Silencing of God: The Dismantling of America's Christian Heritage, Dave Miller

To contact us Click HERE

Silencing of God: The Dismantling of America's Christian Heritage, Dave Miller

I have heard of Dave Miller’s DVD “The Silencing of God” but have only recently viewed it. I was able to get a preview at a Bible Reading Marathon conducted by the Toledo Road Church of Christ of Lorain, Ohio at the Black River Amphitheatre with the Scriptures being read by teenagers over a 24-hour period where Brother Miller was able to speak at this event. While he and I were discussing our concern about the direction our country is being pushed, I asked brother Miller if he thought about putting this material in book form so people could communicate these vital facts documenting our nation’s Christian heritage with others as they are able more easily. I was delighted to hear that a coffee table full-color edition of the book had just been published. As the adult class where we attend began viewing the DVD, I ordered a copy of this book for the church library. It is an excellent product both from content and the attractive quality of printing.

Those who know me personally know I attempt to keep up on national politics and the forces that are attempting to take us further away from God. So, the material in the DVD was not a total shock to me. What was surprising to me is the voluminous efforts early leaders made to ensure all knew our county was established to be a Christian nation—monuments, money, manuscripts, correspondence, speeches, mottos, oaths, songs, constitutions—Federal and States, etc. I often hear people say the United States is not a Christian nation and was never designed to be one. That the Founding Fathers desired to establish a secular government that merely tolerates various religions. I knew before watching the DVD that was absurdly FALSE. The Founding Fathers wrote the First Amendment to protect religious freedom as opposed to the sinister twisting of the phrase, “a wall of separation between church and state,” in a letter by Thomas Jefferson to a Baptist association to reassure them that the Federal Government would not interfere with religion to restrict the exercise of religion. I am alarmed that some fail to realize the Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments, were written to preserve individual freedom from government interference. Particularly alarming is that few seem to realize that the freedom of the Press and Religion go together—these two are both in the First Amendment. Ask yourselves, “If the Press was being treated by the Federal Government the same way Christianity is, would they tolerate it?” It is a highly relevant question! 

What I learned from the DVD is just how overtly the Founding Fathers and early leaders were in favor of New Testament Christianity. Sometimes people like to refer to our “Judeo-Christian Heritage”; however, the Founding Fathers were more specific to our Christian Heritage. They pointed out that we are a tolerant Nation because of, not in spite of, New Testament Christianity. The degree to which they expressed this was rather eye-opening to me. One of the quotes I vividly remember was by John Jay, the first Chief Justice of the first U.S. Supreme Court. The early founders of our Nation were not shy about affirming the importance of Christianity to the preservation of the Nation. John Jay wrote about supporting infidel (non-Christians) leaders:

Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers. It is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest, of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.—Page 89.

Some refuse to be involved in politics in any way and prefer to avoid all discussion on this subject; however, political and societal forces are pushing churches into areas that we cannot support; e.g., accepting the homosexual lifestyle and using our tax dollars to fund abortions. If we do not use our rights to make Christ’s views, which must be our views, on these two subjects clear to our leaders, then we will lose these two battles. And these two highly activist lobbies will not be interested in letting the church exempt herself. I wish we could continue in the luxury on relying on others to shoulder the political fight so we can focus solely on spreading the gospel, but we cannot. We must devote resources in this struggle too, or our ability to spread the gospel may be severely hindered. If we do not bow to our knees in prayer to God, we may find our knees forced to the ground against our wills and then we will be willing to pray to God but it will be a cry out to God in despair.

I found the words of President James A. Garfield, a member of the Christian Church, to be worthy of adoption:

Now, more than ever before, the people are responsible for the character of their Congress. If that body be ignorant, reckless, and corrupt, it is because the people tolerate ignorance, recklessness, and corruption. If it be intelligent, brave, and pure, it is because the people demand these high qualities to present them in national legislature…. If the next centennial does not find us a great nation…it will be because those who represent the enterprise, the culture, and the morality of the nation do not aid in controlling the political forces.—Page 89.

It is time for Christians to be “strong in the strength which God supplies thru His beloved Son.”

