force my beliefs upon anyone else. It's none of my business what you choose to believe or where your soul may end up. Because I do believe in God, I leave such matters in his hands. I do not understand why everyone gets upset with others for sharing their beliefs. I don't believe in Santa Claus, but I don't go around bursting children's bubbles at Christmas. And, Ethan, I do agree that my orgasm is individual to me; but I would hazard to say that the dictionary defines what it is at least physically. We have the freedom to believe what we choose in this country. Why is there so much emotion in people sharing their beliefs? I really don't think anyone wants to convert anyone else; I don't. If you go to an outstanding restaurant or see a hit play it is completely normal to go out and tell everyone about it. Nobody hates anyone for that. Let's just all respect that we are all different and let's support everyone's right to believe and share their opinion. Love to all. P.S. I have a splitting headache today and cannot take anything for it because of a medical test I'm having tomorrow. Does anyone know any way to get rid of it without ingesting anything?

Ethan: Unfortunately, you are in limited company as someone of faith who does not try to convince others Every day, someone from the JWs or LDS knock on doors to convert we heathens.LOL As for the analogy, everyone knows the play is fiction. The quality of the writing and acting ate the topic. That is not at all what religious faith is about. Specious comparison.

Kathy : Content isn't what I was talking about; I meant that nobody thinks you're an idiot for going on and on about how great that play or dinner was. Our society elevates a hot playwright, producer, actress, or chef to the level of a god. I think that is extremely odd.

Kathy: Any headache cures forthcoming? Any one?

Ethan: I agree. Look at Beiber's behavior at the Anna Frank house pathetic.

Ethan: When I get a headache, I take a soaked hot washcloth and place it over my eyes. Reheat and repeat. It usually works.

Kathy: Done and done. I'll try it now. Thanks!

Jane: Kathy, I guess your MO...is pray for it to go away..

Dennis : I take a cold washcloth and place it over my eyes and when it gets warm I get it cold again and repeat. It is comforting. I used to tell my wife that having sex would take her headache away! Take your choice. In any case, I´ll pray for you! (Dennis - It is quite funny that me and Ethan did the exact opposite to relieve a headache. I was not trying to be sarcastic.)

Dennis: So few people realize that the false religions of churches and temples and mosques have actually very little or nothing to do with the true worship of God. God is a spirit, the spirit of love and "He" wants us to worship "Him" in spirit and in truth in how we live our lives. It´s not a rule keeping, or fear of death, but a purpose for living. It´s a lifting up of the heart and mind above the morass of the sad world we live in and seeing beyond into the unknown dimension and finding light, love and purpose in living! It´s a spiritual orgasm and it´s wonderful! Try it, you might like it!

Jane: I'm thinking at best god is a she....

Ethan: The best anything is a she.

Kathy: Tsk tsk Jane. Your intolerance of other opinions is showing.

Ethan: Ok. Show is over. Thank you all for attending, and Jane for adding reason and logic to the mix. 'night all.

Kathy: Oops you forgot about the golden rule. Shouldn’t you treat us all with respect and not just the friend who shares your views? Hardly the sign of a good host.

Dennis : Actually, the book of Proverbs seems to present the Holy Spirit in the feminine case.[4] In the traditional Christian belief of a Three-in-One-God, it would seem to make sense that there needs to be a feminine aspect. In the book The Shack by William P Young, the author also presents "God the Father" as a woman. The Father, Son and Holy Ghost can be seen as a Heavenly family, if that is the case, then the Holy Ghost would be the woman. Of course I am speculating as we have only glimpses into the spiritual dimension. But some in depth studies on this subject have been made by others. That was why I put "He" in quotations as God is a spirit with infinite abilities so whether we should use "He" or "She" I do not know. And I do not think it matters. Like Paul said, "Now we see through a glass darkly, but then face to face."[5] Hope this helps!

