To Be Content (on Sunday) in Whatever

With all the variety in worship styles and different levels of teaching quality in modern American churches, believers are often put in situations where they wonder if they should look for another place to go to church on Sunday. Worship style and/or music choice is probably one of the biggest differences between churches that are covering the biblical bases of what church should be. Larger churches have been able to schedule two different styles of worship music by having two worship times. Smaller churches have to compromise or settle on one type. In either case, a believer may feel unfulfilled on Sunday morning.

I am going to say something that may sound contradictory to what I have said in the past. I believe attendance at a local gathering of believers is very important. Admonitions like Hebrews 10:25 and the general nature of being a "body" necessitate corporate interaction of some kind. However, the "where" is not as important as the "what." By that I mean "what" does church mean in the believer's life? If church attendance is the only thing in a person’s life to indicate she is a Christian, I think she should heed Paul’s suggestion to “examine [herself] to see if [she] is in the faith.” You have doubtless heard someone say that going to church doesn’t make one a Christian any more than going into a garage makes one a car.

What a person does Monday through Saturday is the real measure of faith. If the Bible doesn’t get opened devotionally; and the knees don’t get bent in prayer; and the mind doesn’t travel to thoughts of grace, provision, protection, etc. almost every day, doubt arises as to the authenticity of one’s faith. True Christianity is a mindset, a world-view that colors everything the believer thinks, says and does. Sunday services are a time to celebrate with like-minded others and to join in corporate events of worship, prayer and teaching (Acts 2:42) But in reality, church attendance is not the sine qua non of Christianity; lifestyle is.

Most sincere believers know those things. When a believer is not feeling fulfilled by the corporate Christian part of her life (aka church), it is wise to consider her options. Because the perfect church doesn’t exist, it is fruitless to go off on a quest to find it. The church, universal and local, is made of humans – fallible beings who will fall short of perfection in everything they do, including doing church. The biggest question to ask in an unsatisfactory church situation is whether the local body in question is doing something the Bible prohibits or not doing something the Bible commands. If the former is the case, it may be time to look elsewhere for body life. If the latter is true, the sincere believer must decide if the lack is critical or not. The follow-up question is whether the dissatisfied attender can do anything to correct the issue.

The  question can become complicated if one parent/spouse is happy in a local body, and the other is not. If the husband is the satisfied one, as he is the head of the household, acquiescing to his preference is something a submissive wife might do. If he wanted to go Unitarian Universalist or Mormon, I think a wife would have grounds for discussion if not disobedience. Otherwise, if they are dealing with the “something missing” category with most of the other boxes of church being checked adequately, I don't know that a wife should protest too much. I know this is a thorny issue in the twenty-first century, but Paul’s direction in 1 Corinthians 7 still applies. Even though the situation may not involve an unbelieving spouse, the concept of being who she is in spite of who he is may be drawn from Paul’s comments. If it's the husband who is dissatisfied, he may be justified in moving, but he must consider what a move would mean to his wife. Deference sometimes means we get less that we might if we had complete independence. 

This raises the question of whether a dissatisfied believer can do anything to introduce the worship and teaching she craves into her life. Christian radio (Internet) is a wonderful twenty-first century ministry that can fill in what’s lacking in a local situation that is otherwise biblically sound. I have it on almost constantly when I am in the car and often in my ear buds around the house. At my church, we had what they called a “prayer furnace” every Wednesday morning. We gathered around a smart phone tuned to a worship channel on the Internet (YouTube mostly), and we sat silently or sang along and frequently spoke prayers aloud when so led. I was amazed (shouldn’t have been) to see how often the “random” songs that played wove their way into the nature of the prayers we were praying.

As an aside, I want to mention that this was not the typical prayer meeting where you pray for your neighbor’s cousin’s mother-in-law’s upcoming surgery for a bunion. Genuine needs regarding material things did come up, but we mostly prayed for wisdom and guidance for the church, effectiveness in ministry to the city, and other topics like improving the quality of worship in the Sunday service. Sometimes the silence was more edifying and satisfying than any spoken prayer. I even had visions a time or two. My point is that we had times of deep worship when the Holy Spirit was evidently in the room. It was a high-point of the week.

