Circumstantial Love, Trust, and Faith in Christ is no Love, Trust, or Faith at All

A circumstantial love, trust, and hope in Christ is NOT real love, trust, or hope in Christ! An Eternal Relationship is not dependent on time and space--what you're doing or is happening to you--if it is, then check your relationship, because it doesn't look like it's legit. To put it another way, if you would ditch Jesus for fame, wealth, power, safety, pleasure, status, or people, if you would ditch Jesus because times are tough, or your schedule is tight, because your best friend just stabbed you in the back, you failed a critical exam, or even the death of someone you really love, then your faith in, love for, and hope in Christ is dependent. When you trust the Holy Trinity, Yahweh of Armies, for eternal life, that trust does NOT come with any conditions attached. We don't say, "I will Trust You and Love You and Hope in You, IF..."

Indeed in the we love God because HE FIRST LOVED US and did so unconditionally! In response by His Spirit's gracious work in us, we love, trust, and hope in Him in the same way: UNCONDITIONALLY.

Thus, my dear brothers and sisters, I urge you to examine your hearts as I am, and pray deeply about whether your faith, love, or hope is in any way conditional. If there is even a shred of such, let us truly repent. Since God's Love is UNCONDITIONAL, He will be faithful to forgive and cleanse of all unrighteousness. Yet, for some who may read this, they may realize that there was never even a shred of unconditionality to their faith, that is to say, they may realize that their whole "faith" or "love" or "hope" is conditional, that is, that they never fully and truly trusted Christ for salvation, to those people, I beg and plead to bet all your money, no all your life, on Jesus right now--trust Him completely for eternal life and abandon all your unbelief! If you do, you will be saved and your faith will be unconditional just as your Heavenly Father's love for you is unconditional.

To those who wonder, how can I ever really know whether my faith is conditional or not, I say
1) Only the Holy Spirit can make that clear
2) Unfavorable and Hostile conditions will make that clear

Those who wonder may wonder what kind of answer that is, since it appears to mean that we must to some degree wait and see. To them, I say, true, but God will make it clear one way or another, but just keep loving and trusting and hoping unconditionally by the Holy Spirit. God will keep His Promises and II Timothy tells us that even if we are unfaithful, He will be faithful. But it also says that those who deny Him, He will deny. If that answer still makes you squirm, I understand. I feel the tension too, but that is exactly how God wants it. Indeed that just deepens our faith. Trust God in the tension. At any rate, I digress...I love you all...now I am back to work...

PANDAFIRE VBS Teaching Themes

Teaching Theme of the Week: “Identity” (i.e., Who does God say we Are?) (overarching themes: Our Place in God’s Family, Perseverance, and the Gospel)

Nightly Teaching Themes

Night 1.      God is our Father (We are God’s Children)

a.    Rom. 8.12-17

b.    Luke 15.11-32

c.    I John 2.28-3.24

Night 2.      Jesus is our Brother (We are Jesus’ Brother)

a.    Rom. 8.12-17

b.    Rom. 8.28-30

c.    Luke 8.19-21

d.    Mark 3.31-35

e.    Matt. 12.46-50

Night 3.      The Holy Spirit is our Leader (We are the Spirit’s followers)

a.    Rom. 8.12-17

b.    Rom. 8.1-11

c.    John 16.5-15

d.    Acts 13.1-3

e.    Gal. 5.16-26

Night 4.      The Church is our Family (We are brothers and sisters of each other)

a.    Rom. 8.12-17

b.    Eph. 2.11-22

c.    Eph. 4.1-16

d.    I Cor. 8.1-13

e.    I Pet. 4.16-17

Night 5.      Endurance is our Calling (We are called to keep believing and obeying)

a.    Rom. 8.12-17

b.    Rom. 8.18-39

c.    I Pet. 4.1-19

d.    Heb. 12.1-13

e.    Eph. 6.10-20

f.     Luke 9.23-27

g.    John 16.33

h.    Luke 8.22-25

P.S. Sorry this was not up sooner.

Tentative 2011 Volunteer Assignments

VBS Volunteer Station/Group Assignments

Teaching:

1.    Zuly Nava (Pre-K)

2.    Chris Lee (1-3 & 4-6)

Games:

1.    Hansung

2.    Julie Seo

3.    Susie

Drama:

1.    Julia Zheng

2.    Kristina

3.    Christ Han

4.    Jasmine

5.    Kayla

6.    Jenny

7.    Ben

Music:

1.    Praise Band

2.    __________—Motions

3.    __________

4.    __________

Crafts:

1.    Jane

2.    Joyce

3.    Josie

Groups:

            Pre-K

1.    Tyler

2.    Jessica

            Grades 1-3

1.    Danniel

2.    Jessica Zheng

3.    Demia

            Grades 4-6

1.    Ann

2.    Sang

Miscellaneous Needs:

1.    Pastor Anthony

2.    Alex Tellez

3.    Erica Tellez

4.    Alice Kim??

Feel free to comment on this and let me know how you feel about the decisions. I may give you a final version on Sunday. I had meant to have this up by Tuesday, but the power went off at the church from Monday Morning to Wednesday night, and was off again for part of yesterday. Needless to say I have been playing catch up. So sorry for the delay. Susie, Sang, and Christ, I know you had wanted some other roles, but I think this is where I need you for this VBS. I also moved around some people who weren't there on Sunday, so that I would have a Spanish speaker with the two younger groups, since they are the ones who will know less english (at least in my experience with the kids so far). Sorry for the unexpected changes, which may change by Sunday, but probably this is how it needs to be. 