The Disciples' Prayer, Hugo McCord

To contact us Click HERE
The Disciples’ Payer, Hugo McCord


Recently, I was requested to present a series on prayer. As I assembled reference materials, I shopped at a local used bookstore and came across a popular book that stated it was the 10th anniversary edition, and I learned it has over 1 million copies sold. I purchased the volume to see if it had any insights or approaches that I might find of use. While the book had several positive points, it also had some negative ones too. I went to my shelf and started reading Hugo McCord’s The Disciples’ Prayer and thought “Now this is a book on the subject that should be in new and used bookstores in a celebrated 10th anniversary edition!” Sadly, many of the works published among churches of Christ do not have the marketing support as some of large publishing houses. I believe brother McCord’s book far exceeds the value of the one I purchased that day.


The late brother McCord wrote this book in 1954 as Vice President of Central Christian College (now Oklahoma Christian University). McCord’s scholarship was well known. He received degrees from Freed-Hardeman College (now University), University of Illinois, and a doctorate from Southern Baptist Seminary. Brother McCord’s dissertation was on the supposed “Synoptic Problem” which I find of interest since it is a theory of many modernists who attack the Bible. The “Synoptic Problem” claims there are discrepancies, even contradictions between Matthew, Mark and Luke. They even go so far as to suggest an imaginary author called “Q” that the gospel writers had to borrow from. Some suggest that Mark’s gospel was written first and Matthew had to borrow from it. Imagine that! Matthew, an apostle who was with Jesus during His ministry, had to borrow from Mark who was not an apostle. Difficult to believe? Indeed. Occasionally McCord writings point out how these critics overlook certain realities that contradict their theories. For example, McCord’s chapter on “Give Us This Day Our Daily Bread” discusses the word “daily” and how modernists have far missed the mark:

Many scholars have doubted that the word “daily,” epiousion, in this petition is a faithful translation. Actually, some great scholars have been unfamiliar with epiousion. Origen (c. 185-254) was bold to say that Matthew and Luke just made up the word. But Chrysostom, Gregory Nyssen, and Basil of Caesarea—all eminent Greek-speaking scholars—thought that epiousion really means “daily”… Centuries elapsed, and modern scholars, still unfamiliar with epiousion, refused to accept the translation “daily” (needful). However, thanks to penetrating scholarship (?), the stigma of coining the word was taken off Matthew and Luke, and laid on the broad shoulders of imaginary author “Q,” from whom Matthew and Luke copied (?). So said modernists Moulton and Milligan as late as 1919. But in 1925 Q was exonerated from coining the word, for lo it was found in an old Greek housekeeping book. (Page 62)

The Disciples’ Prayer discusses the model of prayer Jesus gave in the “Sermon on the Mount” in Matthew and later to a smaller group in Luke. These two accounts are not parallel in the chronological but topical sense since the Sermon on the Mount is five chapters before the model prayer of Luke 11. Also, the wording is not identical in these models which indicate it was never intended to be recited repetitively as some do—a practice Jesus warned about just prior in Matthew’s account. And churches of Christ are not the only ones to point this matter out! I found the words of Martin Luther of interest on this and more pungent:

Thus, as we see, it was carried on in monasteries, nunneries and the whole ecclesiastical crowd, that seem to have had nothing else to do in their calling than to weary themselves daily so many hours, and at night besides, with singing and reading their Horas; and the more of this they could do, the holier and greater worship they called it. And yet among them all there was not one that uttered a real prayer from his heart: but they were all filled with the heathenish notion that one must tire God and one’s self with crying and muttering, as if he neither could nor would otherwise hear; and they have thereby accomplished nothing else than to waste their time and punish themselves…with their praying.— Martin Luther, Commentary on the Sermon On The Mount, Philadelphia, PA: Lutheran Publication Society, 1892, pp. 240-269.

Brother McCord does a thoughtful and insightful analysis of what some commonly refer to as “The Lord’s Prayer” or “The Model Prayer”. McCord points out that it was never a prayer that the Lord actually prayed so to call it “The Lord’s Prayer” would be incorrect unless one is speaking of a pattern of prayer taught by the Lord. The study of prayer has been enriching and this small volume spoke volumes compared to other works I have examined of longer length.

