I'M REMINDED OF A HOMETOWN COBBLER

Mr. Cobbler, Mr. Cobbler please mend my shoes

Fix them so the nails won't hurt me
O yes, please do
For I'm running, skipping, jumping
All the day through.

...Or words to that affect. This was only one of a number of 18th century nursery rhyme songs taught to me by my mother when I was knee-high to a grass hopper, still in diapers I think.

A newer version of the song goes something like this: "Mr. Cobbler, Mr. Cobbler, please mend my shoes. Have them done bye by half past two. Stitch them up and stitch them down, and I will give you half a crown!"

As Europe neared the end of the 18th century, an explosion of new art, literature, and music renewed interest in ‘folk art’ and ancient themes, including supernatural beings like elves. Scholars, dramatists, and artists joined a rekindled interest in folklore, seeking to uncover ancient stories. In this period, what we think of as elves, fairies, and a host of other traditional European folk characters began to take their familiar shape. Andrew Lang gave fairies their butterfly wings in ‘Princess Nobody’, and the Brothers Grimm gave elves their cobbling hammers in ‘The Elves and the Shoemaker’. These characters remain fixed in our imaginations to this day, essentially unchanged.

This all came to mind for me following a virtual history group conversation I had with a young lady from my hometown of Dresden. Her grandfather just happened to be a cobbler/shoe repair man of my acquaintance during formative years in the 1940s.

Clickers and accessories

Clarence Breaton Sr. was a throwback cobbler, complete with black rubber apron and leather-stained hands, in his small, antiquated repair shop on main street. Those were the days when all shoes were made of leather and designed to last. Clarence served up the works, completely rebuilding footwear -- heels, soles and all. You had a choice of half-soles and leather or rubber heels. I visited him frequently to have "clickers" replaced on the heels of my shoes because they wore down quickly.

Metal clickers were supposed to make heels last longer but we kids liked the sound of them as we click, clicked down the street military style. There was no sneaking up on anybody in those days! Clickers were a macho status symbol.

Clarence Breaton's handiwork. Glove
padded with felt and neatly stitched.

Clarence was no one-trick pony either. He padded and re-stitched baseball gloves for both me and my dad because my fastball was gaining in velocity as we regularly played catch in our backyard during summer months. The extra felt padding also helped firm up my dad's glove because he lost a finger on his left hand as the result of a shot gun accident in his youth.

Clarence's shop also doubled as a museum of sorts with World War One memorabilia on the walls, even a mysterious suit of armor that somehow managed to fly under the radar of local historians. Would be interesting to know if anyone in the Breaton family know anything about it or of the whereabouts today.

A member of the Canadian Navy Over-Seas Expeditionary Force in WW1, serving in France and England, Clarence suffered a serious leg wound and walked with a noticeable limp for the balance of his life.

Shoemakers existed in all civilizations and were among the first European settlers in North America. They were divided between two professions. Cobblers repaired existing shoes; cordwainers made shoes from scratch. The first European cordwainer came to the New World in 1629, two decades after the first cobbler.

The expense and difficulty in importing goods from Europe meant that cobblers played a vital part in the early American economy. Shoemakers’ value went beyond the economic, however. The cobblers were also an informal news network. These craftsmen traveled from town to town, and as they repaired shoes they shared news among isolated settlements. The advent of machinery and other advances in shoe-making in the 19th century would change this, however.

Although cobblers and cordwainers have both been prized throughout history for their skills, shoes have changed dramatically over the course of time and so has their price tags.

Combined with American Lyman Blake’s invention in 1864 of a sewing machine designed to sew shoes (it could handle thick leather better than the machines designed to sew cloth for tops and bottoms), this technology allowed for shoemaking to shift out of the homes and shops of cobblers and into full factory settings.

As styles quadrupled in the past century and synthetic materials coupled with mass production made for cheaper brands of shoes, repair shops that were a staple of Western culture, became few and far between.

Still we from a couple of generations back still remember shoe repair as an essential service. The well-worn proverb “The shoemaker’s children always go barefoot” and the story of the elves who helped a shoemaker in Grimm’s Fairy Tales, later adapted by the Muppets, have helped keep the memory alive.

Some of the more nostalgic among us also remember with fondness good old Clarence Breaton and his uniquely interesting shop in downtown Dresden. But our numbers are dwindling, right?

If the shoe fits, we have to wear it!

THE RELIGIOUS COMPONENT IN THANKSGIVING

Our American neighbors to the south have just celebrated their version of Thanksgiving and this is a good time to take a look at the traditional holiday in both countries. Personally I subscribe to both versions and here's why.

Basically, Thanksgiving is a day to give thanks and is not based on a historical date like Christmas. So, the entire world does not celebrate Thanksgiving and even those that do frequently celebrate on different dates.

Canada's Thanksgiving on the second Monday of October is based on a bountiful harvest and not on the Pilgrims and the New World like the Unites States holiday. The reason it occurs earlier than the US Thanksgiving is that Canada is north of the United States and because of this the harvest season occurs slightly earlier in the year. So, it only makes sense for Canada to celebrate its fall harvest when it does.

Amazingly, the first Canadian Thanksgiving goes back even further than the United States. In 1578 an English explorer named Martin Frobisher was trying to find a northern route to the Orient. He was not successful in his quest, but he did end up establishing a settlement somewhere along what is Newfoundland today. Despite not making it to the Orient, Frobisher was thankful the journey had been safe and decided to have a day of thanks. This resulted in the first Canadian Thanksgiving.

During this same time frame many French settlers were making their way to the area and also began having days of thanks during the harvest time. They, like the American Pilgrims, invited local Indians to take part in their feast.

The pilgrims who came to the New World colony (USA) from England in 1620 were, in many ways, ordinary men and women. Some of them were members of the English Separatist Church (a Puritan sect of Christianity). These Separatists originally fled England and sailed to Holland to escape the religious intolerance and oppression of their homeland. In their day, the Church and the State of England were one, and independent congregations who desired to explore their own, differing relationship with the Christian God were unable to practice their faith independent of the State Church. 

Separatists had come to the conclusion that membership in the Church of England violated Biblical teaching. They fled their homeland so they could pursue God in a way they considered to be truer to the teaching of the Bible. This group successfully escaped religious persecution from the Church of England, but eventually became disenchanted with the Dutch way of life. They observed the lifestyles of those around them and believed they were in an ungodly land. So once again, they pushed on toward a new place where they could both worship the Biblical God of Christianity and live in a way honorable to this God.