It is sad that sometimes people are not being fulfilled in the corporate part of their Christian life. The most important thing is knowing that your life before your spouse, the kids, your co-workers, your grocer, your neighbor – you get the idea – demonstrates that you belong to Christ and want to make His life yours. “I have been crucified with Christ, and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me,” as Paul put it. Focus on that with all your heart and Sunday mornings may not be so much of a problem.

Romans 13 Applied

 I have written more than once that Black Lives Matter has communist and anarchist roots. ANTIFA, an openly anarchist organization, knowingly co-opts BLM “protests” and makes them violent and destructive. These things alone are enough to lead thinking conservatives to decline to support BLM. Some would say these are “political” reasons with no place in Christian dialogue. As it happens, there is good biblical ground for disagreeing with BLM as well.

The Apostle Paul begins Romans chapter 13 with these words: “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except by God, and those that exist are put in place by God. So then, the one who resists authority resists the ordinance which is from God, and those who resist will receive condemnation on themselves.” Paul didn’t give us the opportunity to evaluate the quality of the governing authorities; he flatly said we are to be subject – to obey. Lest you think the Apostle had good government in mind, remember who his governing authorities were: the Romans.

Emperor Nero began his reign about the time Paul would have been writing Romans. Nero is the governing authority who is thought to have blamed the Christians for the disastrous fire that ravaged two thirds of Rome in 64 A.D. Whether he blamed them or not, there is no question that he began a vicious campaign to persecute the young sect of believers. For over one hundred years, Christians were marked out for persecution and death in an empire where emperor worship was required.

Paul surely understood that “be subject” did not include false worship, but he gave the command just the same. The verses that follow apply today as much as they did in the first century. “For rulers are not a cause of terror for a good deed, but for bad conduct. So do you want not to be afraid of authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from it, for it is God’s servant to you for what is good. But if you do what is bad, be afraid, because it does not bear the sword to no purpose.” A modern translation might sound like this: “There is no need to fear the police if you are doing what is right. However, if you are disobeying the authorities, watch out! They carry Tazers and pistols to maintain civil order.”

Paul continues in Romans 1: “Therefore it is necessary to be in subjection, not only because of wrath but also because of conscience.” In other words, we don’t obey the authorities simply because it might be uncomfortable if we get caught; we obey because it’s the right thing to do. No one with a healthy conscience could feel guiltless while burning down neighborhoods, looting stores, and throwing rocks and bullets at the police who are trying to maintain order.

Finally, Paul instructs us to give honor to whom honor is due. Surely this honor does not apply to a man charged with domestic abuse, rape and robbery who is detained by police in the act of violating a restraining order. I agree: it is unfortunate the situation in Milwaukee escalated to the point where an officer believed he was in danger and had to use his weapon. Note that the gun only came to be used after the man broke free from two Tazer shots and continued to his car where he appeared to be retrieving something – perhaps a weapon. For NFL players to honor this man with his name on their jerseys is not just irrational; it is offensive.

I want to be careful here. I suspect the loyal British subjects in proto-America in 1776 might have felt about the rebellious colonists the way I feel about ANTIFA and BLM. However, I do not think there is a moral equivalence. The revolutionary colonists and today’s social justice protesters share the feeling that they suffer injustice under the governing authorities. The main difference is that the colonists spent years writing to the authorities pleading for a redress of their grievances. They did not begin their protest with Molotov cocktails, torches and bullets. They did not burn down their neighbors’ barns and stores. True, there were acts of civil disobedience such as the Boston Tea Party, but large-scale violence did not break out until the authorities began to use it against the protesters. It was at that point that the Founding Fathers resorted to an appeal to what they called “natural law” which assured them the unalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness – rights they saw as endowed by a gracious Creator God.

