Letter to the Editor
Daily Press
P.O. Box 1389
Victorville, CA 92393
Re: Daily Press, Saturday October 30, 2010, A4, “Whitman met by angry crowd”, Thomas Watkins.
A nugget of popular wisdom says that your enemies say more truth about you than do your friends. Thank you California Nurses Association for your endorsement of Meg Whitman. Taking the time and expense of following her around in costume and a bus speaks volumes to we the voters. Your union brethren have reassured this voter that my vote for Meg Whitman will not be wasted. The insecurity and thuggery of the California Nurses Association blaringly exposes the union’s cowardice and your fear that Ms. Whitman may be tough enough.
G.Goslaw
7983 SVL Box
Victorville, Ca 92395
Saturday, October 30, 2010
Thursday, October 28, 2010
SVLA Again
Letter to the Editor
Daily Press
P.O.Box 1389
Victorville, Ca 92393
Dear Daily Press, Editor Don Holland and Editorial Editor Steve Williams,
There you go again, Daily Press, making politically correct bye lines that are not supported by the facts. This Spring Valley Lake resident and proxy for one of it’s 4,000 homeowners is calling you and your reporter Brooke Edwards out for manipulation of the facts.
The dishonest article in today’s edition, October 28, 2010, is entitled “Investigation clears former SVLA employees”. No where in the article or in the workings of SVLA has anyone been “cleared” of thief charges. The truth is that the District Attorney turned his back on the homeowners of SVLA and refused to prosecute the former employees who absconded with association funds.
Our illustrious Board chairman, Judge Mahlum, must have connections to the District Attorney’s office. Wasted by this board is a $10,000 special audit authorized by this board to help in the investigation and an estimated 50,00 to 100,000 dollars in association funds stolen. We don’t know how much was stolen because we member’s are not allowed to see the audit, at least not the last time I checked. We only get to hear second hand numbers.
If you were a real newspaper, you would first check the facts when you write about SVLA. It is no wonder that Judge Mahlum and general manager Sabo are so faint hearted, it is no wonder that they want the issue of justice in SVL to dissipate. It is no wonder that the theft has been buried in the District Attorney‘s office for over a year in the hopes that SVL would forget. Some of us have a long memory, property values be damned!
G.Goslaw
ggoslaw@gmail.com
Daily Press
P.O.Box 1389
Victorville, Ca 92393
Dear Daily Press, Editor Don Holland and Editorial Editor Steve Williams,
There you go again, Daily Press, making politically correct bye lines that are not supported by the facts. This Spring Valley Lake resident and proxy for one of it’s 4,000 homeowners is calling you and your reporter Brooke Edwards out for manipulation of the facts.
The dishonest article in today’s edition, October 28, 2010, is entitled “Investigation clears former SVLA employees”. No where in the article or in the workings of SVLA has anyone been “cleared” of thief charges. The truth is that the District Attorney turned his back on the homeowners of SVLA and refused to prosecute the former employees who absconded with association funds.
Our illustrious Board chairman, Judge Mahlum, must have connections to the District Attorney’s office. Wasted by this board is a $10,000 special audit authorized by this board to help in the investigation and an estimated 50,00 to 100,000 dollars in association funds stolen. We don’t know how much was stolen because we member’s are not allowed to see the audit, at least not the last time I checked. We only get to hear second hand numbers.
If you were a real newspaper, you would first check the facts when you write about SVLA. It is no wonder that Judge Mahlum and general manager Sabo are so faint hearted, it is no wonder that they want the issue of justice in SVL to dissipate. It is no wonder that the theft has been buried in the District Attorney‘s office for over a year in the hopes that SVL would forget. Some of us have a long memory, property values be damned!
G.Goslaw
ggoslaw@gmail.com
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
The Bible Abusers
Key Word: Implication
Colossians 2 : 8 See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy,which depends on human tradition and elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ.
LOGIC, according to Webster, is the science of correct reasoning; a science which describes relationships among propositions in terms of implication, contradiction, contrariety, conversion, etc.
Implication is a formal relationship between two propositions such that if the first is true then the second is necessarily or logically true.
The Church uses illogical implications drawn from Scripture to assert the God directed trustworthiness of certain human traditions. Such as...
I. Creationism which can only be Biblically valid by implication. God created the world so it follows that science is an enemy of faith. This is the new gnosis or Gnostic world world view tradition of separating spirit and matter. Matter, the “real” world is evil so that an intuitive knowledge in spiritual matters is all that God cares about. This is the practical false dualism of modern creationist thought.
II. Raptureism which can only be Biblically valid by implication. God will bring the consummation of this world so it follows that the Bible tauts a specific divine methodology. It is, however, human arrogance to dictate to God the end game. (Every rapture scripture is stolen from the theology of the Second Coming of Jesus Christ, the end of this present world order)
III. Homophobia which can only be Biblically valid by implication. Homosexuality occurs as a sin in scripture therefore all homosexual behavior is a sin. Heterosexuality occurs as a sin in scripture therefore all heterosexual behavior is a sin. Neither is a valid implication.