Dennis: Ethan, and as far as empirical science is concerned, agnostic Biologist Dr. Michael Denton does a good study on the topic of the impossibilities of changing a reptile into a bird which evolutionists claim. It can be seen on YouTube on “From a Prince to a Frog," http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtDX17KjjG0 In his book Evolution: A Theory in Crisis, Denton wrote, “Neither of the two fundamental axioms of Darwin´s macro-evolutionary theory- the idea that all of life forms are linked together and ultimately lead back to a primordial cell and the belief that all the adaptive design of life has resulted from a random process – have been validated by one single EMPIRICAL discovery or scientific advance since 1859.”[6]

Reiterating the point once again, neither natural selection nor mutations, which evolutionists claim are the mechanisms for evolutionary change, can form new genetic information. The theory that you are trusting in does not have a mechanism. People have been duped into believing that evolution is true and therefore their disbelief in God is justified. But, Ethan, when we look at the scientific facts, we find that evolution is the far less reasonable and logical of the theories. But, nevertheless, we accept it because we have rejected the concept of God. Our empty and hypocritical religious experiences from childhood and adolescence have taught us that God is dead, or at least inattentive to this life. In any case, we don´t want a religion that will crowd out our sexuality. We want to be free to live life to the full. I fully understand that and I´m sure God does, too. I just think you have quite a few misconceptions due to the obvious faults with the religious systems around the world. Very few, if any, have much to do with the "Spirit of the Living God."[7]

Footnotes:

[1] Matthew 6:34

[2] Philippians 3:13

[3] Jeremiah 29:13

[4] Proverbs 8; Proverbs 9:1-12

[5] 1Corinthians 13:12

[6] Denton, Dr. Michael; Evolution in Crisis

[7] 2Corinthians 3:3

Read More

Primary Relationships

by Peter Amsterdam

Something that has come up repeatedly in my life and in recent conversations and correspondence I’ve had with others is how busy we all are.—Busy making a living, doing mission projects and fundraising for those projects, taking care of the children, studying, spending time in meetings, paying bills, commuting and perhaps getting stuck in traffic, and trying to manage numerous commitments. Busy with house repairs, car repairs, medical treatment, cooking, cleaning, shopping. Busy with the never-ending list of things to do, to manage, to learn. The demands on our time can be overwhelming. And there are times when we truly are overwhelmed.

Unfortunately, when there is so much to do, it’s often the most important things that get pushed aside and suffer the most. Sadly, they are the things we feel we can temporarily neglect in order to take care of matters which are urgent. It seems to be a quirk of human nature that the urgent often trumps the important. Many times, those things which get set aside are our primary relationships. The cares and concerns of everyday life often cause us to focus on matters which, though important, are not vital to our true happiness and fulfillment in life.

Recently I realized that I’ve been seeing less and less of a very dear friend of mine. I’ve been getting increasingly busier, as has he, since he’s recently started his own business. I always enjoy his company, benefit from his practical counsel and spiritual fellowship, and can really relax when we’re together. As much as I benefit from meeting with him, I noticed myself repeatedly putting it off due to my workload and other duties. It finally dawned on me that I needed that time with him and those lively discussions on topics that aren’t related to my work. I was missing them and him. I made a decision to keep in closer touch and to get together regularly, even though it’s not always convenient and can set me back on the work front. I came to the conclusion that I’ll always have more work than I can keep up with, but I may not always have my friend close by, and I should value the time we have together.

As I see it, there are three primary relationships which we need to be very careful to not relegate to lower importance.

1. There is the relationship we have with ourselves. In the tumult of life, we often neglect taking care of ourselves. With so much to do, we under-sleep, over-caffeinate, and under- or overeat, depending on our personality. We stress and worry, which damages us both physically and mentally. We set aside things which will benefit us in the long term, like exercise, preparing healthy food, or taking time for relaxation. These are sacrificed for the expediency of the moment, even though this neglect causes us damage in the long run.

I think most of us missed one of the points Jesus made when He said to love your neighbor as yourself. While the focus of His statement is on loving others, without expressly saying it He made the point that we are supposed to love ourselves as well. When you love someone, it’s natural for you to want to care for them, to protect and nurture them. You feel a responsibility for their well-being. This is how you are meant to love and care for yourself as well. You are responsible to take care of your physical, spiritual, mental or emotional well-being. You need proper rest. You need time away from your work, diversion from your daily duties, some recreation. Everyone needs time to regenerate, to step back from the busyness that is life. When we do this, we are renewed. When we neglect it, we suffer for it.