Originally printed West Virginia Christian, Vol. 18, No. 1,January 2011, p. 8. Reprinted by permission.

I don't feel no ways tired

To contact us Click HERE
I leave you this Sunday night with a song, one that I suspect none of you have heard. I came upon it in this manner:

I knew of the work of the pianist/storyteller/composer Ken Medema from my days in the Presbyterian Church back in the 1980's and 90's; I attended one of his concerts with the church youth group. He is enormously creative, but I had forgotten about him until encountering a mention of him in a book on church music that I am reading, “Jubilate: Church Music in the Evangelical Tradition” by Don Hustad.

So, when I had completed my work for the day, I looked Ken up on the internet and found his website. On it, he has a list of podcasts, and I listened to the one titled “Pipe Down” (Nov. 22, 2011) which deals with his lifelong fascination with the pipe organ.

At the end of the forty-five minute podcast, he includes a song he found by the Norwegian duo of guitarist Knut Reiersrud and organist Iver Kleive, on the compilation “Nordic Nights.” The song is an old spiritual, “I don't feel no ways tired.” The performance includes (besides pipe organ and guitar) the singing group “Blind Boys of Alabama.” Here it is on YouTube. Many items on YouTube have millions of views; this one has just 621 views and no comments. I do not think that I have ever heard a pipe organ used in this manner. This performance is a treasure, and I commend it to you.

May God's blessings be with you this night and always.

Evensong: What's the point?

To contact us Click HERE
One of the choristers, a ten-year old girl, asked this of me as we were vesting for Evensong today. “What's the point? Why are we doing this?” I did not answer her well; at first I made light of it, saying something about getting through it so we could have the pizza supper after. But she persisted; it was a serious question. I still did not answer well, telling her that people have been doing this for thousands of years, and it is our turn to take part in it. This is true, but not a sufficient answer.

Similar thoughts were in my mind this week as I prepared the organ music for this day's services. The postlude this morning was a large-scale fantasy on Sine Nomine by Craig Phillips, a fine piece. As I struggled with it and grew weary, I asked myself: “Why am I playing this?” My answer: “To honor the Saints.” This was the parish celebration of All Saints' Day, transferred to Sunday, one of the seven principal Feasts of the Church.

Were St. Cecilia, or J. S. Bach, or the Blessed Virgin Mary, or R. E. Lee, or Hezekiah the King to walk in the door of my home, I would extend them every honor within my power. I would give them the best chair, bring them the best of my food and drink, try to tell them how much they have meant to me. Or so I imagine. But am I willing to do what is actually in my power – more than that, the work which is my proper and bounden duty as a church musician? Am I willing to do a little extra work to prepare some Music to honor them, and through them the Lord whom they served? And on this day, not only these few, but all the company of heaven: patriarchs, prophets, apostles, martyrs, and “all other thy righteous servants, known to us and unknown” (BCP p. 489)?

Aided by such thoughts and encouraged by their examples, I gave it a good effort this week. In the event, the Phillips had more errors than is fitting, but some of the other music in this week's liturgies did go well. When we sang “For all the saints” this morning, all eight stanzas of it with a fanfare going into stanza seven, it was an Event.

When the combined youth and adult choirs sang the Bainton anthem “And I saw a new heaven” at tonight's Evensong, it was likewise an Event. For that matter, their singing of Psalm 150 to the chant in C major by Stanford was equally extraordinary.

To my young friend and fellow chorister in the Lord's service: No, I cannot give you a proper answer, not with words. But I pray that the very experience of it may lead you in the direction of an answer. Were you to stand where I stood, in the midst of the choristers as they sang, and see the intensity in the faces of many of them, young and old, perhaps you would begin to understand. I know you could hear it all around you – I saw a bit of it in your face, as well.

