Intermittent Explosive Disorder

In recent correspondence a friend told of how two usually civil friends erupted in a “cat fight” at their bridge club.

Later came the story of two persons who verbally engaged in egregious behavior at a meeting of their civic club.

Then came the question, “What is going on? Is there an epidemic of some sort of “people rage’ like “road rage’?” The answer is “yes.”

That same day I read an article originating in New Orleans regarding a diagnostic term getting increased use there. It is “Intermittent Explosive Disorder” (IED). It is used to describe normally compatible persons who, out of character, suddenly become explode. The aggression may be physical but is most often verbal.

It is caused by undue stress. In the area impacted by Hurricane Katrina such stress is common. It has resulted in increased incidents of explosive conduct by rational people.

Susan Howell is a professor at the University of New Orleans and a reputable pollster. Throughout March and April she and her staff interviewed 470 people in and around New Orleans. They found people in the area are having trouble sleeping. Nearly 2/3 say they are stressed over what is going to happen in the next few years. Twenty percent say they feel tired, irritable, sad, that they have difficulty concentrating and that everything is an effort. Summarily those are signs of stress.

At best the poll is skewed. The pollsters used conventional phone lines and many of the residents hardest hit still don’t have phone service. Had they been included the depression rate would have likely been considerably higher.

Our entire culture is stressed. Social, economic, business, political, and family pressures are at an all time high nationally. Those who are “news junkies” don’t help themselves in that the accumulative effect of events not directly involving them bring pressure on them.

Being made aware of this condition might well cause a reader to recall a recent incident where they nearly boiled over. If so it is good to realize this and pre-prepare for such a moment concluding in advance the proper response when next tempted to erupt. Plan a cooling down attitude and a positive reaction. A predetermined rational response to the conditions that might precipitate aggression can mentally help control potential rage.

It is also wise to realize other persons are experiencing similar pressures and therefore avoid a tendency toward retaliation. Tit-for-tat responses produce road rage. You never know what is going on in the life of the other person. You can be the “ice man or woman” to help chill out a potentially explosive situation. It takes character to “walkaway” from mounting unnecessary hostility.

Self-control means you are in control. If you aren’t someone else is. That means the other person wins by controlling you. Don’t let another’s intemperance control your temper.

For years I carried in my wallet a little note given me as a teen by my mother that still works. It reads, “A soft answer turns away anger.” Try it.

Follow the wise council of Barney Fife, “Nip it. Just nip it.”

The DaVinci Code – Part 5

The DaVinci Code is for you if you like a good murder mystery full of conspiracy theories and intrigue. It comes replete with hidden treasures, secret societies, and covert love. If you are spiritually inclined the fact all of this has Scripture as its backdrop may appeal.

The book having been on the best seller list for some time is now to be released as a movie. To help persons understand its basis this is part one of two parts on the subject.

If you like fiction “The DaVinci Code” is a thriller you will enjoy. If you are expecting history forget it.

If you are offended by distorted truth, misrepresentation, a refutation of history, and a mockery of Biblical fact don’t go to the movie or read the book.

The thesis of the book is fatally flawed. In summary it proves itself to be a compilation of lies. Basic to this is the deity of Christ.

Another source of the author’s materials from Gnostic sources. The Gnostics were heretics who infiltrated Christianity around 150 AD. Irenaeus, bishop of Lyons, wrote of them around 180 AD: “…everyone of them generates something new, day by day, according to his ability; for no one is deemed ‘perfect’ who does not develop some mighty fiction.”

Dan Brown, author of the book on which the movie is based draws heavily form Gnostic writings. Nevertheless, he says of his work, “All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate.” NOT!

In reality numerous falsehoods have a superstructure of twenty primary groups of lies. Consider the basis of a few.