The Mayflower held more than just the Separatist Puritans. The ship also contained other pilgrims who still remained loyal to the Church of England but came to the new world for economic reasons or because they sympathized with the Puritans in one way or another. But one thing was certain about everyone on the ship. Whether they were part of the Puritan group or simply along to assist them and make a new life for themselves, everyone shared a fervent and pervasive Protestant faith permeating all aspects of their lives. So, when the pilgrims made ground at Plymouth Rock on December 11th, 1620, they were also grounded in their faith as Christians. 

It should also be noted here that for the better part of a century the new colonies were also a dumping ground for many thousands of criminals from the British Commonwealth "transported" as virtual slaves for land owners to work off sentences.

At the end of the harvest of 1621, the pilgrims decided to celebrate. They brought with them both religious and secular customs from their homeland. Among these customs were the tradition of a secular harvest festival and the tradition of a religious holy day of thanksgiving. These were two separate celebrations for the original pilgrims, but both celebrations had strong religious overtones. Even the secular harvest celebration included a religious component of thanks to the Christian God who had provided the harvest. In addition to this celebration, the pilgrims also dedicated a day of thanksgiving that was purely religious in nature.

Regardless of how people may feel about the Thanksgiving Holidays, one thing should be obvious to even the most casual observer of history: Thanksgiving was (and still is) founded on the Christian notion we have something to be thankful for and someone to be thankful to. 

These first observers of Thanksgiving understood who it was they were to thank. Over and over again, through the early years of the colonies to the most difficult days of our national history, believers and leaders have affirmed and humbled themselves to the providence and protection of God. 

Those who initiated these national holidays intended them to be a day of thanksgiving and prayer; a day in which all of us could offer thanks to the God of the Universe.

Apart from over-dosing on turkey and all the trimmings, how did you celebrate Thanksgiving this year my friend?

"Men are so grumpy," stated a twice divorced lady friend in a wide-ranging telephone conversation that included the subject of relationships the other day.

My response to the unexpected remark was a rather foolish "Well, I have no idea what makes them that way." You say the dumbest things sometimes when you are taken by surprise and don't know what else to say. 

Perhaps a generalization in my friend's case, but nonetheless not without merit. No doubt she knew all to well whereof she spoke.

In retrospect, being a man myself and collectively guilty as charged, I have a pretty good idea of what contributes to grumpiness in men and I have been compelled to not dismiss my lady friend's comment quite so lightly.

Recent research tells us that most men suffer from 'Grumpy Old Man' syndrome when they hit 70. There are good reasons to believe this to be the case. Seventy is an age when men may become more aware of their own mortality as they see friends and loved ones pass on. They might be struggling with wearisome health problems, and/or feel depressed because they have no aspirations or goals left to attain. 'Grumpy Old Man' syndrome is also and most likely due to the fact that testosterone levels in a 70-year-old are quite probably half the normal levels of a younger man.

Whereas women's estrogen levels drop relatively suddenly when they go through menopause, causing a variety of noticeable symptoms, men's testosterone levels drop gradually over a period of time so the symptoms are not as obvious.

From experience, and not to make excuses, there is a good possibility that men who suffer from this syndrome may experience a sense of feeling burned out, increased depression, increased irritability, increased anxiety, more nervousness, more bodily complaints, reduced mental effectiveness and increased sweating (even hot sweats). They may have a need for more sleep or suffer sleep disturbances. It goes without saying that muscular weakness, physical exhaustion, impaired sexual potency and disturbed libido also have a way of eating away at a man's ego. 

Frankly, it's enough to drive any guy around the bend.

I'm told that stress, toxicity, a poor diet with too many bad fats, autoimmune diseases and some drugs can also lead to a drop in testosterone levels. Likewise, abdominal fat, which makes estrogen, will neutralize the testosterone and cause levels to drop further.

And finally, there is the fact that the world is changing around us, and rarely to our high standards. Aging men, in particular, succumb to the nearly irresistible temptation to look at The World These Days and find it hopelessly screwed up. The tendency, unfortunately, is to take it out on those the closest to us.

With all of this evidence of decline, how can we not be grumpy?

Author Michael Gurian has spent a lifetime studying and writing about our journeys through life -- often with an emphasis on male psychology. His most recent book, “The Wonder of Aging: A New Approach to Embracing Life After Fifty” addresses how men and women age differently – and why men sometimes turn sour.

First of all, Gurian confirms that low testosterone can, in fact, be one of the culprits. Starting at about the mid-40s or 50s, every man’s testosterone levels begin to decrease, and sometimes the decrease is precipitous around age 60.

“The whole system is robbed of a chemical that it based its life on for the first 50 years,” said Gurian. “It can create irritability. And a lot of us get kind of depressed. Females can get immensely irritated, too. But when they are depressed, they evidence it in crying and talking about how they feel. Males tend to use anger more.”

Or to put it another way: Women fret, men yell.

So, are those ubiquitous testosterone supplements the solution? Nope. It’s not that easy. First, as the Mayo Clinic notes, “whether treatment is necessary is a matter of debate.” Second, there are many, many other reasons why men get grumpy.

Some have been physically active but when they put on weight and don’t exercise they tend to be more irritable with age, probably because they have more to be irritated about. They lose even more of their athletic identity or youthful vigor.

It’s really a rite of passage, where the body changes and you can’t do what you used to do, the mind being willing but the body not so much.

There is something debilitating about not being able to cut the mustard any more -- and worrying about it.

This is not just about sports and other declining physical attributes. Some guys lose something they feel is even more vital -- which is why Viagra is such a big seller. Men use it to “put off that identity shift,” as Gurian puts it, into their older selves.

However, the deeper causes of Grumpy Old Man syndrome lie in the emotional and psychological realms. Men go through divorces. They retire and lose their workplace identity.

“With anything that’s really tough, guys will tend to ‘fight or flight,’ ” said Gurian, who is also a marriage and family counselor. “Some of the fight stuff is anger. Some of the flight stuff is withdrawal.”

That’s partly why men experience more quick bursts of anger in their 50s and 60s. There’s “nothing inherently wrong with male anger,” Gurian said. However, if your “quick bursts” go from once a week to a few times every day? Well, now you’re entering full-blown Guy Who Gets Irritated by Everything territory.

Now that we know a little more about the causes, the question remains: How can we avoid turning into Grumpy Old Men?