I am not convinced that people of color in America are being systematically denied their rights. I admit that there are bigoted people and even communities who make it harder for minorities to achieve success in a material sense. However, there is no system of government that works by design to deny anyone the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I admit that there used to be such laws, but no more. To violently overthrow the government because of perceived oppression is not patriotism; it is vandalism and anarchism. It is also in direct disobedience to the principles Paul outlined in Romans 13.

As believers we must pray for our leaders as Paul recommends to Timothy, “in order that we may live a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity.” There is nothing godly or dignified about BLM and ANTIFA. Let us pray that our leaders can find a way to resolve the horrible unrest in our country without having to resort to “bearing the sword with purpose.” There is one other thing we can do: show the love of Christ to everyone regardless of color, for truly, all lives matter.

The Definition of "Is"

I did not sit down this morning to write another political blog, but as I thought about my reading in Paul’s letter to the Romans, Bill Clinton came to mind when I realized how important the meaning of little words can be. In Romans 11:26, Paul said, “And so all Israel will be saved.” One can toy with the definition of the word “so” in much the same way Bill Clinton did with “is” back in 1998. The words “all” and “Israel” can also be treated to delicate parsing. The only way to define any word properly is to define it in context.

I will begin with Israel. This is not a little word, and its meaning in Scripture varies somewhat. The context of Paul’s letter to the Gentiles in Rome is crucial to defining “Israel” in Romans 11:26. Back in chapter 9, where the context of Paul’s discussion begins, he clearly defines Israel as something other than simply a person descended from Abraham. (See Romans 9:6-8) He proceeds to make the point that even among those directly descended from Abraham, God made distinctions as to who was a true heir of the promise. Paul goes further to prove that even among the chosen genetic line, only those who responded by faith were considered “Israel.” This follows logically from his discussion back in chapter 4 about Abraham being justified by faith alone.

Because “Israel” has a specific meaning that refers only to those found faithful to God, one must consider what the word “all” means as Paul used it. To insist that he was including everyone born in the line of Abraham would be to contradict the point he was making in chapters 4-11. Given Paul’s context, it is perfectly reasonable to think he meant all those who qualify as Israel by his definition, which does not have a genetic qualifier, but a spiritual one. All the faithful, Jew or Gentile, will be saved.

This brings us to the little word that started my thinking: so. According to the Greek dictionary, “so” is best translated as “in this manner.” We might say, “Like so” meaning “like this.” The “manner” to which Paul referred was the qualifier of faith. By faith, he asserts, all who are chosen by God will be saved whether born in Abraham’s line or not. Jews and Gentiles alike are saved in the same manner: by faith. “All Israel” will be saved by faith, but not by the Jewish law; this has been Paul’s theme for several chapters. To make Romans 11:26 mean that all ethnic Jews will be saved someday is preposterous.

So I say parodying Bill Clinton, it depends on your definition of “all.” I have heard people say, “All means all, and that’s all all means.” If language were simplistic, and words did not vary in meaning due to contextual usage, that would be true. But it’s not true. “All” has various shades of meaning that must be determined by the context in which it is used. I am not suggesting that some Bible interpreters are telling the truth with the intent to deceive; I am saying that it is imperative that Bible interpretation relies on exegesis rather than eisegesis; we must “read out” what is in Scripture rather than “read into” a passage what we want it to say to support a presupposition.

It is normal human behavior to want to fit things into a scheme we can understand. The problem comes when our attempt to make something fit ends up violating proper principles of interpretation. Michael Heiser makes this point dramatically in his book, Unseen Realm, and his other writings. While earning his M.A. and Ph.D. in Hebrew Bible and Semitic Studies, he interpreted the Old Testament using the popular paradigm until someone caused him to see the fault in the pattern he had been using. Correcting the fault brought new insight comparable to having new revelation from God.

