Euro-German

Read Carefully For A Laugh!

The European Commission has just announced an agreement whereby English will be the official language of the European Union rather than German, which was the other possibility.

As part of the negotiations, the British Government conceded that English spelling had some room for improvement and has accepted a 5 year phase-in plan that would become known as "Euro-English".

In the first year, "s" will replace the soft "c". Sertainly, this will make the sivil servants jump with joy. The hard "c" will be dropped in favour of "k". This should klear up konfusion, and keyboards kan have one less letter.

There will be growing publik enthusiasm in the sekond year when the troublesome "ph" will be replaced with "f". This will make words like fotograf 20% shorter.

In the 3rd year, publik akseptanse of the new spelling kan be expekted to reach the stage where! more komplikated changes are possible.

Governments will enkourage the removal of double letters which have always ben a deterent to akurate speling.

Also, al wil agre that the horibl mes of the silent "e" in the languag is disgrasful and it should go away.

By the 4th yer people wil be reseptiv to steps such as replasing "th" with "z" and "w" with "v".

Dur ing ze fifz yer, ze unesesary "o" kan be dropd from vords kontaining "ou" and after ziz fifz yer, ve vil hav a rel sensibl riten styl.

Zer vil be no mor trubl or difikultis and evrivun vil find it ezi tu understand ech oza. Ze drem ov a united urop vil finali kum tru.

Und efter ze fifz yer, ve vil al be speking German lik zey vunted in ze forst plas.

Caution Church

Krampus

Krampus is a mythological creature and as far as I have known, unique to the Germanic people.  Originally he was the wild man of the woods - the boogie man. He shakes the forest and tears up trees, he frightens little children, especially those whom have been rotten during the year.  One bad dude.

As St. Nicholas become a part of culture representing all things good, Krampus become the representation of evil.  So, if St. Nicholas is the representative of God, then Krampus is the devil or at least a want-a-be.

This is a very well dressed Krampus, usually he is more primitive (cheaply) dressed!  I guess this town must have had some Krampus bucks lying around or someone whom really got into the role.

Each village, of course, has their own idea of what Krampus looks like.  However, lately some towns have become more Hollywood-ish - with Krampus sporting huge Ibex style horns and wookie fur.  While others have remained much more traditional and primitive in their representation - almost more humorous than fearful for a child!

One of more annoying aspects has been Krampus becoming more of a Halloween character, with at least one Krampus seen whom looked more like someone from Pirates of the Caribeen, tri-corner hat and all, than the more traditional wild forest scary guy that would just as soon eat you as smack your back side pink!

Every December 6^th, on the anniversary of St. Nicholas’ death in 342, someone dressed as St. Nicholas would come through the local villages.  I always figured it was one of the village fathers and interestingly never seem to be the local priest!  He would ask you your name, look in his book and then give out candy to all of the good children and usually some good advice (like attend church, obey your parents, don't do whatever the latest offense the village knew about was, use your hankie and not your sleeve, etc).

Whereas, Krampus, whom always accompany him, would give the bad children several whacks on the back end.  Guess what I got - candy or whacks...... Yah, I figured it was a conspiracy with the police over how many times I got busted every year for climbing the cherry tree in our back yard (all trees were strictly vorboten!).

But, it was a good object lesson for us - good is rewarded and evil is punished by the scary creature!

I remember Krampus as being tall and very hairy.  Of course, as an adult I realize that the hair was long hair goat skins sewn onto a costume. But, it was still frightening!

Our Home Is Not This Earth

I seem to have constant entanglements with other believers over the question as to whether or not Christians should be involved in politics or not.  These arguments come from those under the influence of American thought in particular.  Many of them would believe it is the calling of the Church to work towards the Christian Utopian Paradise – without Christ physically being here.  In many ways the same problem which arose during the Reformation and lead to many conflicts between Reformed groups and the cultures which surrounded them.

If you remember, you are called a stranger in a strange land – that means you are not a part of the land you are in!  You fit in about as well as someone from Brooklyn in downtown Kemerova – a place where you do not speak the language, do not know the customs, plus you look and smell different!  You might be slightly interesting because you are different but that would be the end of the attraction and commonality.

You are also called an ambassador.  Have you ever known an ambassador?  I have and they are often in very difficult situations.  They may be personal friends with those whom they work with but their job is to represent their country of origin to the country they are in.  So, you might be an American Ambassador to Germany – where culture is not so difficult, food is good, language is manageable and you will rarely slam into a real battle of the wills with those whom you work with.  On the other hand, you could be posted to Chad, where you are considered just one more problem and your diplomatic immunity may well not stop you from being killed.

How fitting both of these descriptions are of our condition as a Christian here on Earth!  We are no longer to be a part of the culture or people we once lived in.  We have a new belief and hope, which is not understandable to the native population blinded by their sin nature.  We truly become strangers and alien to even the thought processes used by those around us.