The key, according to Gurian, is making a true identity shift. Between the ages of 50 and 65, every man needs to “let go of lost youth.” Our youth really is gone and not coming back. We all need to create new, more age-appropriate identities for ourselves.

The important thing is to shift your energy into something. Maybe you can coach the sport you love. Maybe you can turn to golf, a sport easier on the tendons. But don’t just sit on the couch and do nothing.

Similar shifts may have to take place when it comes to relationships, or sex, or your spiritual life. Every man needs to make these kinds of shifts between the ages of 50 and 65. The process described by Gurian makes absolute sense. You must stop clinging to your youthful self, and accept your new, older self. It all boils down to an old-fashioned, yet wise concept: aging gracefully.

So here’s the secret to not turning into a Grumpy Old Man: Shift still not-inconsiderable energies into new, constructive pursuits -- ones that make sense for a 60+-year-old man. 

Most of all fellows, don't let "grumpy" define you! It can ruin being around an otherwise pretty good guy.

WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME YOU TOOK STOCK OF YOU?

At different intervals in my life I have done some serious soul searching and taking stock of where I stood at that particular point in time. Invariably it was an opportunity to make an assessment on how good, or bad, I had done and to make changes accordingly. I guess for that reason I have been a work in progress.

It has just made sense for me to take periodic inventory of myself, often deeming it prudent to back up a couple of steps in order that I might take one giant stride forward. As someone who has always learned the hard way, through good old fashioned hands-on experience, self-assessment goes with the territory.

I cannot help but think that the process of taking stock of one's self is something that many  people do routinely and realistically, no one can create a self from scratch.

I came to appreciate the personal "taking stock" concept as the result of a newspaper interview I conducted 50 years ago with Mildred Newman and Bernard Berkowitz, wife and husband psychologists, who had just authored a book "How to Take Charge of Your Life". Their philosophy encouraged self-identification and self-fulfillment as important steps toward becoming a total human being.

Mildred explained it this way: "If you have deep respect for yourself, you will have respect for others. You will not become self-centred or selfish. You will find yourself increasingly considerate of others around you." And she was right!

If you take stock of yourself, self-love or respect is mandatory because more often than not there will be things that you have done in error that require correction and you cannot correct a wrong until you own it.

We happen to live at a time in history when there is more freedom, more to choose from, more possible ways to be than ever before. The way in which we go about choosing the elements that attract us as building blocks for our own personality, and the ways in which we put them together spell out that which is uniquely us. Everyone chooses from what is available.

Even though we may have clothed ourselves in borrowed finery, we are not a fraud. After all, who has been doing the choosing in your life? You can be sure that no one else has ever put together exactly the same combinations as you have; and don't forget there are only 12 notes in a musical scale, and yet many countless unique and beautiful compositions have been created.

It is all a question of how your notes are put together and it does not make you any less to have taken from others who, in your mind, have it all together.

The wonderful thing to understand -- what comes to so many as a stunner, a shocker -- is that you do not have to take yourself as a pre-packaged product coming off an assembly line. There are certain things you have inherited -- your coloring, your sex, your bone structure, your height -- but what you do with your biological inheritance is up to you.

Much of what you are you have made, and it is your right, if not obligation, to remake yourself exactly as you see fit (as long as it is for the better). And why shouldn't you do a better job of it?

You have had a lot of experience since you started putting yourself together and you have learned a lot more about what works and what does not.

If you inevitably see something you do not like about the current you, remember that chances are you put it there, and you can change it.

And to think that I wouldn't be what I am today if it were not for periodic taking stock exercises...A silly old fool still learning the hard way!

A work in progress? 

I'd like to think so!

INTIMACY, WHERE ART THOU INTIMACY!?

Intimacy means that we’re safe enough to reveal the truth about ourselves in all its creative chaos.

Okay, I'm going to admit it -- I miss intimacy in my life.

The sad part of it is, the older I get and the more I think about it, intimacy is assuredly past tense in the ever-shortening period of time I have left on this planet. I mourn the loss of physical attributes to do much about it even if circumstances were different.

Oh sure, after almost 60 years of combined marriage to two late wives, I cannot deny that I enjoy the freedom to do my own thing -- go to bed when I want to and get up when the spirit moves me, eat when and what I want, not having to answer to anyone for my comings and goings and personal idiosyncrasies.

But there is no denying the need in all of us for a fulfilling intimate relationship, especially when you have experienced it once, or twice...You miss what you once had. The gentle touches, words of endearment, unconditional love that can only be shared by two soul-mates, someone to be there for you through thick and thin, someone with whom to laugh and cry.

A healthy intimate relationship can positively affect all aspects of life, including physical health and self-esteem.

Once our survival needs are met, no single aspect of our lives contributes more to our satisfaction or to our sense of psychological wellbeing than our intimate relationships.

Intimacy refers to a distinctively close level of communication between two people. Intimacy may be reflected in confiding or candid talk; meaningful shared silences; mutually enjoyed activities; or of course in sexual interaction. But "intimacy" is not a synonym for sex; rather, it should suggest the idea that sex is potentially a unique type of communication.

In an intimate or close relationship, you ideally feel free to be yourself, to care for another person, to ask for what you need. These are the relationships that contribute to our happiness or, when they go wrong or fail, to our misery. Intimacy also has been thought of as companionship and has been associated with emotional bonding.

Intimacy is a "warm friendship," while sexuality is the use of words, gestures, movements or activities that attempt to display physical affection. Put it all together in a neat package and you have pretty ideal makings for a fulfilling life.

What I am getting at here is that with the reality of never again experiencing that special kind of intimacy, you are left with one of two options -- wither up and die or seek ways of filling the void.

My way of filling the intimacy void is to increasingly occupy myself with what brings me the most satisfaction and that in large measure is communicating by means of the written word and exercising creativity from the safe confines of my home. There is one dangerous off-shoot in falling into the resultant lifestyle pattern, however, and that is the tendency to slip further and further into a state of reclusiveness.

A loner by nature, I think that people like me (down deep) simply need someone to appreciate who they are and to lend a sympathetic, understanding ear to their often-muted voice. 

Writers like me are susceptible to becoming reclusive because sharing knowledge or wisdom can lead to obsession. A friend stops by to ask if you want to go out somewhere and you shew them away; saying, "I can't go right now. I'm in the middle of writing an important article," or, the phone rings and you quickly stuff it under a pillow or choose to ignore the ringing until it mercifully stops. Life and everybody in it become distractions.

