Ecclesiastes 9:7-10
^[7] Go, eat your food with gladness, and drink your wine with a joyful heart, for it is now that God favors what you do.
^[8] Always be clothed in white, and always anoint your head with oil.
^[9] Enjoy life with your wife, whom you love, all the days of this meaningless life that God has given you under the sun— all your meaningless days. For this is your lot in life and in your toilsome labor under the sun.
^[10] Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with all your might, for in the grave, ^{[or Sheol]} where you are going, there is neither working nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom

Looking at this passage in Ecclesiastes, and the many similar ones like it earlier in the text, it inspires me to look at Solomon's project positively. Many ways to read the text is to see Solomon say "I tried this, and that didn't work. I tried that, and that didn't work either." And so on, until he concludes "So pursue meaning in God, and you'll be satisfied." But that is not what Ecclesiastes is all about. Many times he concludes enjoying the moment, because it is a gift of God; that being enabled to enjoy what God has given you is itself a gift; that if you can enjoy the moments of life in the merriment of eating and spending time with friends, of working and participating in the fruits of your labor, of having a godly wife and a peaceful home, etc., then do so! God's blessing is upon you!

So as I am going to be in the Bible study tonight going over this chapter, I am hoping that we can take some time afterward and enjoy a meal together in the community of loving friendship. That is, take the verses and apply them right away. Enjoy your time with each other with food and drink! Don't weary yourself, relax and enjoy this time because you won't have it later! Later, you will not have fruits of labor or knowledge or anything. You'll be dead. The table will be empty or overturned, and you will rest in the grave.

So, I was in my kitchen reheating some homemade soup and toasting some toast. Then on the corner of my eye something moves: but nothing is there when I look. First thought is that it could be a mouse. As my bowl revolves, absorbing radiation, I stare a little longer where I thought something moved. Sure enough, a little nose with whiskers pops out, two adorable black beady eyes see me and zip back under the oven. I was right! Unfortunately, I've got to kill this cute, big-eared shrew. So I make my way upstairs and tell my parents, trying not to spook them or set them on edge, asking where the traps are and such.

Mind you, I still want my soup.

So they tell me where to find them, yet I can't find the traps in the garage. I am kinda losing my attention on the search, thinking that since I can't find them, I might as well go to the store and get a trap or two. So I come down stairs, finish my cheesy broccoli and potato soup, complemented with a side of french bread toasted and buttered to perfection. It was amazing, by the way. I have some more to share if you want some.

I go to my room and get some stuff on so I can get out of here to get some traps. I get on the compy, as per my bad habits, and as I am surfing -- much to my surprise -- the shrew hops on my shoe! Eh-eh-ehwwwww! I shake it off and it flies, crashing against the metal computer tower and running away. My door is closed.

Me and the shrew. Alone.

I decide I am going to clean my room a little bit. Don't want it hiding in my sweatshirt lying on the floor. Don't want it snuggled under my socks. Don't want it wedged between my stack of papers ...and the other stack of papers. Clean! ... Now time to tear my room apart! >:) ... the couch moves across the room hastily, and so does the shrew. Darting back and forth, where does it go? I get poaster board and block off sections of the room. It scurries along the wall. What will I do with it? I see my viking helmet: perfect! I jump across the room and quake the couch, seeing it move frantically as I pounce with the helmet cupping the ground a mere instant after the shrew was present. I block it in a corner: 3-4 feet by 3-4 feet. Enough poaster board and all. It's got an end table in there, so it isn't an easy place to trap it with a helmet. Plus, there lay wires for the LAN. A nice arena when you think about it.

The critter gets out, under a poaster with the crack of a mere cable's width. Impressive how it can fit through there! Things get quiet in here. It walks around, hop hop, stop. Hop hop, stop. Unmoving, I watch the precious creature God has made, and try to convince myself "You can't keep it, Jon. It must die tonight." It slowly makes its way to my feet and I close in, shoving the viking helmet to the ground once more: another failed attempt. Yet the event scared it back into the corner, the same route taken under the poaster board prior. I patch up the holes and firmly press the walls in.

Going upstairs in haste, I call for my cat. I can't find her right off, so I turn on more lights in adjacent rooms to my parent's bedroom, and then I see her: the wonderful orange and white Molly, with a pink nose pointing straight at me, "Meew!"... I call her to me, trying to remain softer than the snores saturating the bedroom. She comes obediently, and I pick her up, trying to keep her calm as I quickly move down the stairs and into the basement. I open the door to my room, and it what a mess it is! I will need to fix this soon. I drop my cat into the corner where the shrew was last seen. Where is it?