Love you all!

Grace and Peace and Hope in Christ Jesus

Pastor Anthony

On the text-critical problem in I Cor. 2.4

In I Cor. 2.4, there is some question as to what the text actual was that Paul wrote. I was doing this for a sermon and thought the world might as well benefit as much as my church, that and I am going against NA27's decision (the most scholarly text on the Greek NT today).

NA²⁷ gives several possibilities. Let’s look first at the external evidence.

Reading	Attestation	Possible Explanations
ΠΕΙΘΟΙΣ ΑΝΘΡΩΠΙΝΗΣ ΣΟΦΙΑΣ ΛΟΓΟΙΣ	MS Date Text Family MS Order ﬡ2 VII Alex* 1st A V Alex 1st C V Alex/mix 1st Ψ IX/X Alex 1st Majority Various Byz. 1st vgcl 1592 West n/a	Although it has the backing of a number of 1st order mss, it is a not a super early reading, and its geographic diversity is rather low, really only Alex. and Byz. mss are supporting it. Further, it is a longer reading. But most importantly, the are clearly clarifying additions.
ΠΕΙΘΟΙ ΑΝΘΡΩΠΙΝΗΣ ΣΟΦΙΑΣ ΛΟΓΟΙΣ	MS Date Text Family MS Order 1 XII Byz.? 42 XI Byz.? 440 XII Byz.? alii various Byz.? .	What it is interesting about this is that a group of late, byz. mss read πειθοι, not πειθοις, which seems to indicate that it is not accidental
ΠΕΙΘΟΙΣ ΑΝΘΡΩΠΙΝΗΣ ΣΟΦΙΑΣΚΑΙΛΟΓΟΙΣ	MS Date Text Family MS Order 131 XIV Byz.?	This ms is clearly added upon for clarification.
ΠΕΙΘΟΙΣ ΑΝΘΡΩΠΙΝΗΣ ΣΟΦΙΑΣ	MS Date Text Family MS Order 630 XII/XIII Byz.? 2nd	What is important here is that ΛΟΓΟΙΣ is missing, indicating it might be an addition, since it’s late.
ΠΕΙΘΟΙΣΟΦΙΑΣ ΑΝΘΡΩΠΙΝΟΙΣ ΛΟΓΟΙΣ	MS Date Text Family MS Order 2495 XV Byz.? Freq.	The important things to note here are the πειθοι and the conforming of ανθρωπινοισ to match λογοισ
ΠΕΙΘΟΙΣ ΣΟΦΙΑΣ ΛΟΓΟΙΣ	MS Date Text Family MS Order B IV Alex* 1st D VI West 1st 33 IX Alex 1st 1175 X Byz.? 2nd 1506 1320 Byz.? 2nd 1739 X Alex 1st 1881 XIV Alex 1st pauci vgst 1994 West n/a (syp) 1920 Byz. n/a	Although it has a number of 1st order mss and decent geographic diversity, it is a later reading, However, it lacks the clearly added ΑΝΘΡΩΠΙΝΗΣ. However, it still has λογοισ, which is missing in some mss. And it still has πειθοις and not πειθοι which is also found in some mss.
ΠΕΙΘΟΙΣ ΣΟΦΙΑΣ ΛΟΓΟΣ	MS Date Text Family MS Order ﬡ* IV Alex* 1st	Supposedly, in support of the previous entry, but actually it indicates that λογοισ is clarification.
ΠΕΙΘΟΙΣ ΣΟΦΙΑΣ	MS Date Text Family MS Order P46 c.a.200 Alex*/wst 1st* F IX West 1st G IX West 1st pauci various Byz.	Actually has the earliest attestation, and decent geographic spread, except it is a very western reading. However, it is the shortest and certainly explains all the options before it, but the difficult issue is the last option, with no attestation.
ΠΕΙΘΟΙ ΣΟΦΙΑΣ	No Attestation	A possibility from the editors.

The last two options are the closest to the original. The last option is what we know to have been in the text for sure. The question is just whether there was another sigma or not. This is difficult to decide, because even as I was writing the second to last option I missed typing the second sigma, but that goes to show how easy it is to lose that letter. Also, ΠΕΙΘΟΙ is a hapax legomenon, where as ΠΕΙΘΟΙΣ occurs moderated frequently in other literature (although still a hapax for the NT). The scribes are likely to have changed it to something they recognized or missed writing one of the sigma’s. Although it is also possible they double up on the sigma’s by accident. However, the fact that only a handful of mss, and most of them later mss, lack a double sigma, may indicate error more than faithfulness considering the sheer number of other mss. Thus, it is more like for the minorly attested reading to be the genuine rather than the unattested suggestion. Also the piece of information that could go either way is the possibility of mishearing the rector, since when spoken somewhat quickly ΠΕΙΘΟΙΣΣΟΦΙΑΣ would be very hard to distinguish from ΠΕΙΘΟΙΣΟΦΙΑΣ and vice versa. So for now I will go with the attested options, and lest people think me uninterested with unattested options, I just want to know I also do quite a bit of OT textual criticism, which is a way of saying I obviously have no problem with textual emendations.