2. Another is with our loved ones. These are the people who are closest to us—our spouse or significant other, our children, our parents, our close friends. These are the people who need our love, care, attention, and fellowship, just as we need theirs. They are members of our lifelong team, a team which should not be neglected or set aside, no matter how busy we may be.

3. Our primary relationship—and of course the most important, as this relationship is the foundation of all others—is with God. Since He is the one who made us, who has blessed us with life and purpose and loved ones, maintaining a strong relationship with Him is paramount. It is within this relationship that we nurture our spirituality, that we grow in faith, in love for others, and that we draw close to Him and become like Him. Both material things and accomplishments will pass, but the relationship we have with the giver of life will remain throughout eternity.

The busyness that we each encounter is a fact of our daily lives. For the most part, it’s something that we must cope with. But in order to cope, we need to protect and invest in our primary relationships so as to have proper balance, live in a loving atmosphere, and be spiritually and even physically renewed. Having healthy primary relationships is vital to a fulfilling life. This requires making decisions that enable us to give proper focus, time, and attention to our relationship with God, our loved ones, and ourselves.

It’s not that these relationships are all that is important in life, and that nothing else has value. There are many other important demands within our lives which require our time and attention as well. It’s because other things are important, and often timely, that they are given time and attention to the neglect of our primary relationships.

Allotting time, energy, and focus to our primary relationships—God, loved ones, and self—is a commitment and can be a sacrifice. It’s simply not an easy thing to do.

While God deserves top billing in our priorities, the time we spend communing with Him is sadly often the first thing to be jettisoned when we become overwhelmed with the myriad of other happenings which are calling for our time and attention. We are meant to love God with all our heart, soul, mind, and strength, with all that we are. If we regularly commune with Him and read and meditate on His Word, if we pray and express our love for Him, we strengthen our relationship with Him. And from within that strengthened relationship, we derive the power to build and maintain our other primary relationships.

Having happy, healthy relationships with our loved ones is vital to our having fulfilling lives. The shared love, the interaction, the care and concern, the moral and sometimes physical support—all of which are part of a primary relationship—provide a lifelong structure of mutual love and care which strengthens each one involved.

As human beings, we are made in God’s image. He’s a Triune Being, three persons in one. He’s a community of loved ones. As His image bearers, we are also meant to partake of and enjoy the community of our loved ones, our family, our friends and fellow believers. Strengthening the connections with those you love and who love you is important.

Your family, your friends, and those you gather together with to pray and worship are all important to your overall well-being. The deadlines, pressures, responsibilities, and the overall hustle and bustle of this life, as important as these things may be, or seem to be, should not be allowed to crowd out those you love. It can be a challenge to give enough time to your loved ones, but it’s a key to living a truly happy and fulfilling life.

Taking care of yourself is also a key to finding joy in life. This isn’t a call to selfishness; it’s a call to be a good steward over the life God has blessed you with. There are times you need to protect yourself, often from yourself, as for many it’s difficult to say no to work or potential commitments that encroach on the time which should be given to our primary relationships, and particularly the time taking care of ourselves. There are so many things in life that are important, so many things that need your attention or care. You have duties and responsibilities; people are counting on you. However, to adequately meet those responsibilities, you need to invest time in taking care of your own body, mind, and spirit.

Eating right and exercising both play a role in this. So do hobbies or interests outside of your normal responsibilities. Spending time nurturing your spiritual life is part of this as well. Maintaining healthy relationships and severing unhealthy ones, being around positive people, and cultivating friendships in which there is both giving and receiving, develop a healthy you.

Life is busy, there’s no doubt about it. While we may not be in a position to change that fact, we can more easily cope with it if we make the commitment to devote proper time and attention to our primary relationships.—To God, to our loved ones, and to ourselves.

Read More

What If Serial Killer Jeffrey Dahmer Had Found God Earlier?