I take some pieces of paper and other articles of mess and toss them behind the end-table. It darts out. My cat oblivious to the movement. She tries to jump out, due to boredom of the moment and the anxiety of being trapped in a corner. I grasp her and toss her back where I think the shrew is. The rodent crouches down, hoping not to be seen. Success for the shrew a second time! I push my cat and point. Nothing. What on earth! How can you not see it? ... so the shrew makes its way back into the shadows. At this point, both the cat and I are frustrated, so I toss my cat back behind the end-table for another go. Thud. Chingaling-ling. The rodent goes into a wild frenzy, as Molly follows right behind, claws widely drawn and flailing about.

She circles the end table as the prey tries to conceal itself. Next moment, you can see the shrew -- drenched in drool -- flying as she has made it a trajectory. It plays dead. She keeps batting it. She stops a while, it gets up... then pounce and ...CRUNCH. The head is limp. She totes it around in her mouth with pride. I go to her and congratulate her for her victory. She gnaws and gnaws, allowing you only to see the tail coming out of her mouth. Another moment, all that remains is a blood stained floor in the corner of a disheveled room. My cat leaves satisfied.

I love my cat. She's adorably fierce. And now I can rest peacefully tonight, without needing to spend a dime on traps!

I felt compelled to write on the vines, the trees, and the fruit. I will get to it eventually, because it is important stuff. But at the same time, I felt a need to go through the Gospel according to St. John (Greek: ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ), wherein I'd start at the beginning and discuss things as they progress in the Bible. It should be needless to say, that is a large project and will give both a more thorough grasp of the words as they are given in context and a more thorough message since nothing will be omitted (if anything, there will be less emphasis). Knowing me, I bet I won't complete it because it could take several years, but it sounds like a great thing to start.

So I'll start it.

᾿Εν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος, καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν, καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος.
Transliteration: "En arche en o Logos, kai o Logos en pros ton Theon, kai Theos en o Logos."

English Standard Version:
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
New International Version:
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
Revised Version:
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God;"
King James Version (Authorized in 1611):
"In the beginning was the Word, & the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

The above has very consistent wording. The German renders it a little different:
GLB: "Im Anfang war das Wort, und das Wort war bei Gott, und Gott war das Wort."
(My translation of GLB: "In the beginning was that Word, and that Word was by/with God, and God was that Word"). I submit to you that if your translation differs in meaning from any the above translations, you might want to hold the text with some skepticism. (E.g. "...the Word was with God, and the Word was a God", as is found in Watchtower/J.W. translations)

Now that we've got that on the table, let's break it down. What is the "Word"? The orthodox view, which we recognize, is that the term "Word" to mean Christ. But how does "Word" refer to Christ? This may seem odd if you ask me, but it isn't obvious to us Western readers. So, as we take a look further, consider how St. John uses the Word in the sentences, and how he is trying to show who Christ is in how he describes Him. However, there has some socio-historical context that needs to be considered.

Now, most importantly, I do not answer this on my authority, but on the commentary I have read, to make this point: The Greeks and the Jews in St. John's day referred to the Word, which is in Greek logos ( Λόγος ), to mean the chief principle of how things work: reason, from which root our word "logic" is derived. Christ is the chief principle of the consistency and rationality of the world, of creation.

Ravi Zacharias explained the term logos with respect to definition. Christ is understood as not just a word, not just a principle, but rather the very definition; that which defines things. This gives the weight of God creating us all, and everything, relative to Himself, who is absolute and does not change. The Word anchors meaning itself and gives a starting point of reference.

Two interpretations I would take no ownership to are the following: that the Word is that which God spoke in the beginning. "God said, 'Let there be light' and there was light". This does not do the verse justice, because of the final clause in the sentence. "And the Word was God" (or, again, as the German words it, "And God was the Word"). The words of speech hold the authority of the one speaking, but they are not themselves the speaker. The second interpretation is that the Word is the Bible/Scriptures. That's hogwash. This will become clearer as I continue to expound on the verses.

Now I would like us to stop and think for a moment. Think of Christ in the way just presented: Christ is the reason all things work together and One around whom all things have an anchor of meaning. There is plenty of support for thinking of Christ in this way, and it makes you want to know more about Christ, right? Check out Colossians ch 1 in its entirety, focusing your attention most on how St. Paul describes Christ in verses 15-18. Meanwhile, let's stick around in John ch 1 so we can make good use of the flow.