The same thing can happen in the rest of our lives. People, political parties, or the police can be misunderstood when viewed through a faulty system of interpretation. You spend years thinking someone hates you only to discover that they are just introverted and can’t express themselves. Or you think Republicans are the party of rich people until you discover that conservative economic policies actually benefit those at every income level. Or you are scared of the police because you have been taught that they are evil, and then you realize that most of them are decent people trying their best to do an incredibly difficult, dangerous public service.

The key to understanding anything is not mental or emotional; it is spiritual. There is only one viewpoint that will flawlessly give us the correct perspective. We must try to see everything as God sees it. As believers, we have the great blessing of the indwelling Holy Spirit to aid us in getting God’s perspective. Obviously, we need the Spirit’s help to interpret Scripture, but it is equally important to seek His guidance in all of life. God knows the correct definition of every word ever written and the true motivation behind every action. Ask Him for understanding. James 1:5 says He will always come through with the correct answer. After all, He is the God Who Is.

Don’t be a Moron

 I experienced another confluence today that got me thinking. My Bible reading is in the first chapters of Romans where Paul harshly criticizes unbelievers for ignoring what can be known of God and living lives of unrighteousness and debauchery. He certainly pulls no punches. Then my devotional reading of Charles Spurgeon took off from the verse, “The sword of the Lord and the sword of Gideon.” Spurgeon developed the idea that believers must rely totally on God to accomplish His work (the sword of the Lord), and at the same time do whatever is humanly possible to bring God’s will to pass (the sword of Gideon).

The problem came when Spurgeon said, “go out personally and serve with our flaming torch of holy example, and with our trumpet tones of earnest declaration and testimony.” I am mostly successful in living a life that is a worthy example of a believer, but the second half of the admonition gives me trouble. If Paul’s condemnation in Romans is an example of “earnest declaration,” I can’t see how that will win many friends or influence people to turn to Christ. I used to be quite bold in that regard, and I was told to go someplace hot and uncomfortable on several occasions. I even had fellow-believers tell me to tone it down.

The problem is that many people, perhaps most people are not aware that they are “lost in sin.” The entire concept of sin has been mostly washed from the consciousness of our modern society. “Values clarification” as taught in public schools has strengthened the natural inclination of humans to go their own way regarding moral structures. Unfortunately, sin and its consequences are not frequent topics of sermons even in evangelical churches. In our post-modern society where truth itself is scoffed, telling someone they are wrong is a sure way to lose an audience.

The situation has become even more difficult with the codification of politically correct speech standards and the criminalization of certain topics. There are places in America where a sermon on Romans 2 would be considered hate speech and place the preacher in jeopardy of criminal charges. It has already happened in Canada and the UK. I am not suggesting we go as far as Pastor Steven Anderson and call for stoning, but the simple message that God disapproves of homosexual behavior is no longer safe under First Amendment protection.

It is not only pushing legal boundaries to speak the truth (in love, of course), but the workplace is being gradually converted to a no-speak zone. I have spent the last two years working at an organization that would reprimand me, and should I not cease, fire me for proclaiming the Bible standard for sexual relationships. I was required to take annual harassment training that explicitly forbade any judgment of a person’s sexual preferences. The same type of training was required at the academic institution where I last taught. A similar prohibition exists for recommending the biblical roles of husband and wife, and biblical parental discipline has been criminalized as well. The list of things believers cannot talk about continues to grow.

It is ironic to the point of hypocrisy that the tolerance and inclusion demanded by political correctness specifically excludes Christian, biblical proclamation. We are being asked to tolerate everything except the beliefs that are based in biblical truth. I see the enemy’s hand in this situation so clearly that I am disappointed that Christians have not stood up and cried foul. Biblical standards of behavior and expressions of faith are being systematically removed and forbidden from Western society.