Read More

The History Of Protestantism In A Nutshell!

www.deeptruths.com

By David Brandt Berg 7/6/78 & 12/9/82

Martin Luther

The first major split off from Rome and the Catholic church was the Eastern Orthodox church, from which all the various Orthodox groups came--Russian Orthodox, Greek Orthodox, Syrian Orthodox, etc. The Eastern churches were really the first split-off from Rome. Later, of course, Protestantism split off from Romanism also.

Martin Luther was the leader of the Reformation when Protestantism first split off from Catholicism, and the Lutherans were the first major Protestant denomination and the largest and most powerful, because they swept Germany and the Scandinavian countries, and that's why Luther's usually given credit for being the leader of the Reformation. But there were also many other reformers: Savonarola in Italy, John Knox in Scotland and Henry VIII in England and Calvin in France.

Calvin was a Frenchman who had to take refuge in Switzerland, where John Knox visited, studied under and became a follower of Calvin and then returned to Scotland and led the Reformation there, organising the Presbyterian Church. So the modern-day Baptists and Presbyterians are usually considered descendants of the Calvinist Movement of those days, although there were Anabaptists before that. They followed Calvin and were called Calvinists, and their major doctrine was called Calvinism, of which you and I (members of the Family International) are firm advocates!: Salvation by grace!--Eternal Salvation!--Once saved, always saved!

That was Calvin's strong doctrine, along the line of Luther's also: Salvation purely by grace, not by works. Because at the time of the Reformation, the Catholic Church was strictly a religion of works and practices and church-going and ceremonies and all the rest.--And that's still what they preach today, let's face it: You've really got to earn your Salvation by your works! And of course, nobody could ever make it that way! So they're building their Salvation on a poor foundation of their own self-righteousness, when only Jesus can save!

In those days all of those reformers were considered Protestants because they Protested! They were protest-ants--Protestants. And of course they were risking their lives to do it, because the Catholic Church held sway and held power and controlled the System and the police and they very often didn't hesitate to slaughter them or throw them in prison or beat them or whatever! One big army and invasion that the Pope sent North slaughtered one million Protestants in Bavaria alone!--And that's why Bavaria is almost solidly Catholic to this very day!--They just wiped out all the Christians!

So the protestants got their biggest push primarily from Martin Luther, and John Calvin was sort of the Luther of France, and virtually all of those first Protestants were "grace" people. They were sick of the Catholic Church, which was all works, so to really make the break they had to break completely with a real doctrine of grace!--"Once saved, always saved!"--Real grace!--Saved by grace and kept saved by grace, not by works!--Eternally!

BUT Then along came dear John Wesley! Sometimes I wonder about him--the Devil up to his old tricks. Under King Henry VIII, the Church of England had already split off from Roman Catholicism, but 200 years later, Wesley split off from the Church of England and began the Methodist Church. And although he supposedly preached grace, his major doctrine was so-called "Holiness", a strong religion of works rather than grace.--You had to be holy, good, perfect and not sin!--Or you could lose your salvation every time you had a bad thought!

The grace people all came, of course, out of the Catholic Church first, originally, and the works people came out of the Church of England through the followers of Wesley or the Wesleyans, and all the variety of Methodists and "Holiness" denominations came from the Wesleyan Methodists, including all the various Pentecostal denominations! So Luther, Calvin, Knox and virtually all the early Reformers were grace people, and this swing back to works didn't come until the days of Wesley when he began to promote works and piety and self-righteousness!

So the Protestant Church divided into those two main camps: Calvinistic, "Once saved, always saved", and the Wesleyans on the other hand. I used to say the one had the doctrine of Eternal Security and the other had the doctrine of Eternal Insecurity: Often saved--but you can never be sure!
Copyright © 1998 by The Family International

Read More

Daniel Estulin- The True Story of the Bilderbergers

Read More

Jesus, The Good Shepherd

A compilation

Download Audio (11.4MB)

I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.—Jesus, John 10:111

*

He tends his flock like a shepherd: He gathers the lambs in his arms and carries them close to his heart; he gently leads those that have young.—Isaiah 40:112

*

For the Lamb on the throne will be their Shepherd. He will lead them to springs of life-giving water. And God will wipe every tear from their eyes.—Revelation 7:173

*

I am the good shepherd; I know my sheep and my sheep know me—just as the Father knows me and I know the Father—and I lay down my life for the sheep.—Jesus,John 10:14–154

*

“I am the good Shepherd”5 is the fourth of seven “I am” declarations of Jesus recorded only in John’s gospel. These “I am” proclamations point to His unique divine identity and purpose. Immediately after declaring that He is “the door” in John 10:7, here Jesus declares “I am the good shepherd.” He describes Himself as not only “the shepherd,” but the “good shepherd.” What does this mean?