What's the point? What's the point of two months' choral rehearsals to get to one evening service? Or ten hours and more on the organ bench for one postlude that ended up not going very well? Behind these questions, why have people sung or said or prayed Matins and Evensong in one form or another all these years, in every imaginable language and setting and circumstance? Some of the point lies in what singing and praying together before God, and working at it with all our energies and skills, does to bring us a little closer to our maturity in the image of Christ, a little closer in every rehearsal and service. The preparations for this service have made us a better choir, and better choral singers individually. I believe that it was also beneficial to those who were in tonight's congregation, many of them parents of choristers.

But there is more: all of it, all of the work, all of the thousands of years of prayer and psalmody and praise embodied in the Daily Office, especially the Choral Office, is our “reasonable service” (Romans 12:1) for the honor of the One before whom we stand, who alone is worthy of praise.

I ain't got long to stay here

To contact us Click HERE

This day, the First Sunday of Advent, in all of its Lessons and Music, is what the song describes: “the trumpet sounds within my soul.”

Our time here is short; we had best make the most of it. And it is not just our individual span, our “threescore years and ten.” All things shall come to an end, and after that, the judgment. The Bridegroom has tarried long. But he is coming.

Almighty God, give us grace that we may cast away the works of darkness, and put upon us the armor of light, now in the time of this mortal life in which thy Son Jesus Christ came to visit us in great humility; that in the last day, when he shall come again in his glorious majesty to judge both the quick and the dead, we may rise to the life immortal; through him who liveth and reigneth with thee and the Holy Ghost, one God, now and for ever. Amen. (BCP p. 159)

Evensong: What's the point?

To contact us Click HERE
One of the choristers, a ten-year old girl, asked this of me as we were vesting for Evensong today. “What's the point? Why are we doing this?” I did not answer her well; at first I made light of it, saying something about getting through it so we could have the pizza supper after. But she persisted; it was a serious question. I still did not answer well, telling her that people have been doing this for thousands of years, and it is our turn to take part in it. This is true, but not a sufficient answer.

Similar thoughts were in my mind this week as I prepared the organ music for this day's services. The postlude this morning was a large-scale fantasy on Sine Nomine by Craig Phillips, a fine piece. As I struggled with it and grew weary, I asked myself: “Why am I playing this?” My answer: “To honor the Saints.” This was the parish celebration of All Saints' Day, transferred to Sunday, one of the seven principal Feasts of the Church.

Were St. Cecilia, or J. S. Bach, or the Blessed Virgin Mary, or R. E. Lee, or Hezekiah the King to walk in the door of my home, I would extend them every honor within my power. I would give them the best chair, bring them the best of my food and drink, try to tell them how much they have meant to me. Or so I imagine. But am I willing to do what is actually in my power – more than that, the work which is my proper and bounden duty as a church musician? Am I willing to do a little extra work to prepare some Music to honor them, and through them the Lord whom they served? And on this day, not only these few, but all the company of heaven: patriarchs, prophets, apostles, martyrs, and “all other thy righteous servants, known to us and unknown” (BCP p. 489)?

Aided by such thoughts and encouraged by their examples, I gave it a good effort this week. In the event, the Phillips had more errors than is fitting, but some of the other music in this week's liturgies did go well. When we sang “For all the saints” this morning, all eight stanzas of it with a fanfare going into stanza seven, it was an Event.

When the combined youth and adult choirs sang the Bainton anthem “And I saw a new heaven” at tonight's Evensong, it was likewise an Event. For that matter, their singing of Psalm 150 to the chant in C major by Stanford was equally extraordinary.

To my young friend and fellow chorister in the Lord's service: No, I cannot give you a proper answer, not with words. But I pray that the very experience of it may lead you in the direction of an answer. Were you to stand where I stood, in the midst of the choristers as they sang, and see the intensity in the faces of many of them, young and old, perhaps you would begin to understand. I know you could hear it all around you – I saw a bit of it in your face, as well.

What's the point? What's the point of two months' choral rehearsals to get to one evening service? Or ten hours and more on the organ bench for one postlude that ended up not going very well? Behind these questions, why have people sung or said or prayed Matins and Evensong in one form or another all these years, in every imaginable language and setting and circumstance? Some of the point lies in what singing and praying together before God, and working at it with all our energies and skills, does to bring us a little closer to our maturity in the image of Christ, a little closer in every rehearsal and service. The preparations for this service have made us a better choir, and better choral singers individually. I believe that it was also beneficial to those who were in tonight's congregation, many of them parents of choristers.