IV. Perfectionism which can only be Biblically valid by implication. God expects progressive spiritual performance so it follows that there is a performance plateau of the spirit that brings spiritual credibility.
V. Eternal Damnation which can only be Biblically valid by implication. Spiritual failure is a dour circumstance of this life so it follows that humankind can place themselves beyond God’s reach forever (eternally at death).
VI. Biblical infallibility which can only be Biblically valid by implication. The Bible has divine truth for us therefore every word of the biblical revelation has equal value.
VII. The prosperity gospel which can only be Biblically valid by implication. Faith in God is blessed in scripture so that the faithful can expect certain rewards, monetary or physical.
VIII. Liberation theology which can only be Biblically valid by implication. Freedom is a theme in scripture so that we must assist God in adjusting society to freedom norms.
Conclusion
All eight are non logical implications grounded in human tradition and to be avoided. “Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of human traditions. You hypocrites!” Matt 15:6and7. These are strong words against complicating the simple truth of Scripture. When we assert these implications we are Bible abusers.
G.Goslaw
October 27, 2010
Colossians 2 : 8 See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy,which depends on human tradition and elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ.
LOGIC, according to Webster, is the science of correct reasoning; a science which describes relationships among propositions in terms of implication, contradiction, contrariety, conversion, etc.
Implication is a formal relationship between two propositions such that if the first is true then the second is necessarily or logically true.
The Church uses illogical implications drawn from Scripture to assert the God directed trustworthiness of certain human traditions. Such as...
I. Creationism which can only be Biblically valid by implication. God created the world so it follows that science is an enemy of faith. This is the new gnosis or Gnostic world world view tradition of separating spirit and matter. Matter, the “real” world is evil so that an intuitive knowledge in spiritual matters is all that God cares about. This is the practical false dualism of modern creationist thought.
II. Raptureism which can only be Biblically valid by implication. God will bring the consummation of this world so it follows that the Bible tauts a specific divine methodology. It is, however, human arrogance to dictate to God the end game. (Every rapture scripture is stolen from the theology of the Second Coming of Jesus Christ, the end of this present world order)
III. Homophobia which can only be Biblically valid by implication. Homosexuality occurs as a sin in scripture therefore all homosexual behavior is a sin. Heterosexuality occurs as a sin in scripture therefore all heterosexual behavior is a sin. Neither is a valid implication.
IV. Perfectionism which can only be Biblically valid by implication. God expects progressive spiritual performance so it follows that there is a performance plateau of the spirit that brings spiritual credibility.
V. Eternal Damnation which can only be Biblically valid by implication. Spiritual failure is a dour circumstance of this life so it follows that humankind can place themselves beyond God’s reach forever (eternally at death).
VI. Biblical infallibility which can only be Biblically valid by implication. The Bible has divine truth for us therefore every word of the biblical revelation has equal value.
VII. The prosperity gospel which can only be Biblically valid by implication. Faith in God is blessed in scripture so that the faithful can expect certain rewards, monetary or physical.
VIII. Liberation theology which can only be Biblically valid by implication. Freedom is a theme in scripture so that we must assist God in adjusting society to freedom norms.
Conclusion
All eight are non logical implications grounded in human tradition and to be avoided. “Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of human traditions. You hypocrites!” Matt 15:6and7. These are strong words against complicating the simple truth of Scripture. When we assert these implications we are Bible abusers.
G.Goslaw
October 27, 2010
Friday, October 22, 2010
The Bible
It is a Saturday morning men’s bible study at a typical unnamed non denominational church in the high desert. This was a healthy time of sharing in which the discussion came around to the authority of scripture.
The focus was not on the academic and philosophical issues but we regular guy’s understanding of the everyday value of the Bible in our lives. One impertinent participant asked the pastor if there were not some differences that conflict with each other in the Bible. The pastor’s response was in the affirmative but
they were said to be minor and of little consequence.
Those few of us who are familiar with scripture know better, as does the pastor with his graduate degree. His response was not unexpected but to this respecter of the biblical record it was to some degree dishonest. Did the pastor want to avoid any questioning of divine script? Yes! If it had occurred, would such an honest discussion damage the usefulness of quickly quoting the Bible from the pulpit, as if such a quote should end all questions? Possibly but this particular pastor is not prone to such errors but an honest discussion there was not. A decision was made by this pastor that in true Nicholsonian style, “we (the laymen thus gathered) cannot handle the truth”.