#1. Constantine had the New Testament revised to represent Jesus as being “godlike.”
Long before Constantine became Emperor of Rome (306 AD) Christians readily acknowledged Christ as divine. Brown alleges a vote taken at the Council of Nicea (325 AD) was the first declaration that Jesus was divine.

In New Testament texts written nearly 275 years earlier His divinity was asserted. He was said to be our “Great God and Savior” (Titus 2:13), “the eternal blessed God” (Romans 9:5), and that in Him dwelt “all the fullness of the Godhead bodily” (Colossians 2:9). He was described as “God manifest in flesh” (I Timothy 3:16). Ministers were exhorted to “shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood” (Acts 20:28). When did God shed blood? In the person of Christ on the cross. He is spoken of as “Christ, who is the image of God” (II Cor. 4:4).

Numerous secular records predating the Council of Nicea attest to the belief in Christ’s deity. An example is the writing of Ignatius around 100 A.D. in which he makes reference to “Christ the God.” Justin Martyr referred to Him as “God” in 150 A.D., Clement of Alexandria wrote of Him as being the “most manifest Deity” in 200 A.D., and Irenaeus called Him “Lord and God” in 185 A.D.

#2. By a “relatively close vote” at the Council of Nicea Jesus was declared to be God.
Out of an assembly of over 300 attending the Council only two refused to sign a statement representing Jesus as “true God from true God.” The purpose was not to propose a new concept but to support the long held belief in Christ’s deity in opposition to a then current teaching by a North African elder, Arius, who sought to humanize Christ as a created being.

#3. Jesus was “a mortal prophet, a great and powerful man, but a man nevertheless.”
In the era of the New Testament the challenge was not to establish a belief in Christ’s deity but His humanity. A sect known as Gnostics taught God could not become human. I John 4:1-6 was penned in opposition to this fallacy.

#4. Jesus married Mary Magdalene.
In “The DaVinci Code” Mary Magdalene is said to have become the bride of Christ and His choice to head His movement. Peter and other male followers of Christ were envious and brought pressure to bear on her. She escaped and moved to France where she gave birth to the Child of Jesus. Through the bloodline of this child the Merovingians were allegedly started. Historically the Merovingians sprang not from Mary but King Merovech who ruled from 447 to 557 A.D.

Mary and her followers reputedly founded Paris. Historically Paris was founded by Gauls of the Parissi tribe as a fishing village on the Ile de la Cite in the Seine River. It was originally called Lutetia.

“The DaVinci Code” represents King Dagobert II as marrying Giselle de Razes. They are reputed to have started the Priory of Sion in the Middle Ages to protect the true documents verifying the misrepresentation of Mary supposedly advocated by the church. Brown accepts those bogus documents as true and the Bible as false.

Razes in reality was not a historical character but a mythical figure created by a French charlatan, Pierre Plantard, in 1960. In an attempt to establish his lie Plantard places false documents in libraries throughout Europe to prove the group had a distinguished past including such notables as Victor Hugo, Isaac Newton and Leonardo DaVinci. These spurious works by Plantard, verified to be forgeries, form the basis of much of Brown’s thesis. It is these and other untruths that Brown declares are true (p.1).

To bolster his claim the author included a list of notable “historians” (p, 253) who “have chronicled in exhaustive detail” the bloodline of Christ. In reality not one of those listed is a historian. There is no creditable source from the period who advocated this baseless theory. “The Gospel of Mary Magdalene” is the source for this concept.

The style and content of this spurious gospel indicates it was written around 160-200 AD, long after the death of Mary even though it is ascribed to her. “The Gospel of Philip” refers to Mary as Christ’s “companion.” Brown wrote, “As any Aramaic scholar will tell you, the word companion, in those days, literally meant spouse.” The only extant copy of “The Gospel of Philip” was written in Coptic not Aramaic.

It is believed by scholars that “The Gospel of Philip” was originally written in Greek. There is no indication there ever was an Aramaic version of the bogus book. The Greek word translated “companion” (koinonos) occurs ten times in the New Testament and in neither case does it refer to marriage or a sexual relationship.