The ultimate goal of getting a point across releases us from feelings of insignificance and worthlessness. We imagine, or hope that what is shared on paper or screen makes something easier for someone else to understand, or helps somebody feel better, or makes another person smile or laugh. Ultimately a degree of relevance or a tiny nugget of God-inspired wisdom. Fulfillment is our lover.

Some times though, even people who enjoy being alone become depressed or anxious if they go too long without human contact.

As strange and contradictory as it may seem, I am a loner who needs people and if I can't have intimacy I'll settle for the next best thing even if it means at times putting everything aside, getting out in the world and imposing myself at the risk of being a little too aggressive. That's just my nature and I have to be ever cognizant of boundaries and sensitivities.

I am an all-in or all-out person of extremes and as old as I am, still learning how to effectively manage them. That alone should be enough to keep my mind occupied and off being intimacy starved. In retrospect, I really do not have much to feel bad about...Right!?

Still there are those times when I need to feel the warmth of a familiar hug...And there's no one there.

COMMON LINKS: QUANTUM PHYSICS AND SPIRITUALITY

Little did I know when I set out to tread ever-so-gingerly into the early translations of the sacred Word of God that I would find myself having to scramble to brush up on quantum physics. Let's be honest, even as a high school student I was challenged to grapple with the complications of Grade 11 and 12 physics, not that there is any comparison.

So, what is quantum physics anyway? Put simply, it’s the physics that explains how everything works: the best description we have of the nature of the particles that make up matter and the forces with which they interact. Quantum physics underlies how atoms work, and so why chemistry and biology work as they do. You, me and the gatepost, at some level at least, we’re all dancing to the quantum tune. If you want to explain how electrons move through a computer chip, how photons of light get turned to electrical current in a solar panel or amplify themselves in a laser, or even just how the sun keeps burning, you’ll need to use quantum physics.

In this piece, based largely on the work of several scholar study groups that I have been privy to, we unveil a possible connection between quantum physics and the all but forgotten four-letter name of God in the Hebrew Bible! You may be surprised by the relationship that Scripture has with the scientific world. 

“Einstein, don’t tell God what to do!” This was the famous retort of Niels Bohr -- one of the creators of quantum physics -- to the most celebrated scientist of the 20th Century. Albert Einstein had been unhappy with what he called the “spooky” quantum theory, which implied that reality was almost random, illogical, impossible to understand. At the most fundamental observable level of physical existence, the tiniest expressions of energy and mass behaved in a way that was utterly bewildering. Like many people, Einstein found this hard to accept, and so he had argued that “God doesn’t play dice” (i.e., the natural universe is – or “should” be – orderly).

Surprisingly enough, the ancient Hebrew Bible has some things in common with modern quantum physics! Actually, the Bible expresses a rather similar overall view of the universe. Ecclesiastes 7:24 is one of many verses that speak of the great, unfathomable mystery of reality: “What has come into existence is far away and deep, deep! Who can search it out?” (Compare, for example, Isa 40:28, 55:8-9; Ps 92:5/6, 139:6; Job 5:9, 11:7; Ecc 3:11, 8:17.) Probably Bohr would have enjoyed these verses more than Einstein.