It should be understood that Jesus is “the” good shepherd, not simply “a” good shepherd, as others may be, but He is unique in character.6 The Greek word kalostranslated “good” describes that which is noble, wholesome, good, and beautiful, in contrast with that which is wicked, mean, foul and unlovely. It signifies not only that which is good inwardly—character—but also that which is attractive outwardly. It is an innate goodness. Therefore, in using the phrase “the good shepherd,” Jesus is referencing His inherent goodness, His righteousness, and His beauty. As shepherd of the sheep, He is the one who protects, guides, and nurtures His flock.

As He did in declaring that He is “the door of the sheep” in John 10:7, Jesus is making a contrast between Himself and the religious leaders, the Pharisees.7 He compares them to a “hireling” or “hired hand” who doesn’t really care about the sheep. In John 10:9, Jesus speaks of thieves and robbers who sought to enter the sheepfold stealthily. In that passage the Jewish leaders (Pharisees) were contrasted with Christ, who is the Door. Here, in John 10:12, the hireling is contrasted with the true or faithful shepherd who willingly gives up his life for the sheep. He who is a “hireling” works for wages, which are his main consideration. His concern is not for the sheep but for himself. As a result, when a wolf appeared—the most common threat to sheep in that day—the hireling abandoned the flock and fled, leaving the sheep to be scattered or killed.8

First, to better understand the purpose of a shepherd during the ancient times of Jesus, it is helpful to realize that sheep are utterly defenseless and totally dependent upon the shepherd. Sheep are always subject to danger and must always be under the watchful eye of the shepherd as they graze. Rushing walls of water down the valleys from sudden heavy rainfalls may sweep them away, robbers may steal them, and wolves may attack the flock. David tells how he killed a lion and a bear while defending his father’s flock as a shepherd boy.9 Driving snow in the winter, blinding dust and burning sands in summer, long lonely hours each day, all these the shepherd patiently endures for the welfare of the flock. In fact, shepherds were frequently subjected to grave danger, sometimes even giving their lives to protect their sheep.

Likewise, Jesus gave His life on the cross as “The Good Shepherd” for his own. He who would save others, though He had the power, did not choose to save Himself. “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.”10 Through His willing sacrifice the Lord made salvation possible for all who come to Him in faith. In proclaiming that He is the good shepherd, Jesus speaks of “laying down” His life for His sheep.11—Got Questions website12

*

Whenever the Savior describes Himself by any emblem, that emblem is exalted and expanded, and yet it is not able to bear all His meaning. The Lord Jesus fills out every type, figure, and character—and when the vessel is filled, there is an overflow. There is more in Jesus, the Good Shepherd, than you can pack away in a shepherd. He is the Good, the Great, the Chief Shepherd—but He is much more. Emblems to set Him forth may be multiplied as the drops of the morning, but the whole multitude will fail to reflect all His brightness! Creation is too small a frame in which to hang His likeness. Human thought is too contracted, human speech too feeble to set Him forth to the fullest. When all the emblems in earth and Heaven shall have described Him to their utmost, there will remain something not yet described. You may square the circle before you can set forth Christ in the language of mortal men! He is inconceivably above our conceptions, unutterably above our utterances!

But notice that He here sets Himself forth as a shepherd. Dwell on this for a moment! A shepherd is such a man as we employ in England to look after sheep for a few months, till they are large enough to be slaughtered. A shepherd after the Oriental sort, such as Abraham, Jacob, or David, is quite another person.