#5. The Holy Grail is a veiled reference to Mary Magdalene.
There is no reference to the “Holy Grail” in the Bible. The term first appeared in a novel by Chrestien de Troyes written around 1100 AD, entitled “Perceval.” It was first used to speak of the cup from which Christ drank and later tradition said it held Christ’s blood.

A work by the Frenchman Pierre Plantard in the 1960s and 1970’s released documents he said traced the royal bloodline from Jesus and Mary Magdalene through the kings of France to, of all people, himself. This theory of a secret society was popularized in 1982 in a book entitle “Holy Blood, Holy Grail.” Brown draws heavily from this work and its sources. Under oath in 1993, Plantard admitted his claims were unfounded and untrue.

#6. Leonardo DaVinci was aware of the secret society and the Holy Grail, therefore, he painted Mary Magdalene in his masterpiece, “The Last Supper.”
It was a signature of DaVinci that he painted many males with feminine features as in his work “St. John the Baptist,” now in the Louvre. DaVinci’s “Last Super” was painted on the Refectory wall of a convent in Milan between 1495 and 1497. His water based tempera began to erode almost immediately.

By 1726 when the first restoration was attempted it had eroded so badly the painting was barely recognizable. What DaVinci painted originally is only approximated today. What is now seen is a restoration of other restorations. The novel and movie entitled “The DaVinci Code” are fiction studded with enough truth to be confusing. Poison even in the most refreshing beverage is still poison. Bottom line. It is fiction.

Though the book is an attempt to discredit Christianity it is in general an intrinsic assault on truth comprehensively. Current facts (the glass panes in the pyramid at the Louvre number 673 not 666 as the book states) and history (the Olympic games were held on a four year cycle to honor Zeus not an eight year cycle to honor Venus) are distorted throughout to support the feigned thesis of the book. Brown says in his book, “Almost everything our fathers taught us about Christ is false” (p.235). The fact is it is his book that is false.

In one review “The DaVinci Code” is said to promote “the gleeful heretical notion that the entirety of Judeo-Christian culture is founded on a misogynist (woman-hating) lie. It is Brown’s work that is a cornucopia of lies, a classic canard. A cogent consideration of the facts leads to the conclusion the book is a delusive Christological counterfeit.

The Gospel Of Judas: Part I

In the mid to late 1970’s peasants hunting for treasure in caves along the Nile found a document hidden for nearly fifteen hundred years. Contained in a crumbling limestone box was a mysterious leather bound book, a codex, “The Gospel of Judas.” Written long after the death of Judas it is reputed to have been written by Judas Iscariot, one of Christ’s apostles.

Some national secular media sources have postured it as the ultimate truth. It being the latest it is reputed to be the truth ultimately revealed about the relationship of Judas and Jesus Christ.

Its style, vocabulary, and content identifies it as a writing of a Gnostic group known as the Canites. It offers insight into this group of heretical authors who offered alternative understanding of Christianity. A lot is known about this fringe group. This group wrote to recast many characters presented negatively in the Bible. Thus, their name came from Cain, the first murderer in Scripture. They cast such Bible characters as heroes. In order to do this they had to produce alternative texts written hundreds, even thousands of years after the facts.

In considering this meretricious document written long after the facts are supposed to have happened compare it with the four New Testament gospels of which there are 5,200 older manuscripts or portions of them written in Greek, the trade language of the day.

Of them Dr. Dan Bahat, archaeologist responsible for excavating the Temple Mount, said to me they are in every sense historically accurate and were invaluable in the excavations.

The Gnostic character of the work is self-evident. It presents Jesus as using terms common in the era of the Gnostics but not the time of Christ. He is represented as speaking to Judas of “aeons” and an “eternal realm” different from Scripture. Judas is referred to as the “thirteenth spirit.” He was an agent sent from God to release Jesus from the physical body in which He was imprisoned at the time of incarnation.