Another possible similarity between quantum physics and the Hebrew Bible relates to the previously mentioned four-letter name of God – יהוה (YHWH). People have wondered about and argued over this name for many centuries. A great number of different theories try to define its proper pronunciation and original meaning. One of the most popular ideas is that the Hebrew Bible’s name for God is a verb that expresses past, present, and future tenses all at once! According to this interpretation, the name YHWH means something like “the one who was-is-will be.” This is a very old idea that may go back as far as the Jewish-Greek Septuagint translation (ca. 200 BCE/BC) and the Book of Revelation (1st century AD/CE).

~~~~~~~~~~~

It should be explained that the ancient Hebrew language that the Old Testament was written in did not have vowels in its alphabet. In written form, ancient Hebrew was a consonant-only language (making translation the challenge it was). In the original Hebrew, God’s name transliterates to YHWH (sometimes written in the older style as YHVH). This is known as the tetragrammaton (meaning “four letters”). Because of the lack of vowels, Bible scholars debate how the tetragrammaton YHWH was pronounced.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

If we were to translate this understanding of God’s name into the language of quantum theory or physics, we might call it “a superposition of all possible states.” Indeed, quantum mechanics posits that the particles or waves that apparently make up our universe (and us) can exist in all possible states at once – until someone carries out a “measurement.” Once you measure the location of a particle, it “collapses” to a single specific location. Perhaps the name of God, YHWH, is similar: it communicates being in all states, dimensions, and times simultaneously – and if you try to define the meaning more specifically, you end up reducing it to just one aspect.

This is by no means the only possible way to understand the name יהוה (YHWH), and it is not even necessarily the most plausible. But it does serve as an interesting mind stimulant, our thoughts going perhaps where they never would have otherwise.

I have been fascinated too with something written by Ellis Peterson AKA Ragnar Storyteller, a retired math professor and electronics engineer. "The Laws of Quantum Physics is a gift to us from the Age of Aquarius," he states emphatically. Simply speaking, the Laws of Quantum Physics tell us that there exists an infinite ocean of thinking intelligent energy called the Quantum Ocean. Spiritually speaking this is the Mind of God, where we live, move and have our being.

"So even though we feel that we have moved through a physical distance in space around our Galactic Sun, in reality we have moved in 'God’s' Mind," he continues.

"There is no time, past present nor future in the Quantum Ocean, Mind of God. There is no here or over there space in the Quantum Ocean. There is only the HERE-NOW.

Everything that ever was, is or will be exists in the Quantum Ocean, Mind of God. The Age of Pisces that we have just physically left and the Age of Aquarius that we have physically entered (some 50 years ago) exist and have always existed in the the Quantum Ocean, the Mind of God."

We humans are individual souls within the Mind of God, who ‘blink out’ of the Quantum Ocean and into the self-consciousness of a new incarnation, When our physical life expires, we ‘blink in’ to the Quantum Ocean -- an unfolding and infolding process.

"It is all on schedule...Our incarnations, the Planets, the Solar Systems, Galaxies etc. It is according to some Divine timing plan. The ‘blinking out’ and ‘blinking in’ of man, races of man, civilizations of man are all on a timing schedule.

Only we as individual souls have the gift of free choice. We can choose for ourselves what choices we will make once we incarnate. This free will allows us to choose our thoughts, feelings and actions which will create our present reality," Peterson concludes. (I wrote similarly in a Wrights Lane post not long ago.)

We can then deduct that, in the Age of Aquarius, we have the gifts and tools of the Laws of Quantum Physics to make more conscious choices.

Bet you never thought of it that way before.

Seriously, I hadn't either.

DOES HELL ACTUALLY EXIST IN THE PRESENT?

Being of an inquisitive mind that searches for difficult answers -- lately a preoccupation with matters of religious interpretations -- I subscribe to a Hebrew resources bible centre study program and was particularly taken recently by the question "does hell exist?"

Finally, I thought, someone has the fortitude to address a subject that many of us wonder about but have lacked the wherewithal, understanding and nerve to tackle.

The prospect of going to hell if we do something really bad has been drilled into us since childhood, but for me initially there was the threat of a spanking and the possibility that if I wasn't a good boy Santa Claus would not bring me anything at Christmas. We learn very early in life that there is a price to pay for not obeying rules.

Hell is the worst possible penalty for living a life of sin and, true enough, this eternal threat hanging over us does serve as an effective deterrent. It is an understatement to suggest that a place in Heaven is a much more attractive alternative for a life in the ever after.

But, where is this place called Hell -- and what unspeakable torture is administered to unfortunate souls ending up there?

Well, Dr. Nicholas J. Schaser who teaches courses in biblical and Jewish studies, has some interesting reasoning and theories to pass on. Here is a summary of his remarks to the aforementioned study group.

Schaser goes directly to the bible to point out that Jesus does not shy away from the topic of hell. For instance, he tells his disciples, “It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into hell (γέεννα; géhenna), ‘where the worm does not die and the fire is not quenched’” (Mark 9:47-48). Indeed, explicit warnings about “hell” appear throughout the Gospels. "In light of this biblical truth, the following statement will seem counterintuitive—or even heretical—but it’s equally true: Hell does not exist," Schaser stated with emphasis.

He went on to explain that the Jewish notion of punishment after death originates from an actual geographical location. The Valley of the Son of Hinnom is listed among Canaan’s locales in Joshua, and it became a place of child sacrifice and foreign worship. The ancient Israelites “built the high places of Baal in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom (גאי בן הנם; gei ben hinnom), to offer up their sons and daughters to Molech”. This valley served as the earthly template for a post-mortem pit that ancient Jews called “Gehinnom” (גיהנום)—“Gehenna” in Greek and “Gehinnam” in Aramaic—the “Valley of Hinnom.” While Israel’s Valley of Hinnom certainly exists, its otherworldly counterpart is still awaiting existence.

From Scripture we get the impression that hell will be created after the resurrection of the dead; at present then, hell does not exist. When Jesus describes hell as a place “where the worm does not die and the fire is not quenched” (Mk 9:48), he quotes from Isaiah’s eschatological vision of the righteous living in God’s kingdom and the rebellious dying in fire.

Through the prophet, God describes a grand future creation: “The new heavens and the new earth that I make shall remain before me…. All flesh shall come to worship before me… and they shall go out and look at the corpses of the people who have rebelled against me. For their worm will not die, nor their fire be quenched, and they shall remain an abhorrence (דראון; deraon) to all flesh” (Isa 66:22-24). This “abhorrence” for the wicked is a post-resurrection reality. As Daniel notes, “Multitudes of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake [in resurrection], some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting abhorrence (דראון; deraon).” 

The scriptures describe everyone being raised from their graves and then receiving either eternal life or ongoing abhorrence. Hell is not a destination for the wicked after death, but after resurrection (for the destination after death, called Sheol or Hades, click here).

The ancient Aramaic translation of Isaiah -- or “Targum” (תרגום) -- replaces “abhorrence” (דראון; deraon) in the original Hebrew with an explicit reference to hell. In Aramaic, Isaiah 66:24 reads, “their breaths shall not die, and their fire shall not be extinguished, and the wicked shall be judged in hell (גיהנם; gehinnam).” The Targum parallels Jesus’ quotation of this same verse in Mk 9:47-48 alongside his own reference to “hell” (γέεννα; géhenna).

For both *Yeshua and the Jews who wrote the Targum, “hell” will be a place that exists in the “new heavens and new earth” that Isaiah prophesied. The wicked do not arrive in hell immediately after death; instead, they go there following their bodily resurrection. This post-resurrection scenario is what the Targum and Revelation call the “second death”—that is, a death that comes after resurrection. 