We are representatives of Jesus, the Christ, the one whom is the ruler of all but still unknown or acknowledged by most.  As His Ambassadors, we are to represent His desires to the world, the place we have been sent, to the culture around us.  His desire is first our own fallen natures and maturity, then those around us to recognize Him and hence brought to their salvation.  This is accomplished through our being the least amongst men, as He was, a servant to all.  That means you not serving yourself nor your own desires.  It also means those around you may not appreciate you, or whom you represent.  Of course, how you represent Him, is completely at the discretion of Him – but the goal remains the same –changed lives – not cultural change, that will come with the changed lives….

When as Christians, we lose sight of our condition and our assignment; problems are caused to the body of Christ – some of which are very hard to live down.

If ever there was a prime example as to how true the above is, here it is:

 

How much more mislead could Christian and Catholic Church leaders have been?  Yes, you could with validity argue that those on this platform saluting Hitler were pressured into doing so.  But, equally, you could argue there is no leadership, discernment, nor wisdom displayed here!  With obviously no Gifts of the Spirit being present, could there have been any Fruits of the Spirit in this environment? 

Then, is it any wonder in the years to follow that Europe would abandon the false church which faced them?  And yet, I see no more wisdom displayed by today’s “christian” leaders, than these mislead men …..

Serving Ourselves

Regard all things with a grain of salt, no matter the source, save for the Bible - and that includes anything I or anyone else tells you.  You alone are responsible before God for your choices - I for whatever I tell you.  If I am admonishing you, it is to be extremely careful with how you choose to live your life, whom you listen to, how you serve our Lord.

We have such finite understanding of the Lord, often only noticing His leading in the past tense.  We live under the control of a God within two wills.  His first is what is called His determinative will.  This covers all those things He desires for us and are well documented in our Bible: how to deal with one another, how to live our lives, etc.  For example hunting spouses whom are already Christian, women ministering to women/men to men, paying your taxes, obeying the law, attempting to live in peace with those around you, etc.

Then you have the permissive will of God.  Here we are dealing in the gray areas of life and it grows harder without discernment to know which way to go.  Sometimes the Bible does not have the answers, sometime we only have a vague direction in which to go.  So, which church should you attend?  Well, the Bible tells you it must be based on Him and nothing else, it should be involved in the raising up and training of the believer, it sponsors missions, it cares for the widows and orphans, does not support sin within the body, etc.  Ok, that is not a whole lot to go on here other than it is service oriented!  It does not say, "Stay away from Pastor XYZ."  But, you must look at the teachings of any church, no matter how traditional, and evaluate where they are walking in their relationship to God.  If it appears their emphasis is upon themselves (health and wealth gospel) - you are not dealing with a Christian church - be they Lutheran, Baptist, Methodist, Catholic or unaligned. Yah, sounds harsh, and way too many of my friends are wrapped up in these churches, but I have to answer to God for my knowledge of His Word and to my understanding: their teachings do not come from the Bible but from man and his desire to control his environment.  My friends are equally accountable to God for their decisions to be there under this teaching (be that right or wrong for them!).

And given these two wills, one is often left with the questions as to what is exactly right or wrong.  Let us take an example.  You are going to go to St. Petersburg on a mission of some unknown period of time.  Ok, you feel strongly led and are sure it is of God.  Only one problem, you are newly married and your husband does not feel so drawn - but does tell you that it is ok for you to go - after a lengthy fight.  Are you in the will of God or not?  If you say “Yes”, well, you have just blown a stack of scripture concerning your requirement to be with your husband and the running your household.  If you say “No”, you will feel betrayed on the inside and question if you should have ever gotten married.  This is the kind of dilemma I was referring to.  We make choices all of the time and sometimes those choices bring with them dilemmas we never anticipated - and thus are borne all sorts of frustrations with God, of our own making.

If you are interested, here is a real situation:  She alone felt the need to serve in the mission field; her husband has no desire at all but is willing to let her go.  But, even if she does go - she will be serving herself and not God.  How can I say this?  Because, my Bible tells me that God has limited himself to working within a set of rules and her abandonment of her family, even with their permission, is still wrong.  Yes, you can argue from the perspective of logic as to why what she did was the right thing to do, but luckily God does not use man's logic.  And, the outcome clearly showed what she did was completely wrong - they almost ended up in divorce when she got back and are now in counseling to get back on track with one another.  So long term solution is he should have gone with her and if he is unable to, she should have stayed home - to err on the safe side if nothing else.  If God wanted her on the mission field, He will convince her husband to be there with her........