The Gnostics professed to possess secret knowledge. They taught there was a significant dualism between the spiritual and material worlds. In their philosophy the entire universe, all things physical, was a material trap for the spirit world. Their constant drive was to escape the physical world and enter the spiritual realm.

Judas is portrayed as a noble friend of Jesus who sought to enable Jesus to escape the material trap of His body. Jesus is represented as saying to Judas, “But you will exceed all of them. For you will sacrifice the man that clothes me.” Meaning, you will be responsible for my physical death. This depicts Judas as a friend of Jesus who was accommodating Him in liberating the spiritual person within by seeing to it He was killed.

This is contradictory to the New Testament teaching that Jesus came willingly to accept the cross as a sacrifice for sin. The redemptive work of Christ is contradicted by this concept. This reveals that not only did Gnostic writers seek to make heroes of Bible miscreants but to discredit the meritorious work of Christ.

Metropolitan Bishoy, head of the Coptic Orthodox Church, characterizes the writings as “non-Christian babbling resulting from a group of people trying to create a false amalgam between the Greek mythology and Far East religions with Christianity…They were written by a group of people who were aliens to the main Christian stream….”

One close observer of the unfolding of this find wrote “some statements made reflect the imagination of journalists, honest mistakes, or misinformation.” The author of most of the material on the subject, Michel van Rijn, believes he was deceived on much of the material related to the document.

The (non)gospel is not new. Irenaeus (c. 135 – c. 200) wrote about such a work. He associated it with a sect known as the Cainites. Irenaeus referenced bogus mystical resources and said of Judas, “They declared that Judas the betrayer was thoroughly acquainted with these things, and that he alone, knowing the truth as no other did, accomplished the mystery of the betrayal, by him all things, earthly and heavenly, were thus thrown into confusion. They produced a fictitious history of this kind, which they style as the gospel of Judas.”

This recent revelation is the latest in numerous Judas make overs based on ancient untruths. Most of these stories were written around the same time by Gnostic authors. They were a fringe element of the Christian community intent on disputing the foundations of the faith. Other Judas representation have long been dismissed as spurious.

One scenario represented Judas as having great faith in Jesus. He believed Jesus to be a reluctant Messiah. He truly believed that if Jesus were pushed He would assert Himself and lead in the overthrow of the Roman occupiers. When Jesus refused to use His powers and defend Himself in Gethsemane the heartbroken Judas killed himself.

Another account relates to Judas as the noble treasurer of “The Society of the Poor.” Many times Christ is quoted as referring to “the poor.” Allegedly this was code language referring to a secret society He headed intend on overthrowing the Roman oppressors.

Previous generations having dealt with these same fallacious stories proved they knew how to separate wheat from chaff. Hopefully this enlightened generation will also.

Today old Gnosticism, long sense discredited, is back and marketing well to a public historical and Biblical uninformed on the subject. May we become as wise as those of the era of the emergence of these writing and acknowledge them for what they are, a lugubrious assault on Christianity by pseudo authors.
The Prophet Isaiah wrote: “The grass withers, and the flower fades, but the word of God stands forever” Isaiah 40:8.

Dressing For Church

Read this slowly and patiently. Stop and make your choice after each phase. Now, open your clothes closet and make your selection for each of these occasions.

You have just been invited to visit the President in the Oval Office. What will you select to wear? Think it though and select your attire. Got it? Next.You are going to an important social event hosted by an very influential member of the community. Choose your apparel.

There is a dance in a major hotel and you have been invited. Pick your clothes.You are going to a banquet with a friend who is the honoree. What looks good for the event?

It is Saturday afternoon and your favorite team is playing its biggest rival. You will be a guest on the 50 yard line. What looks good for the occasion? Look around and you will see a lot of folks styling and profiling. The “frats” look sharp.It is Sunday morning and your are going to church. How will you dress?