The situation I have been describing is built into the political platform of one of the major parties in this country. I have written previously that I am disturbed by the fact that thinking Christians can say there is no difference between Republicans and Democrats. I read a blog recently that called for Christians to be tolerant of fellow-believers’ differing political affiliations. The writer believes that any vote is a vote for the lesser of two evils. This may be true, but when one of the “evils” involves openly denying the right of Christians to express and live their faith while encouraging infanticide (aka abortion), homosexual lifestyles, deficit spending, disrespecting law enforcement and celebrating anarchy (calling it patriotism), this “evil” cannot be a legitimate choice for a believer. Each of the positions I mentioned plainly tramples a biblical principle.

My Christian friends are all over Facebook complaining about the flood of political ads we are being subjected to. I am there too; I mute them or change the channel, especially when they are so easily recognizable as distortions of the truth (aka lies) that anyone who cares to investigate can discern. But we must not tune out to the point of idiocy. It would be idiotic, moronic to use the biblical term, not to seek the truth and vote our convictions.

A biblical moron is one who does not make the attempt to follow God. I believe that there is a more godly choice in the upcoming election – note I did not say a more godly man; all the candidates are human and therefore fallible. But if a Christian votes for a platform rather than for a candidate, there can be only one choice. That is an intolerant statement. Paul was explicitly intolerant in his Roman letter. Jesus was quite intolerant of the hypocrites of His day. If I offend, I do not apologize; Jesus was called the stone of stumbling and the rock of offense. What I am offended by is morons – in the biblical sense.

Related articles: “Christians are Responsible to be Politically Engaged” “What Does it Mean to be an American” “How Could a Christian Vote for Hillary?” “Hooray! We Won. Now What?”

Bringing the Kingdom

Some truths presented in the Bible are easy to understand; others, not so much. On one level, we can comprehend that God loved the world so much that He sent His Son to save it. As humans created in God’s image, we can identify with God’s love and His desire to bring His creation back into fellowship. Because God’s image in humans also includes a sense of justice, it wouldn’t seem right to let everybody back in without a cost. We realize that because the fellowship was broken by human misbehavior, some kind of restitution had to be made. Jesus accomplished that by His substitutionary death on the cross.

If we step back from the simple concepts of love and justice, we can look deeper into why God brought humans and this universe into existence in the first place. The language in Genesis where God discusses His purpose in creation introduces the concept of a kingdom – rulership. Genesis 1:26 says, “And God said, ‘Let us make humankind in our image and according to our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of heaven, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every moving thing that moves upon the earth.’” Adam was to have been the vice-regent of the creation of God.

Genesis 2 reveals that God placed Adam in a special place called the Garden of Eden. It was Adam’s responsibility to take care of the Garden and cause it to expand, eventually covering the whole earth. Sadly, Genesis 3 recounts the disobedience of Adam and Eve as they chose to make their own terms of regency instead of following God’s directions. Because they would not do things His way, God expelled them from the perfect conditions of the Garden and left them to live with the consequences of choosing to go their own way. The consequences they inherited from their rebellion continue on earth to this day. They were forced to exist in a world of blood, sweat and tears with only glimpses of the joy they had known in the Garden.

Even though God kicked His prince and princess out of the Garden, He did not abandon them. Immediately after their expulsion, they were given a glimmer of hope that all was not lost. The evil character who incited their rebellion was told that a day would come when he would pay for his indiscretion. The Seed of the woman would one day take back the rulership of the kingdom of Earth. In Matthew 4 the evil character from the Garden, the Devil, offers to give Jesus the kingdoms of Earth if He will worship him. Of course, Jesus refuses, but He did not correct the Devil’s assertion that the kingdom of Earth was his to give.

Now we are back to the cross I mentioned earlier. When Jesus willingly gave His life for all humans, the mistake of Adam was erased, and the rulership of the kingdom of Earth was returned to God’s chosen ruler. Except it wasn’t. Here is where it gets hard for earth-bound humans to understand. The kingdom of Earth was returned to its rightful ruler at the cross of Calvary, but the enemy of God did not slink away in defeat. He continues to fight a losing battle to maintain his rulership. In 2 Corinthians 4:4, Paul confirms this by calling Satan the god of this age. The rule of Heaven was brought to Earth by Jesus, but the battle to establish that rule continues.