But there is more: all of it, all of the work, all of the thousands of years of prayer and psalmody and praise embodied in the Daily Office, especially the Choral Office, is our “reasonable service” (Romans 12:1) for the honor of the One before whom we stand, who alone is worthy of praise.

I ain't got long to stay here

To contact us Click HERE

This day, the First Sunday of Advent, in all of its Lessons and Music, is what the song describes: “the trumpet sounds within my soul.”

Our time here is short; we had best make the most of it. And it is not just our individual span, our “threescore years and ten.” All things shall come to an end, and after that, the judgment. The Bridegroom has tarried long. But he is coming.

Almighty God, give us grace that we may cast away the works of darkness, and put upon us the armor of light, now in the time of this mortal life in which thy Son Jesus Christ came to visit us in great humility; that in the last day, when he shall come again in his glorious majesty to judge both the quick and the dead, we may rise to the life immortal; through him who liveth and reigneth with thee and the Holy Ghost, one God, now and for ever. Amen. (BCP p. 159)

Windows 8 Impressions

To contact us Click HERE

Windows 8 Impressions

My mother had been using an increasingly balky, old eMachines desktop running WinXP. Since I had some time with her over Thanksgiving, we decided that it was time to upgrade to something more reliable and take advantage of the weekend sales. She ended up getting a 23" HP All-in-One system with a dual-core AMD A4-5300 3.4GHz processor, 6GB RAM, integrated graphics, 500GB 7200RPM  HDD, and other fairly standard features that would come with a new Win8 system. We debated the virtues of getting a touch-screen display, but for a desktop system, it didn't quite seem to make sense, especially for over $200 more for an otherwise comparable system.

So, this was my first experience with Win8, and I had 4 days to transfer stuff from a WinXP system to a new Win8 one. Further, I needed to set up the system and be able to have it work intuitively for my mostly non-tech mother who was accustomed to WinXP. Here are some impressions and things I learned.

• Initial setup of the Win8 system was no problem and did not take very long.
• I used Microsoft Windows Easy Transfer to move as much as I could between the two systems. That worked reasonably well.
• The system is acceptably fast, but I had heard that I might expect comparatively faster performance with Win8. I was not impressed, and those hardware specs should be decent enough.
• I'm not sure how much of the default setup was due to HP and how much to the basic Win8 system, but you need to have a Microsoft account to do just about anything. Skydrive, Games, the default music and video apps... They all need a Microsoft account. There are also many hooks into Microsoft's Xbox system which were a bit annoying if you don't use Xbox.
• When in doubt, we ended up using the general rule of using a mouse right-click. That usually got you where you wanted to go, but we ended up right-clicking a lot, because we were having trouble figuring out how to make things work. Win8 is surprisingly not intuitive to use.
• Win8, it seems to me, is a transitional operating system. It really is a combination of Win7 and Win8, and there is something of a schizophrenic feel to how it all works. I ended up trying to have my mother think of the distinction between Win8 apps and Win7 programs. Programs will have the X in the upper right corner to close them. Apps will not have the X and need to be dragged down to close them.
• What gets confusing is that there is some overlap with some programs which have both program and app versions. The biggest offender (and it really is offensive) is Internet Explorer. When you first open the IE app, it does not have any menu or favorites or tabs or URL bar. How do you get anywhere? Right-click, and that brings up open 'tabs' on the top, a URL bar on the bottom and large icons for 'pinned' (to the Start page) sites, Frequent sites, and Favorites. I couldn't find how to organize those or move them around, and the icons are so large that it takes a lot of scrolling to go through your favorites. It was easier to pin a few to the Start page. What's worse, some sites don't work in the IE app, and so you are directed to use the old IE program. The Google app is another odd one. It didn't work as I expected it to do, but maybe it would function better with a touch screen where you would swipes to go back and forth between results and sites. I also very much disliked the Mail app, and I set up a tile for the new Outlook.com as a way to read mail. I also did not like the Skype app (I simply could not figure out how to add someone to my contacts) or the Photo app (I never could figure out how to move to the next photo!).
• I can see where Win8 is designed as a one-size-fits-all system intended for phone, tablet, and notebook (and desktop as an afterthought). It really is intended to be used with a touch-screen, but after a few days, I could manage acceptably well with keyboard and mouse. I ended up getting around more quickly using the keyboard than the mouse, though. It's simply a pain trying to use the mouse to get the cursor precisely enough in one of the screen corners to activate the "Charm Bar" or the open apps. OTOH, for touch devices, having the larger icons to start apps and using various swipes would work well.
• The Win7 is kind of still there in the Desktop app. (If this were my system, and I really wanted to keep my Win7 functionality and feel, I think I would use Stardock's Start8.) I missed seeing resident programs in the system tray. I missed seeing open programs in the taskbar at the bottom of the screen, and it took a bit to get used to switching using the cursor in the upper left corner method.
• The Win8 Start page is a mixed deal. The 'live tiles' are somewhat helpful, but if there is a way to organize them without fitting into one of the grid patterns, I couldn't figure it out. There is also lots of horizontal scrolling (instead of vertical), but it works fairly well with the mouse scroll wheel.
• When we first tried to turn off the computer, there was no intuitive way to put the machine to sleep or into hibernation (other than just pushing the power button on the machine). It turns out that you need to call up the charm bar, click on settings, then choose Power to have shutdown options. It's just a pain. I ended up going into Power settings to create a keyboard shortcut to hibernate the machine, but that's one more thing to remember.