At which event did you dress most upscale? At which did you dress most downscale?In 1975 I authored a book in which I said I wanted a church where an affluent lady immaculately attired and a youth in a sweat shirt and jeans could sit side by side and be comfortable because neither was concerned about the attire of the other. The background of the appeal was to make those unable to dress up feel welcome and comfortable.

Some ministers today put so much emphasis on dressing down that it makes those who still believe in “Sunday clothes” feel uncomfortable. The reason for grunge on Sunday is said to be in order to make everybody feel at ease. Not everyone does. If it doesn’t matter what you wear why is it considered a badge of honor to dress down. In the long history of the church this is the first generation in which there is a segment that seems to think the kingdom will be brought in if enough people dress down.

A professor at Fuller Seminary in California says he can look at the calendar of activities of a church and tell within 5 years the age of the pastor. The premise being we tend to program for our own interests. Likewise, today you can look at the attire of the pastor and staff and know what clientele they are trying to attract. Why no the full spectrum?

Neither wardrobe option is necessarily better than the other. By stressing one over the other some persons are being excluded. Unfortunately, in many churches those who still believe Sunday worship deserves their best are the outcasts. There is a mutual meeting ground —- our best. We would wear it to any of the events listed above. Why not worship? What would be so good about dressing down for a visit with the President or any of the other noted social occasions?

If grunge is a person’s best so be it. Wear it comfortably. However, if a person can do better it is still considered a show of respect in many circles to wear your best in worship.

Last question, why not wear your best? For what are you saving it? To whose house would it be better to wear it than to God’s house?

Why Katrina And Other Natural Disasters

Why God, why Katrina? Having excluded God from the public arena some now want to summons Him to the court of pubic opinion and demand from Him an explanation of why such things as Katrina happen. A sparrow can’t fall to the ground without these persons blaming God.

Like Paul, “I count not myself to apprehended.” That is, I don’t have all the answers. That is the understatement of the day. If we want answers to spiritual questions we have to go to the source of such understanding, the Bible.It teaches a perfect God created a perfect world. In the sphere called planet Earth He placed the crowning glory of His handiwork, mankind.

The first being Adam and Eve. In His sovereign will He gave them a free will. In exercising that free will they disobeyed God. This disobedience is called “sin” and resulted in what is called “the fall of mankind.” The result of this fall impacted everything from mankind’s relationship with God to the ecosystem. Summarily, the perfect world experienced imperfection brought about by the actions of mankind.

In the New Testament book of Romans chapter 8 this result is called “imperfection.” The Greek word also means “to decay.” In that same chapter it is also called “the bondage of corruption.” The New English Bible translates what followed as “Up to the present, we know, the whole created universe groans in all its parts as if in the pangs of childbirth.”God created the cosmos, meaning order. Mankind’s actions have resulted in chaos, the opposite of cosmos.

In spite of our destructive impact on all of the universe God still has a recovery plan. In that same chapter in Romans it is said, “We know all things work together for good to those who love the Lord…”That does not hint that everything that happens is good. Obviously not all things that happen are good. What it means is that in everything, everything, that happens God is busily at work to bring the good out of it. Momentarily and taken alone some things are very, very bad. Katrina is such.

There are two deadly poisons called chloride and sodium. Taken alone either is deadly. Together they form sodium chloride, called table salt. They work together for good.As in the beginning God has a perfect will. When complied with it makes life productive and fulfilling. Likewise, as in the beginning God has a permissive will. Therein, things He does not prefer but permits happen.

If He had not and does not allow our actions within His permissive will we would be puppets dangling on His strings devoid of choices. Human beings would be discontent and critical of God had He not given us a free will.Credit any aberrant actions or imperfections in nature or society to what mankind has done within that free will.

Persons with a spiritual orientation would do well to commit themselves to thanking God for His recovery plan and not blaming Him for our imperfect world.