This is the “already/not yet” idea made popular by George Eldon Ladd. As explained in the Faithlife Study Bible notes, “God’s kingdom has a dual dimension. Jesus initiated the kingdom on earth, and wherever God’s will is carried out, the kingdom is a reality. The kingdom, however, had not been fully manifested in Jesus’ day—nor has it in ours. We do not yet live in a world where God’s will is a complete reality. We feel the tension of experiencing God’s kingdom in our lives and communities before it is fully realized. We still see unbelief, brokenness, and sin, telling us God’s will is not yet fully expressed.”

It is our responsibility as believers, as God’s chosen representatives in Christ to bring the kingdom of Heaven to Earth. Where we see unbelief, we must share faith. Where we see brokenness, we must bring healing. Where we see sin, we must call it sin. Where we see injustice, we must advocate for justice. In all these things, we must follow the principles of righteousness revealed to us in Scripture. We can’t right a wrong with a wrong. We cannot use kingdom of Earth methods to bring Kingdom of Heaven results.

Because our human flesh rises up in the face of evil, we tend to do evil in response. However, disrespecting authority (as ordained by God) and acting violently (as condemned by Scripture) will not bring the Kingdom. If we are going to maintain fellowship with God, we must walk in the light as He is in the light (1 John 1:7); to walk in darkness is to deny the One who brought us out of the kingdom of darkness into His wonderful light (1Peter 2:9). The flames burning in our communities today are fueled by darkness; they advance the kingdom of darkness. We have to bring the light.

Because the “not yet” dimension of the Kingdom of Heaven is spiritual, our best weapons are spiritual. As Paul told the Ephesians, “Our struggle is not against blood and flesh, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the world rulers of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places.” His directive was to always stand in the armor of light provided by Christ and pray – especially in times like these. The promise of God to His people long ago still stands: “If my people who are called by my name will humble themselves and will pray and will seek my face and will turn from their evil ways, then I myself shall hear from the heavens and will forgive their sins and heal their land.”

As Micah said, “He has told you, O mortal, what is good, and what does Yahweh ask from you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?” That’s how we bring the Kingdom.

Christ is the Crisis

 When Peter preached to Cornelius as recorded in Acts 10, he said something that caught my attention the last time I read it. Peter described Jesus as the one, “appointed by God as judge of the living and the dead.” Two words in particular struck me: appointed and judge. The latter surprised me somewhat because I recall that John said Jesus was not sent to judge. Yet, Peter insists that God appointed or designated the Son for a particular purpose.

The word “appointed” immediately made me think of a rhyming word that is synonymous: anointed. Throughout the Old Testament we see the word used in a formal, symbolic sense as kings, priests and prophets were anointed. This ceremony involved pouring scented oil on the head of the subject, apparently in sufficient quantity to run down his body. In Psalm 133, David pictured the anointing oil, “running down on the beard, on the beard of Aaron, running down on the collar of his robes!” It sounds messy, but it is in the character of the very visible religious rites of the Jewish faith.

Oil is frequently used in Scripture as a symbol of the Holy Spirit, perhaps stemming from the anointing ritual. It was assumed, after all, that the prophet, priest and king being anointed would be working with God’s Spirit. The picture of oil flowing from the head over the body speaks of the necessity of Holy Spirit control over all one does. It is also interesting to note that the oil used for the ceremony was sweetly scented with spices that smell like ginger and cinnamon. Just as the aroma would flow out from the anointed one, the Spirit would be present in the subject’s ministrations.

So it was with Jesus when He walked the earth as the ultimate Prophet, Priest and King. He fulfilled each of His designated roles perfectly because He was perfectly in tune with the Spirit of His Father. Throughout His final discourse in the Gospel of John, the Savior repeatedly links the ministry of Father, Son and Holy Spirit as one. He also prays that we, His followers, would be one in the same way.