Overall, I do not like Win8, but I suspect that I better get used to it. As someone who likes to 'customize' my machine, Win8 can be rather frustrating in many ways. OTOH, I also suspect that if a person were just starting with the Win8 operating system without previous experience, it might be okay, especially if you were using a touch screen. Win8 tries to maximize screen space--which is great for smaller devices--but it means extra clicks on a desktop.

I saw Accordance, BibleWorks, and Logos running on Win8 systems at SBL, and it will be nice to be able to use a program on a variety of devices. There are lots of other pros/cons and delights/quibbles, but for now, I am happy staying with Win7 on my desktop system.

Better Bible Search Suggestion: Accordance, BibleWorks, Logos

To contact us Click HERE

How would you go about looking for all the instances in the Bible where it says that Jesus is doing some kind of teaching. (I'm going to use English examples here to simplify things.) Using Bible software such as Accordance, BibleWorks, or Logos, I suspect that your first inclination would be to look for all instances of "Jesus AND teach." [For English, "(teach* OR taught)" - Yes, Greek would be easier searching for some form of διδασκω or words related to that root.] You would get about 35 hits in about 34 verses.

So, what's wrong with those results? The problem is that the software is only searching for where the two words occur in the same verse.

So, how do we get around that problem?

• You could just search for "Jesus" and then skim through all the results to look for all the instances when it says, "He was teaching..." (or something similar) and the "he" refers to Jesus.
• The new Logos 5 is trying to accomplish what I just described with their Speaker Labels and their Clause Searches where you can identify with greater specificity who is the subject or being mentioned. This is a great improvement, but it still won't get you all the results, however.

Similarly, let's say you want to find all instances of "light* AND dark*" You will get lots of hits, but again, due to the search-by-verse orientation of the software, you would miss texts like Isa 42:6-7; 60:2-3; Luke 23:44-45; Col 1:12-13; 1 John 1:6-7. The new Logos features won't help you out here, so what should you do? Each of the software packages has a way of searching apart from verse limitations.

• I don't have the latest version of Accordance, but I know it can do this. (Cf. UPDATE below)
• In BibleWorks, you can specify occurrences within X many verses. (This can be done both from the command line and in the Graphical Search.)
• In Logos, you can specify occurrences within X many words using BEFORE, AFTER, WITHIN, NEAR. (Look here.) For the search to work properly, however, you need to search on the "Surface Text" which is one of the search fields you can specify.
  [I checked, and I do recall in Logos 3 that you could search by "Chapters or sections" or by "Verses." Look here. I can't find that option available any more in Logos 5. Anyone know if it's there and how you access it?]