*Yeshua is a Hebrew name, and its English spelling is “Joshua.” Jesous is the Greek transliteration of the Hebrew name, and its English spelling is “Jesus.” Thus, the names “Joshua” and “Jesus” are essentially the same; both are English pronunciations of the Hebrew and Greek names for our Lord.

Scripture clarifies that a fiery place of judgment is reserved for the World to Come, rather than the present world. “We are waiting for new heavens and a new earth in which the righteous will dwell” (2 Peter 3:13), and “hell” is a pending part of that future creation. In other words, hell does not (yet) exist.

I don't know about you, my reader friend, but I come away from this exercise with a slightly better comprehension of a place I'd really like to avoid at the time of bodily resurrection, or at any interval along the mystical way.

The good news is that while we wait, there will time for us to secure a Heavenly reservation in life hereafter, on the other side. It does not take me to suggest what you should do in the interim. 

NOTE FROM DICK: While we have been discussing bodily resurrection in this piece, it is only natural that a similarity to reincarnation enters the equation, but that is another matter and one that I purposely choose to avoid so as not to complicate the premise herein. One cannot really prove (or disprove) reincarnation — we aren't going to catch ourselves reincarnating any more than our waking consciousness can quite catch our sleeping consciousness. Whether the promise of eternal life (mentioned 28 times in the Bible) is literal or figurative, or whether one believes in reincarnation or resurrection (the latter mentioned 41 times), if we live as if our every thought and action lasted forever, we meet the challenge of all religions, ancient and modern.

GIVE UNTIL IT HURTS:

Mark Twain, known as one of the "greatest humorists and the father of American literature," would often use his quick wit to pick at the societal values of his day. For example, he wrote, "It's not the passages in the Bible that I don't understand that bother me so much. It's the ones I DO understand."

Earlier today a local minister advanced a copy of his sermon for Sunday morning and I was quick to pickup on a question he will be asking his congregations in a multiple charge: "Do we grow in generosity to where our giving actually costs us something...or are we just giving what costs us nothing."

My minister friend's Gospel lesson will include a passage that no one can fail to understand. In it Jesus is watching as the members of the worshipping congregation deposit their temple offerings into the collection basket. Many rich people put in large sums. A poor widow puts in a tiny amount. Jesus then calls His disciples to Him and says, "Truly, I say to you, this poor widow has put in more than all those who are contributing to the treasury. For they all contributed out of their abundance, but she out of her poverty has put in everything she had ..."

The Lesson is unambiguous. Jesus could very well say that the poor widow put in more than the others because He knew that her gift, however small, was given from the heart. Her outward worship offering reflected the quality of her inner response to the experience of God's Loving Presence. Her gift of everything she possessed symbolized the unconditional surrender of her entire being.

Now I ask you friends, if we do in fact give to the work of our churches, does it cost us something? In other words, have we given until it hurts? For me, I can truly confess I have to think twice about that and the answer is: I have given what little I could afford, but I can't say that I have sacrificed much in the process. 

Out of necessity, I've intentionally been careful about making ends meet. Does that mean then that I should now start feeling guilty about frugality that has spilled over into church offerings? In my case, put up or shut up? Maybe both!!??

In retrospect, when I consider rent and mortgage payments, all the taxes I've paid, my bills and other costs of mere survival on top of church and other charitable donations, more often than not there was nothing left over at the end of the month...Now, that HURTS!

PICKED UP IN PASSING: THE HORNS OF MOSES

One of the most famous pieces of Western art, Michelangelo’s sculpture of Moses, is marred by one of the clumsiest errors in history of Western civilization. It all traces back to the mistranslation of a single word in the Bible. Do you know what it is?

Michelangelo’s 1515 statue, “Moses,” is certainly one of the world's most admired sculptures but there was a little-known blunder in its creation...Moses has two horns on the top of his head! 

How did this happen? 

Well, it is actually a mistake caused by mistranslation of the Hebrew word קרן. In Hebrew, this word can be read in two different ways: karan (קָרַן), which means "shone" (was radiant) and keren (קֶרֶן) meaning ”a horn.” Moses is described descending from Mount Sinai as, “...he was not aware that his face was radiant (karan) because he had spoken with the Lord” (Exodus 34:29). Because Michelangelo had been depending on a Bible with a mix-up between karan and keren, it may well have caused him to put horns on his now famous statue. 

Unfortunately, this otherwise wonderful piece of art is just one example of the consequences of mistranslating Biblical wording.

Any wonder we have trouble knowing what to believe?

No question that this is a "horny" issue, but at the same time it can be rather a "thorny" one for some of us who pursue such things.

NOTE FROM DICK: Interestingly, though, by the time Michelangelo was working on Julius II’s tomb, it was pretty widely known that the idea of a horned Moses stemmed from an overly literal translation. Which, of course, raises the question of why Michelangelo chose to portray his Moses with horns anyway. It’s possible he did so entirely out of a sense of tradition, but certain historians have also theorized he did so as a final “screw you” to Pope Julius, with whom he feuded endlessly, despite the fact that Julius had been by far his biggest patron. (Actually, no one really got along with Julius—the guy was a heel who, like many medieval and Renaissance popes, was far more interested in military conquest than theology or church leadership.) If so, it wouldn’t be the first time Michelangelo had encoded disdain for the pope into his art. The Sistine Chapel ceiling, the first Michelangelo project Julius commissioned, includes a cherub making an obscene gesture, and Michelangelo’s mural of The Last Judgment depicts the mouth of hell opening directly behind the altar. Subtlety was not one of Michelangelo’s strong suits.

And so, Moses, who in life shared in so much of the glory of God that his face shone with majesty, got his most enduring likeness carved with a pair of sad, stubby horns, partly because St. Jerome was a tad careless with his Bible translation and partly because Michelangelo had it in for the guy whose tomb he was carving.

LOVE OF GOD DEMONSTRATED IN LOVING OTHERS

For a long time I struggled with not knowing how to love God and worried that I was not a true Christian because I could not grasp what was expected of me.

Granted I grew up accepting Christian principles and knowing God as my Lord and Savior, learning very early in life how to worship and to pray to him, but I had trouble understanding how to truly love God in the way that I thought I should.

The uncertainty remained with me well into  adulthood. I knew all too well what it felt like to be in love and to be loved in a husband and wife context but I could not equate that emotional and physical bliss to a love of our Creator.

After all, how can you love God whom you have never seen? 

Everything that I read or heard on the question either went over my head or failed to adequately provide answers. I cannot believe the amount fruitless study I engaged in over the years, church sermons I'd listened to and lip service I paid before, almost out of the blue, the light finally dawned on me...You love God by loving others. Why had that simple truth evaded me for so long? 

The basic nature of God is love. What else is there to say? For so long I had been seeking a different kind of love befitting God and in reality there are no different levels or degrees of love to fit certain circumstances.

When we love others with unselfish love, we are taking on the nature of God and in effect loving him. We are commanded to love God and love our neighbor as our self. When we do this, we are demonstrating that we love God.

When you enter the world of Christianity, you must change your basic nature. The world has programmed us to look out for ourselves, to do whatever is necessary to get ahead. God created us with the instinct for self preservation. As a Christian, however, we must look out for others also.

After all these years of building up self we must sacrifice some time and effort, to serve others. I believe this is one of the most difficult lessons Christians have to learn. It may seem as if we are coldly and deliberately sabotaging self. In reality, we are simply learning to love others as we do our self.