In Acts 10 we have Peter saying that Jesus was appointed, may I say anointed, by God as judge. To understand the manner of Jesus’ judging we have to look at the Greek word Peter used. It is from the word commonly translated “judge” (κρίνω). What stood out to me this time through was the fact that one of the cognates of this word transliterates as krisis (κρίσις). Peter says, in effect, that Jesus is the crisis point for all people, living or dead. The root meaning of crisis speaks of a point of decision. Jesus is the point at which all humanity is separated, selected, approved (or not) as the word denotes.

This idea solves the apparent contradiction raised when Peter says Jesus is the judge while John says He was not sent to judge. Here’s how: John says that the judgement, the separation is already accomplished by the fact that a person either believes Jesus is the Savior or disbelieves. It is not as if Jesus sits behind a bench and decrees this one and that one; it is more like Jesus simply exists as the living stone that everyone must either stand on or stumble over.

I also like the idea that in every crisis in our lives, Jesus is the one point upon which our decision must always turn. We have the option to focus on the crisis and be troubled, or we can focus on Jesus and watch the crisis fade into insignificance. “In this world you will have trouble,” Jesus said. “But take heart! I have overcome the world.” Not only does the decision to trust Jesus bring peace, it also leads to the building of our faith. James says, “Consider it pure joy… whenever you face trials of many kinds because you know that the testing of your faith produces perseverance.” Hang in there, even in the crisis; that’s where you’ll find Jesus.

Herd Immunity or Incredulity: Raising the Herd Intellect

 If you have been reading my posts lately, you know I have been expressing amazement that our situation regarding COVID 19 has so quickly reached the point of mass hysteria. I won’t repeat all the statistics here. You can read the details in the previous articles which I linked at the end of this post. I will summarize. Although I am certain the number is inflated due to political and financial reasons I explained in earlier posts, I will use the number currently being published (200,000) as deaths from COVID 19 in this one calculation. This number means 1 death from COVID 19 for every 1,650 people given 330M population for the United States.

Even that number is not a good representation of what is happening to the general population because as of the latest statistics I have, 75% of all COVID 19 deaths are among the elderly in nursing or assisted living homes. 94% of those people had other health issues which would have caused their demise in a relatively short time. This means that the mortality rate for COVID 19 among otherwise healthy individuals is so small as to be almost insignificant. Yet we have trashed the economy, wrecked the education system and thrown the general population into a panic.

As bad as all that is, there is something else that no one is talking about. We hear daily about the tens of thousands of new COVID 19 cases being reported. What we are not hearing is that the vast majority of those reported infections are without symptoms or with very slight flu-like conditions. Here’s the story no one is telling: those tens of thousands who get infected every day without serious complications will develop natural antibodies that make them immune to the virus. This is known as herd immunity. Our current policies dealing with COVID 19 are actually thwarting the advance of herd immunity and prolonging the suffering.

As I have said before, I don’t mean to sound crass or unsympathetic. I mourn with those who mourn the deaths of their elderly parents or grandparents. I am sympathetic toward those who have lost loved ones in any generation. It may sound like an oxymoron, but death is an inevitable part of life. Ever since we were kicked out of the Garden of Eden, people have been dying from disease. That’s part of the curse we bear because of sin; not personal sin, but corporate sin resulting from our being human beings in the line of Adam.

I believe we would be better off if we dropped all the COVID 19 restrictions except those that apply to any flu season: be sensible, wash your hands, cough into your sleeve, etc. If we open back up for business (and school) as usual, herd immunity would eventually render COVID 19 as harmless as SARS or Swine Flu or H1N1 bubonic plague. I cannot do that myself; neither can you alone. However, if herd rationality were to catch on, herd immunity would save the day. Will you spread this message?

Related articles: “Join the Lemmings, Anyone?” “The Angel Says… Fear Not” “The Emperor Has No Clothes” “The Winnowing Fork of God” “2020 COVID Easter” “Finding God in COVID 19”