That is going to work better doing some kind of cross-verse search, but you are still going to end up with odd and unpredictable results depending on how many verses or words you arbitrarily choose to search across.

The Hebrew Bible texts have always had some system of markings indicating various levels, and those have largely been incorporated into our modern chapter and verse divisions. For the New Testament, Eusebius divided the Gospels into what we might call pericopes in the 3rd century. Chapter divisions were introduced in the 13th century by Langton. Verses were introduced in the 16th century by Stephanus. (Pagnini had a prior Latin Bible in 1528 that had a different versification scheme that was based on larger units of thought or action. For more on his [superior] versification, look here and here.) For more on all this Wikipedia provides a reliable enough account.

For better Bible searching, then, here is my proposal.

I would like to see the option of being able to search biblical texts within (what I will call) pericopes rather than just within verses. I am not a programmer, so I don't know how difficult of a thing it is I am suggesting. I also know that defining pericope units can also be a subjective decision in many instances. Still, we already have many Bible outlines breaking biblical books into sense units that could be used. (BibleWorks includes 13 outlines as used in the RSV, NIV, NET, ESV, etc. Eusebius' work on the Gospels has been improved with a variety of Gospel synopses.) The beauty of this approach is that I wouldn't need to specify a verse range. I would be more likely to find the instances where Jesus is teaching based on the words of the text. I would automatically get John 7:38-39 when looking for instances of "water AND spirit." I would get Psalm 23 if I look for "shepherd AND staff."

Does anyone else think this would be a good idea for the Bible software programmers to pursue? Am I missing anything? Is there already a way in Accordance, BibleWorks, or Logos to do this of which I am unaware? What about any of the other Bible software programs?

UPDATE 2012.12.01:

• Thanks to Rubén Gómez for pointing out in the comments how in Accordance you can use "scope" to search withing paragraph, chapter, or book. I suppose "paragraphs" would be close to pericopes, but I'd still like to search within something like John 3.1-21 (Jesus and Nicodemus) which is usually broken into 4 paragraphs.
• Thanks also to Devin Roza for pointing out a way you can kind of get at it in Logos. Using the Syntax search feature, you actually are searching within syntactical units. You will get more hits this way, but you still won't get all of them because it still is not searching within conceptual units. (I.e., it won't search across 2 sentences.)
  BTW, thanks also for sharing your search on the Faithlife community forum. That worked well for me to connect to it and open it in my Logos.

UPDATE 2012.12.02

• In the comments, Dominick Sela appears to have found to get the desired results in Logos by using a Basic Search. To add some specifics, use the Basic Search. Choose to search "Bible Text" (not "All Text") and choose the version you want to search. The scope of the search is within the defined sections of that particular version, so you will get different results depending on the version and how it splits pericopes. Though you cannot conduct morphological searches using Greek/Hebrew, you can still use this Basic Search, choose a Hebrew or Greek text (that has interlinear coding), and search using English terms. The scope appears to be by chapter.

Moving to Logos 5

To contact us Click HERE

I recently posted a 3-part review of Logos 5.Part 1, Part 2, Part 3

On their blog, Logos has now posted the clearest explanation of the many different ways you can move to Logos 5. It's all logical enough, but it is still complicated enough that you are better off just using the online calculator or calling them.
A few things to note since the earlier reviews:

• I had posed a question about getting condensed verse lists from search results. I have confirmed that you cannot get such a list (e.g.: Matthew 1:1; 2:2-4; Mark 6:34) In one of the recent updates, however, Logos has now made it possible to create a "Passage List" from any of the searches which can be displayed as a compact list with each reference on a separate line. I still want the condensed reference list to paste into documents.
• I had been aware of the "Biblical Languages" package, but Logos was not promoting it since it is only available to institutions that require their students to have Logos. (They note as much in the blog post.) I have not yet seen what is in the package, but it apparently is similar to the Bronze package, though I'm guessing it has additional original language resources.
• There have already been a number of updates to Logos 5, but it has been fast, stable, and reliable for me.
• Logos has updated their splashscreen logo and the logo as it shows up in your task bar. I have them displayed above.