Are there listener’s who would misuse such an honest discussion against the local pastor or the local church or the Bible or the faith as a whole? Surely, but these folk have a spiritual axe to grind and their pettiness can be deciphered by all. On second thought, I may be giving a little to much credit to the choir. The point being that regardless of the aftermath, honesty is the best policy, is it not? This voice can speak frankly because these words are from the bushes with nothing to lose.
There would seem to be two ways that believers read the bible. There are those believers who read the Bible with the eyes of faith and those who read with the blindness of faith. The non believer will find the Bible dull and be turned off. The legitimate seeker, asking real questions of the Bible, will be engaged toward a moment of faith and a viable connection to the realm (biblical kingdom) of the spirit of God. There is a danger in absolute statements but it always seems to happen this way. Was it not Jesus who told us without equivocation, “he who seeks finds (Matt. 7:8)”?
Reading the Bible with the blindness of faith is only for the ever immature believer. The Bible is a “totem” or a token of spirituality sitting on the coffee table. The real authority is what is said about the Bible. That methodology feeds our laziness. The assumption is that the Spirit has long quit giving revelation to the individual so we are to swallow whatever is told to us about God and his kingdom. The Bible becomes then a mere “proof text” for human traditions.
This was the predominate religious and spiritual atmosphere of the time of Jesus. Some would extend this laziness to our day in which the language of religion may have changed but our souls are being starved for relevancy.
The believer who reads the Bible with the eyes of faith never tires of digging for truth within it‘s pages. He or she will insist on an atmosphere where it is O.K. to ask any sincere question of God’s revelation to us. He or she will accept that the books were authored by human beings inspired by the Spirit of God. We sincere believers have chosen a number of ways to express this inspiration but with very little agreement.
Please allow a definition that works for me but in no way is definitive for others. “Not all the words of the Bible are perfect but all the words of the Bible have a God intended value”. Accept or reject this definition but regardless of one’s view of Scripture there can be no harm to asking this question of each passage. What is the God intended value?
G.Goslaw
The focus was not on the academic and philosophical issues but we regular guy’s understanding of the everyday value of the Bible in our lives. One impertinent participant asked the pastor if there were not some differences that conflict with each other in the Bible. The pastor’s response was in the affirmative but
they were said to be minor and of little consequence.
Those few of us who are familiar with scripture know better, as does the pastor with his graduate degree. His response was not unexpected but to this respecter of the biblical record it was to some degree dishonest. Did the pastor want to avoid any questioning of divine script? Yes! If it had occurred, would such an honest discussion damage the usefulness of quickly quoting the Bible from the pulpit, as if such a quote should end all questions? Possibly but this particular pastor is not prone to such errors but an honest discussion there was not. A decision was made by this pastor that in true Nicholsonian style, “we (the laymen thus gathered) cannot handle the truth”.
Are there listener’s who would misuse such an honest discussion against the local pastor or the local church or the Bible or the faith as a whole? Surely, but these folk have a spiritual axe to grind and their pettiness can be deciphered by all. On second thought, I may be giving a little to much credit to the choir. The point being that regardless of the aftermath, honesty is the best policy, is it not? This voice can speak frankly because these words are from the bushes with nothing to lose.
There would seem to be two ways that believers read the bible. There are those believers who read the Bible with the eyes of faith and those who read with the blindness of faith. The non believer will find the Bible dull and be turned off. The legitimate seeker, asking real questions of the Bible, will be engaged toward a moment of faith and a viable connection to the realm (biblical kingdom) of the spirit of God. There is a danger in absolute statements but it always seems to happen this way. Was it not Jesus who told us without equivocation, “he who seeks finds (Matt. 7:8)”?
Reading the Bible with the blindness of faith is only for the ever immature believer. The Bible is a “totem” or a token of spirituality sitting on the coffee table. The real authority is what is said about the Bible. That methodology feeds our laziness. The assumption is that the Spirit has long quit giving revelation to the individual so we are to swallow whatever is told to us about God and his kingdom. The Bible becomes then a mere “proof text” for human traditions.
This was the predominate religious and spiritual atmosphere of the time of Jesus. Some would extend this laziness to our day in which the language of religion may have changed but our souls are being starved for relevancy.
The believer who reads the Bible with the eyes of faith never tires of digging for truth within it‘s pages. He or she will insist on an atmosphere where it is O.K. to ask any sincere question of God’s revelation to us. He or she will accept that the books were authored by human beings inspired by the Spirit of God. We sincere believers have chosen a number of ways to express this inspiration but with very little agreement.
Please allow a definition that works for me but in no way is definitive for others. “Not all the words of the Bible are perfect but all the words of the Bible have a God intended value”. Accept or reject this definition but regardless of one’s view of Scripture there can be no harm to asking this question of each passage. What is the God intended value?
G.Goslaw
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
The Angry God
Don Holland
Editor, Daily Press
(18) The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of human beings who suppress the truth by their wickedness, (19) since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them.