So, I am hoping you are getting the idea here that we are free to make choices but which choices we do make must always err on the side of caution or we will be serving ourselves and not Him.  If this lady had been in submission to her husband, yes she would never have gone to the mission field.  Yes, a great deal of good was accomplished by her being where she went, but you know, God does not specifically need anyone of us to accomplish what He wills.  If her husband could not go, she should have stayed home with him - God would have raised up another to do what needed to be done.  But, this is no excuse for not serving, just realizing that we need to realign our eyes to see what it is we should be doing within the context of where we are.  You can be the best evangelist there ever was, but if you are working outside of the Bible and the Spirit's leading, you are only serving yourself.

Ok, an example closer to home and painful for me.

Our church is going through an expansion phase.  Everyone is excited, everyone is gung-ho, I believe everyone is dead wrong.  Why?  Ok, the mission of the church is outreach and training of the believers.  Well, so far so good.  But, the first thing my church did was to kill the annual Nativity.  Why?  Because it would be inconvenient to hold it while there was construction going on.  Oh, and by the way, once the construction is complete, there will be no place to hold it in the future.  Ok, no Nativity, fine, most churches do not have one anyway.  So what is real the issue here?  It was and remains my church's only real outreach to the community.  It drew people driving by to stop and sometimes question what this ‘Christianity’ thing is really about.  The kid's teachers and friends would attend and sometimes start going to church (not necessarily ours).  Now we will have a big building, which no doubt will always be filled every Sunday, but what about the community outreach?  This continues to be unaddressed.  Is there a reason we could not build or buy a satellite facility somewhere else?  Yes, ‘they’ want a bigger church because ‘they’ are completely sold out to the approach Rick Warren has taken.  But our pastor is not Rick Warren - his walk and ministry are not necessarily what we should be following.  But, this argument is completely lost on those whom lead our church.  They are literally blinded by the concept of Warren’s success and wanting to duplicate it.  And that is completely wrong and not found in my Bible..... 

Following someone else’s program is not following God’s leading.  See the point now?  I am sure God will continue to bless my church, but what part of His blessing will be lost because our eldership’s motivation is wrong?  That is what I worry about for my church and those I feel led to share with.

Even with this letter the same could be true.  If my motivation is to show how smart I am and how dumb everyone else is - that would be sin.  If I am a control freak trying to draw allegiance of others to my way of thinking - that would be sin.  If I have a personal vendetta against Pastor XYZ - that would be sin.  But, if I am trying to share a concern, no matter how unpopular, I am being obedient.  You must discern which is true and go the direction you feel is right.  And, you alone are answerable for your decision.

What Every Girl Needs

One of the more interesting sites I have stumbled across in Blog-land has been Kelly’s.  She is an interesting Christian woman, with an equally interesting group of friends and family whom blog with her.  Since I do not believe in coincidence, there must be a reason behind having found her.

One series of comments she and her friends shared several weeks ago had to do with a daughter’s desire to have their father’s approval – and that is what this installment is about.  It is all Kelly’s fault after all!

I have an estranged daughter.  I adopted her when she was 10 and by the time she was 18 plus one week, she told me she no longer needed a parent and she was gone.  And I have struggled with this situation since May of this year.  Oh sure, I can easily think of things  I could have handled better or said differently in retrospect – whom can not when dealing with an oldest child in your house.

Of course there were a few hundred things she could have not done or done differently as well.  But, such is the nature of relationships and the teenage years.

When I found her down on the Chesnyian border in 1998, two things struck me – one spiritual and one physical.  First, there was no question God’s Spirit was on her and secondly, her sister was going to be dead within months (TB).  Based on her sister’s condition, the Russians allowed an emergency adoption and from the time I found her to having them home was only a matter of weeks.

Across the eight years I had her I can truthful say she is very insecure, very obsessive , very smart, very lazy and had no interest in being discipled.  Yes, the exact opposite of me in every manner.  So you can now see how conflict became a major problem across her last year with me.

It is impossible to have a normal discussion with her; except on nails, hair or the latest in purse fashions.  So, how to I address Kelly’s thoughts on a girl and her needs?  I guess I have to look for opportunities to not tell her how much her mental capacity reminds me of a stump – but to attempt to build her up through mild praise when she does something right.

So, last night she came over for her mail and to hit the refrigerator hard – I have never seen her eat so much!  When I took her home, I found out she had moved to another town and into her own apartment in a very nice area – she had been sharing an apartment in a drug haven before.  Now I had an opportunity!

But, I have to stay in character and gradually work into this new role Kelly has assigned me.  I gently commented how nice her place was, how big the kitchen was, etc.  She was beaming she was so happy when I left to drive back home!

So, Kelly and company, you were right.  It looks like our relationship in on the mend – for the moment.

Thank you.

PS:  Her sister took all of $30 worth of medicine across a year to clear up the TB and she is quite the happy young lady of the house………..