Christians are supposed to operate by agape love. We are to have genuine concern for other people. Again, I believe that Christianity has failed to change the world because too few Christians understand or are willing to operate in this fashion.

The word love brings up many things in our mind. Greek and Latin terminology has different words for love. Flirtatious love, brotherly love. Sexual love. Friendship love, logical love, smothering love, divine love. The English language has only one word for love. It defines itself, so is it any wonder that we have trouble looking for any other definition?

In Greek, agape is used in most Scriptures that deal with the love man has for God, and God has for man. It describes the very nature of God. He is love. Since we are made in his image, it should describe our nature.

Agape love is a little different. It is not a feeling; it's a motivation for action that we are free to choose or reject. Agape is a sacrificial love that voluntarily suffers inconvenience, discomfort, and even death for the benefit of another without expecting anything in return.

Jesus introduced agape love principles with the golden rule: Do to others what you would have them do to you (Matthew 7:12 ). This law is based on Leviticus 19:18. Love your neighbor as yourself. It is called the Royal Law in James 2:8, because all laws of relationship are based upon it.

The principles of agape apply in marriage also.

Love that involves romance is great but it is by nature selfish, predominantly satisfying self needs only. Agape love causes each partner to seek satisfaction for their spouse first. Both needs are met in a beautiful relationship if agape principles are followed. Marriages fail because people quit being concerned for their spouse.

So then, love can be described with the three letters -- "G-O-D" -- and three words "God is Love." The world describes love as an emotion. It is much more than that. It is giving and commitment.

Consider that God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son. He loved, he gave the most precious gift it was possible to give. He is committed to us for life, like we are to be in our wife and husband relationships.

And the loss of a life partner does not mean that our ability to love has gone with them...I get it! Love is a living thing and it is to be shared abundantly as long as we live.

I am so relieved that I now know how to love God. If by chance, like me, you didn't know before, I hope you are (relieved) now too my friend!

It was really not that complicated after all.

CANADIAN INTERMENT CAMPS REMEMBERED

Commemorative statue and interpretive panel stands at the east end of St. Paul’s Lagasse Park in Alberta.

No doubt you missed it but Thursday, Oct. 28, was National Internment Commemoration Day in Canada. The history of Canada’s World War I internment operations remains not widely known, nor understood.

During a time when government approved Indigenous residential schools are very much in the news, this is just another in the numerous dark-gray smudges blemishing Canadian heritage that will not, nor should not, go away -- lest we forget.

From 1914-1920, 8,579 “enemy aliens” were interned behind barbed wire under armed guard in 24 camps across Canada. The majority were ethnic Ukrainian immigrants, nominal subjects of the Austro-Hungarian empire and included 81 women and 156 children. At least 109 internees died of illness or injury in the camps and six men were fatally shot trying to escape.

More than 80,000 others were compelled to register with the authorities and endured state sanctioned indignities, including for some the confiscation of what little wealth they had. Those who were wounded in less visible ways cannot be so easily counted and the trauma of internment resonates still. A trilingual, 100-year anniversary commemorative statue and interpretive panel stands at the east end of St. Paul’s Lagasse Park in Alberta.

The Ukrainian Canadian Congress has released the following video produced by Ryan Boyko capturing the history of the internment of Ukrainian immigrants in Canada. Click on the link to view it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3FtxeMId8U

DO YOU HAVE A STRING HOLDING YOU BACK?

Many years ago in a small town there lived a mayor who everyone knew and loved.

One day this mayor decided to visit the travelling circus which had just come to his town. When he arrived, the show master greeted him and after shaking hands slapped him on the back. The show master insisted that the mayor take a quick tour behind the scenes, before the show started.

So off they went, first visiting the tent where all the circus animals were kept. When the two stepped inside the tent - the mayor’s eyes widened. As he looked around he saw tigers, giraffes, bears, lions, and in a far corner of the tent he spotted a young elephant around whose leg was wrapped an enormous metal chain, which tied him to a thick wooden pole.

As the mayor's attention was drawn to the other side of the tent, he noticed an enormous elephant. But after looking closer, he jumped and pointed a quivering finger…because the enormous elephant was only tied to a pole with a thin rope no thicker than your little finger. A rope which the enormous elephant could have easily snapped with a flick of his leg.

The mayor quizzed the show master, “Don’t you have this backwards? Shouldn’t the small elephant have the thin rope and the large elephant have the thick chain?”

The show master smiled, and responded, “That’s what you would expect, isn’t it?” He continued, “But we have found that when an elephant is young, that is when they try their hardest to break free and so they require the most restraint and the thickest chains. “But by the time they become much larger and stronger their will has been broken. They have come to think it is impossible to break free. And so they cease trying. Thus all they need is a thin little rope, and they will never try to move away from their pole.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Many of us are like that large strong elephant. What ties us to our “poles” in life is not a thick metal chain, or even a string, but our fears and past failures which haunt us. Maybe we tried to do something at some point in life, but were laughed at and criticized. Maybe we were told that we weren’t good enough.

It is the negative experiences from our past which hold us back from being what we could, or are called, to be. We feel trapped by our circumstances and unable to step into the freedoms out there awaiting us. Even though our capabilities grow and our ability to reach out and lay hold of freedom gets stronger as we grow older, we stop trying because our will has been broken.

Yet all we need to see is that string wrapped around our legs and acknowledge the fears and insecurities which at times feel so debilitating are really tiny and weak in comparison to our actual strength and abilities that have been supressed for so long.

All we need to do is flick our legs to break the string -- and start walking.

The wonderful world outside the "tent" we all grow up in awaits the few who are brave enough to simply take a step forward -- and snap the string.

 Science and the Gospel

Showing how they work together

Do science and theology undermine each other or support each other? 

I'll be the first to admit that there will be a lot of readin and writin in this science-theology dialogue post but brevity would not do justice to the serious nature of the subject matter and my reason(s) for pursuing it. So I beg the indulgence of my reader friends -- Christian, Jewish, et al -- in offering a framework for answering the aforementioned question on the following broad descriptions of science and theology.

First, in addition to being an academic discipline, theology (Greek: theos, logos) is God talk. God talks to us through Scripture and nature; and we talk to Him in prayer and talk about Him with words or actions (which speak louder than words). Second, science (Latin: scientia, knowledge) includes the academic disciplines of formal, natural, applied, social, and theological sciences. Many thoughtful scientists and philosophers have recognized the correlation of academic disciplines, and the potential unity of science and the humanities.

From this perspective a person may be professional in some sciences and amateur in others. In addition, it is evident that we are all involved with science and theology on some level and, therefore, can engage in science-theology question to some degree.

As we wrestle with questions about the gospel and science-theology dialogue, let us consider the biblical instruction to “remember the days of old, [and] consider the years of many generations” (Deut. 32:7).

In the premodern period theology was queen of the sciences because the church founded the universities where science was cultivated. At times there were conflicts between traditional theology and new discoveries in science. However, some essential assumptions of modern science may be traced back to the premodern period, when theology provided the context for the development of the scientific method.