While there is some different interpretations over the exact meaning of the word logos, we know that both the Greeks and the Jews regarded the logos in some high regard, for which reason St. John unites both Jew and Gentile in the adoration of Christ. Yet, it still does not seem to be obvious that it refers to Christ in particular, so we need to look at it a little deeper to recognize that logos refers to Christ.

The best statement I can find that answers that is by reading through the rest of the chapter, wherein St. John says that "all things were created" by the Word, that "the Word became flesh and dwelt among us", that John the Baptist testified to the Word as the one who is greater than him and comes after him, and so on. These will be discussed later. So, given we understand the Word to mean Christ, let's address its three propositions:

1. "In the beginning was the Word"
2. "and the Word was with God"
3. "and the Word was God."

"In the beginning was the Word..." This phrase is used most importantly to show His eternal nature. Christ has always been here. As a parallel to Genesis 1:1, it starts by saying that "in the beginning God..." So to start by talking of Christ in this way, it is likening Him to God. But St. John doesn't leave it there, he keeps going on this thought in increasingly powerful claims.

"...the Word was with God..." Christ is unique in His personhood. Christ is eternally distinct. There is no enmity or strife between God and Christ, but rather Christ is in the Godhead. Now, at first glance this sentence may look heretical (for it may give weight to a claim that there is more than one God, yet in reality there is only one true God), if taken apart from the other two propositions, namely the third.

"... and the Word was God." The third claim here is the most powerful clause of them all, given the claims later made about the logos. He hasn't merely existed, He hasn't merely been with God, but He is God himself! God is the Word! They are not only together, they are eternally united as the same Being!

Application:
Who Jesus Christ was, and is, and is to come, shapes exactly what you believe and who you are in Christ. Throughout history there have been numerous heresies over the person of Christ, called "Christological heresies." Studying them is so necessary, not only to prevent the problems from arising again, but also so that we give the clearest picture of the one who sacrificed Himself on the cross for the atonement of our sins. This is the best starting point of understanding Christianity.

This first verse is St. John's foundation, the solid ground on which all that will come in his account, as given by the power of God the Holy Spirit, preserved over the ages so that we might believe in Christ and be changed. Therefore, St. John gives us a good example of where we need to start in our understanding of God and the world, rightly knowing our place in it all and testifying accurately the one whom we serve for His glory and honor and to our joy and pleasure: God, who is forever praised.

It starts with Jesus Christ and who He is.

Drew: Am I too late for this debate?

If not I'd like to give something into which you can sink your teeth. Faith is inevitable, but comes in degrees. It is, in principle, based on trust despite uncertainty. I'll reword that to give it another flavor: Faith is believing (someone, or even some thing) where you cannot know without a doubt. Since there is always a level of certainty/uncertainty (Descartes, Hume, Russell, Quine, etc., who all emphasize this to some great extent, are names with which you are probably familiar), faith must come into play in your life. Every day, even. You trust, for example, the authority of your parents on things which they are qualified (but not on things they are not qualified -- e.g. quantum physics or mathematical analysis), just as you would scientists and farmers and so on. It depends on where they have had experience and have been trained.

At this point, you have no room for logic without some assumptions in place. (Assumptions are required to get anywhere with logic, even if you just wanna prove tautologies) ... And now people have given you claims about a God with whom you have not experience, but rather have been trained to ignore and dismiss (pretty well, I might add), you regard yourself as a more qualified authority in addressing the matter than they themselves? I mean no disrespect when I point this out. It just looks like an abandoning of the principles of logic, on which you claim a foundation.

As far as proving God's existence, let me say that, again, faith is inevitable. But perhaps you wanted a threshold of believability? Perhaps something that would convince the common-man and the scientist? First, we have a hesitation to believe in God, because of our moral core does not, in the most thorough sense imaginable, value what God wants. This means our desires and goals direct what we want to prove: whether it is true or not. This applies to Christians and agnostics alike. Given the first, there is no threshold which will satisfy ALL mankind's demands for certainty; for our logic will be our slaves, not our masters when it comes right down to it. However, we can see that there is a majority of people in the world who believe in some deity who is responsible for our purpose, who is a right judge of our actions, and may have been the creator of the universe in some way. This does not prove that it is legit, but it does answer to the demand for a threshold that can begin to appeal to the majority of people, as far as believability is concerned.

And this was longer than I originally intended.

Where a denial is an affirmation in disguise

I just thought I'd tell you, I don't want [x]

Where [x] can be anything.