The Eastern shepherd is generally the owner of the flock, or at least the son of their owner, and so their proprietor in prospect. The sheep are his own. English shepherds seldom, or never, own the sheep—they are employed to take care of them—and they have no other interest in them. Our native shepherds are a very excellent set of men as a rule—those I have known have been admirable specimens of intelligent working men—yet they are not at all like the Oriental shepherd, and cannot be, for he is usually the owner of the flock which he tends. He remembers how he came into possession of the flock and when and where each of the present sheep was born. He knows where he has led them and what trials he had in connection with them. And he remembers this with the emphasis that they are his own inheritance. His wealth consists in them. He very seldom has much of a house and he does not usually own much land. He takes his sheep over a good stretch of country which is open common for all his tribe—but his possessions lie in his flocks. Ask him, “How much are you worth?” He answers, “I own so many sheep.” In the Latin tongue the word for money is akin to the word “sheep,” because to many of the first Romans, wool was their wealth and their fortunes lay in their flocks.

The Lord Jesus is our Shepherd—we are His wealth! If you ask what is His heritage, He tells you of “the riches of the Glory of His inheritance in the saints.” Ask Him what are His jewels and He replies, “They shall be Mine in that day.” If you ask Him where His treasures are, He will tell you, “The Lord’s portion is His people. Jacob is the lot of His inheritance.”

The Lord Jesus Christ has nothing that He values as He does His own people. For their sakes He gave up all that He had and died naked on the Cross. Not only can He say, “I gave Ethiopia and Seba for you,” but He “loved His Church and gave Himself for it.” He regards His Church as being His own body, “the fullness of Him that fills all in all.”—Charles Spurgeon

*

Jesus’ own stories about God’s love express a quality almost of desperation. In Luke 15 he tells of a woman who searches all night until she finds a valuable coin and of a shepherd who hunts in the darkness until he finds the one sheep who has wandered astray. Each parable concludes with a scene of rejoicing, a celestial party that erupts over the news of another sinner welcomed home. Finally, building to an emotional climax, Jesus tells the story of the lost son, a prodigal who spurns the love of his father and squanders his inheritance in a far country.

The priest Henri Nouwen sat in the Hermitage Museum in St. Petersburg, Russia, for many hours meditating on Rembrandt’s great painting Return of the Prodigal Son. While staring at the painting, Nouwen gained a new insight into the parable: the mystery that Jesus himself became something of a prodigal son for our sakes.

“He left the house of his heavenly Father, came to a foreign country, gave away all that he had, and returned through a cross to his Father’s home. All of this he did, not as a rebellious son, but as the obedient son, sent out to bring home all the lost children of God ... Jesus is the prodigal son of the prodigal Father who gave away everything the Father had entrusted to him so that I could become like him and return with him to his Father’s home.”—Philip Yancey13

*

Jesus said when a good shepherd takes his sheep to pasture, he goes before them and the sheep follow him.14 Jesus is the Good Shepherd, and He knows what’s ahead. He knows where the green pastures and the mountain passes are. He knows where the cool waters flow. He knows where the sheepfolds are, where you’ll be safe and secure. He also knows the danger spots, so you’d better stay close to Him.

You should always follow the guidance of the hand of God. You cannot go by your own understanding of the situation. You dare not rely on your own experience or wisdom. You must look for the Lord’s supernatural, miraculous, powerful leading. You must be guided by the hand of God. If you follow Jesus, you’ll never go wrong! He’s right out there with you, and He knows exactly what to do. Don’t try to rush ahead of Him or show Him the way you think you should go. He’s the one who has got to lead, because only He can.

May your prayer always be “Lord, I will follow. Show me the way.”—David Brandt Berg15

Published on Anchor April 2013. Read by Jerry Paladino.
Music by Michael Dooley.


1 NIV.

2 NIV.

3 NLT.

4 NIV.

5 John 10:11.

6 Psalm 23; Zechariah 13:7; Hebrews 13:20; 1 Peter 2:25; 1 Peter 5:4.

7 John 10:12–13.

8 John 10:12–13.

9 1 Samuel 17:36.

10 Matthew 20:28.

11 John 10:15, 17–18.

12 From http://www.gotquestions.org/Good-Shepherd.html.

13 The Jesus I Never Knew (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1995).

14 John 10:4.

15 Daily Might (Aurora Production, 2004).

Read More