In the modern period various sciences became mature, and natural science was regarded as king of the sciences. Many ceased thinking of theology as a science and trusted science as the solution to all human problems. Nevertheless, Friedrich Schleiermacher (the father of modern theology) defined theology as a positive and practical science.

In the postmodern period many scholars recognize that there are serious limits to both science and theology, and that both can be used for good or for evil. Some persons respond to this by cultivating anti-science and anti-theology attitudes. Others respond by proposing that science-theology dialogue can minimize their potential for evil and maximize their potential for good.

It is important to note that premodern, modern, and postmodern perspectives currently coexist. While some persons identify exclusively with the values of one perspective, we should recognize the positive and negative features of each approach. Rather than premodern theology as queen or modern natural science as king, we need a biblically informed postmodern strategy for science-theology dialogue and I may allude to that in future Wrights Lane posts.

Meantime I want to bring alive for you the thoughts of a remarkable woman 150 years ago as she wrote revealingly on mankinds' scientific and theological struggle to understand the nature of an all-mighty God. She had critics and her authenticity was often questioned, but the provocative and fascinating Ellen G. White was truly ahead of her time.

Ellen G. White

Ellen G. White was a 19th century religious writer, missionary and co-founder of the ‘Seventh-day Adventist Church’, an internationally recognized religious organization. A prolific author, she produced more than 5000 articles and 40 books during her lifetime. Some of her well-known publications include, ‘The Desire of Ages’, ‘The Great Controversy’ and ‘Steps to Christ’. 

Her publications are revered today as many believe her works are direct revelations from god. Her works have been translated in over 140 languages across the world and her publications mostly threw light upon topics pertaining to theology, evangelism, education, creationism and agriculture. 

As an advocate of vegetarianism, she stressed the importance of treating animals with respect and believed that vegetarianism would help human beings grow spiritually. 

In the following extract from one of her earlier formidable works, March 13, 1884, White talked rationally all those years ago about how science and God's written word can work in harmony. You have to read the text slowly and carefully in order to follow the thought process, bearing in mind the pre-modern context from whence it comes. Her opening paragraph is most profound.

“The fool hath in his heart, There is no God.” The mightiest intellects of earth cannot comprehend God. If he reveals himself at all to men, it is by veiling himself in mystery. His ways are past finding out. Men must be ever searching, ever learning; and yet there is an infinity beyond. Could they fully understand the purposes, wisdom, love, and character of God, they would not believe in him as an infinite being, and trust him with the interests of their souls. If they could fathom him, he would no longer stand supreme." She continued...

"Many, when they find themselves incapable of measuring the Creator and his works by their own imperfect knowledge of science, doubt the existence of God and attribute infinite power to nature. These persons have lost the simplicity of faith, and are removed far from God in mind and spirit. There should be a settled faith in the divinity of God's holy word. The Bible is not to be tested by men's ideas of science, but science is to be brought to the test of this unerring standard. When the Bible makes statements of facts in nature, science may be compared with the written word, and a correct understanding of both will always prove them to be in harmony. One does not contradict the other. All truth, whether in nature or revelation, agrees. Scientific research will open to the minds of the really wise vast fields of thought and information. They will see God in his works, and will praise him. He will be to them first and best, and the mind will be centered upon him. Skeptics, who read the Bible for the sake of caviling, through ignorance claim to find decided contradictions between science and revelation. But man's measurement of God will never be correct. The mind unenlightened by God's Spirit will ever be in darkness in regard to his power. 

"Spiritual things are spiritually discerned. Those who have no vital union with God are swayed one way and another; they put men's opinions in the front, and God's word in the background. They grasp human assertions, that judgment against sin is contrary to God's benevolent character, and, while dwelling upon infinite benevolence, try to forget that there is such a thing as infinite justice. 

"When we have right views of the power, greatness, and majesty of God, and of the weakness of man, we shall despise the assumptions of wisdom made by earth's so-called great men, who have none of Heaven's nobility in their characters. There is nothing for which men should be praised or exalted. There is no reason why the opinions of the learned should be trusted, when they are disposed to measure divine things by their own perverted conceptions. Those who serve God are the only ones whose opinion and example it is safe to follow. A sanctified heart quickens and intensifies the mental powers. A living faith in God imparts energy; it gives calmness and repose of spirit, and strength and nobility of character. 

"Men of science think that with their enlarged conceptions they can comprehend the wisdom of God, that which he has done or can do. The idea largely prevails that he is bounded and restricted by his own laws. Men either deny and ignore his existence, or think to explain everything, even the operations of his Spirit upon the human heart, by natural laws; and they no longer reverence his name or fear his power. While they think they are gaining everything, they are chasing bubbles, and losing precious opportunities to become acquainted with God. They do not believe in the supernatural, not realizing that the Author of nature's laws can work above those laws. They deny the claims of God, and neglect the interests of their own souls; but his existence, his character, his laws, are facts that the reasoning of men of the highest attainments cannot overthrow. 

"Nature is a power, but the God of nature is unlimited in power. His works interpret his character. Those who judge him from his handiworks, and not from the suppositions of great men, will see his presence in everything. They behold his smile in the glad sunshine, and his love and care for man in the rich fields of autumn. Even the adornments of the earth, as seen in the grass of living green, the lovely flowers of every hue, and the lofty and varied trees of the forest, testify to the tender, fatherly care of our God.

"The power of the great God will be exerted in behalf of those that fear him. Listen to the words of the prophet: 'Hast thou not known? hast thou not heard, that the everlasting God, the Lord, the Creator of the ends of the earth, fainteth not, neither is weary? There is no searching of his understanding. He giveth power to the faint; and to them that have no might he increaseth strength. Even the youths shall faint and be weary, and the young men shall utterly fall. But they that wait upon the Lord shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary; and they shall walk, and not faint.' 

"In the word of God many queries are raised that the most profound scholars can never answer. Attention is called to these subjects to show us how many things there are, even among the common things of every-day life, that finite minds, with all their boasted wisdom, can never fully comprehend. 

"All the systems of philosophy devised by men have led to confusion and shame when God has not been recognized and honored. To lose faith in God is terrible. Prosperity cannot be a great blessing to nations or individuals, when once faith in his word is lost. Nothing is truly great but that which is eternal in its tendencies. Truth, justice, mercy, purity, and the love of God, are imperishable. When men possess these qualities, they are brought into close relationship to God, and are candidates for the highest exaltation to which the race can aspire. They will disregard human praise, and will be superior to disappointment, weariness, the strife of tongues, and contentions for supremacy. 

"He whose soul is imbued with the Spirit of God will learn the lesson of confiding trust. Taking the written word as his counselor and guide, he will find in science an aid to understand God, but he will not become exalted, till, in his blind self-conceit, he is a fool in his ideas of God. "

CONCLUDING NOTE: In summary to all of the forgoing, many Christians are concerned with science and theology; and the current postmodern period presents a challenging and exciting opportunity for dialogue centered in the everlasting gospel.