People, including your newspaper, lift this verse out of it’s context to validate the erroneous supposition that there is an angry God sitting on high who gets a kick out of raining punishment down on the sinner. At the same time, these same folk are suffering from the delusion that somehow that punishment is for the other guy not them. If this is the “truth” that is gleaned from these verses, there exists an extreme laziness to explore St. Paul’s thought. Enough said but this verse is one of the most abused in scripture.
G.Goslaw
Editor, Daily Press
(18) The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of human beings who suppress the truth by their wickedness, (19) since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them.
People, including your newspaper, lift this verse out of it’s context to validate the erroneous supposition that there is an angry God sitting on high who gets a kick out of raining punishment down on the sinner. At the same time, these same folk are suffering from the delusion that somehow that punishment is for the other guy not them. If this is the “truth” that is gleaned from these verses, there exists an extreme laziness to explore St. Paul’s thought. Enough said but this verse is one of the most abused in scripture.
G.Goslaw
Sunday, October 17, 2010
Just Venting
Dr. Ed Young
The Winning Walk
P.O. Box 1414
Houston, Texas 77251
Dear Pastor Ed,
Thank you again for your program, the Winning Walk, every Sunday morning. Your program has the most creditable presence in the spiritual media. Your knack for summarizing difficult biblical issues in comfortable terms is to be applauded. As you know, the danger of such summaries is to avoid the less popular truth. Great care should be exercised because the audience oten prefers to be played rather than hearing the whole truth. Such a deception occurred today, October 17, as broadcast on TBN.
Your topic was a definition or distinction between liberal and conservative. Let’s assume that the distinction is within the community of believers. As such, the use of these labels is not representative of the love of Christ and are destructive to all of us. You go on to advance Genesis 1 : 1 as the pivotal supposed dividing line between lberal and conservative world views. You state, “If you believe that God created the world then you are a conservative.” This is not reasonable. If you don’t believe that God created the worlds and galaxies, that we live through the will of God, then you are an atheist not a liberal.
Sometimes what is not said is as important as what is said. Further explanation was absolutely necessary at this point even with your program’s time restraints. Since you failed to do this you pandered to the creationist mentality of the choir and offended those of us who maintain that Genesis says nothing about how God made His will factual. The “HOW” is best explained by science. In Scripture it is simply, “God said”. Are not both world views tolerable within the bounds of liberty required of believers by St. Paul? Are they not tolerable without calling each other names as if we were in grammar school?
Possibly I am wrong but I believe that you would agree that both world views are not mutually exclusive. The omission of a needed qualification, however, is a deception without excuse. It is why thinking believers have low regard for the clergy. Preacher’s and politicians too often have similar styles that cry out for a comparison. Both camps whip up the base by appealing to human traditions to raise money. Is that where your coming from? Let me use baseball terminology, “say it isn’t so Ed”.
Thank you for letting me vent, we thinking believers are not second class citizens of the kingdom.
Kindest Regards,
G. Goslaw
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Playing the fool
Letter to the editor
Daily Press
Thank you Mr. Cash for your letter of October 12 (Doing good isn’t enough). May I call your attention to one sentence in your letter, “Sin as defined in the Bible… will end in eternal damnation”. Please excuse my ignorance but where does the Bible say that, either in the Old or in the New Testaments? The trick is to separate what we humans think about the Bible from what the Bible actually says to us. I am an expert in neither but it would seem that this biblical observation needs to be questioned.
My Bible says that we have all sinned, ( chosen our own way ) in this life and that we all are going to pass from this life totally alone. The certainty of death reigns over us all. The Bible speaks often about death but “eternal damnation”? If the two are equivalent we are all in trouble. Your fellow readers are bothered most because this eternal damnation thing seems to always fit the other guy best. When pressed on the biblical fine points Rev. Chandler will recite the universality of the sin question but his banner headlines expose a specialized disdain for the gay community. One would hope that this is not the case.
Could it be that this eternal damnation thing is largely a construct of the Church to get people through the doors and money in the plate? One would hope not but Church history documents it’s possibility or probability. Within the pages of the Bible is truth and help for “our” sin problem but the Church has made it so difficult to find. Jesus walked through the countryside doing Good. The selfless life style is the divine expectation designed by God for all of us and all of us resist the imperative. My Bible defines sin as selfishness not necessarily sexual preference.
There are selfish folk playing golf on Sunday and there are selfish folk sitting in the church pew. To God and to the Bible one’s earthly circumstances seem to matter little, what matters is a gut felt mysterious crazy wireless connection with our maker designer. Please God, forgive my selfishness, search my heart and make me better than I am. At the moment of death, with this faith we shall pass from life with one real friend. Should you or yours miss the connection here on earth, there will be other opportunities in the hereafter. God will be God! Check it out in the Bible.
g.goslaw
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)