I ain't got long to stay here

To contact us Click HERE

This day, the First Sunday of Advent, in all of its Lessons and Music, is what the song describes: “the trumpet sounds within my soul.”

Our time here is short; we had best make the most of it. And it is not just our individual span, our “threescore years and ten.” All things shall come to an end, and after that, the judgment. The Bridegroom has tarried long. But he is coming.

Almighty God, give us grace that we may cast away the works of darkness, and put upon us the armor of light, now in the time of this mortal life in which thy Son Jesus Christ came to visit us in great humility; that in the last day, when he shall come again in his glorious majesty to judge both the quick and the dead, we may rise to the life immortal; through him who liveth and reigneth with thee and the Holy Ghost, one God, now and for ever. Amen. (BCP p. 159)

Silencing of God: The Dismantling of America's Christian Heritage, Dave Miller

To contact us Click HERE

Silencing of God: The Dismantling of America's Christian Heritage, Dave Miller

I have heard of Dave Miller’s DVD “The Silencing of God” but have only recently viewed it. I was able to get a preview at a Bible Reading Marathon conducted by the Toledo Road Church of Christ of Lorain, Ohio at the Black River Amphitheatre with the Scriptures being read by teenagers over a 24-hour period where Brother Miller was able to speak at this event. While he and I were discussing our concern about the direction our country is being pushed, I asked brother Miller if he thought about putting this material in book form so people could communicate these vital facts documenting our nation’s Christian heritage with others as they are able more easily. I was delighted to hear that a coffee table full-color edition of the book had just been published. As the adult class where we attend began viewing the DVD, I ordered a copy of this book for the church library. It is an excellent product both from content and the attractive quality of printing.

Those who know me personally know I attempt to keep up on national politics and the forces that are attempting to take us further away from God. So, the material in the DVD was not a total shock to me. What was surprising to me is the voluminous efforts early leaders made to ensure all knew our county was established to be a Christian nation—monuments, money, manuscripts, correspondence, speeches, mottos, oaths, songs, constitutions—Federal and States, etc. I often hear people say the United States is not a Christian nation and was never designed to be one. That the Founding Fathers desired to establish a secular government that merely tolerates various religions. I knew before watching the DVD that was absurdly FALSE. The Founding Fathers wrote the First Amendment to protect religious freedom as opposed to the sinister twisting of the phrase, “a wall of separation between church and state,” in a letter by Thomas Jefferson to a Baptist association to reassure them that the Federal Government would not interfere with religion to restrict the exercise of religion. I am alarmed that some fail to realize the Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments, were written to preserve individual freedom from government interference. Particularly alarming is that few seem to realize that the freedom of the Press and Religion go together—these two are both in the First Amendment. Ask yourselves, “If the Press was being treated by the Federal Government the same way Christianity is, would they tolerate it?” It is a highly relevant question! 

What I learned from the DVD is just how overtly the Founding Fathers and early leaders were in favor of New Testament Christianity. Sometimes people like to refer to our “Judeo-Christian Heritage”; however, the Founding Fathers were more specific to our Christian Heritage. They pointed out that we are a tolerant Nation because of, not in spite of, New Testament Christianity. The degree to which they expressed this was rather eye-opening to me. One of the quotes I vividly remember was by John Jay, the first Chief Justice of the first U.S. Supreme Court. The early founders of our Nation were not shy about affirming the importance of Christianity to the preservation of the Nation. John Jay wrote about supporting infidel (non-Christians) leaders:

Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers. It is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest, of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.—Page 89.

Some refuse to be involved in politics in any way and prefer to avoid all discussion on this subject; however, political and societal forces are pushing churches into areas that we cannot support; e.g., accepting the homosexual lifestyle and using our tax dollars to fund abortions. If we do not use our rights to make Christ’s views, which must be our views, on these two subjects clear to our leaders, then we will lose these two battles. And these two highly activist lobbies will not be interested in letting the church exempt herself. I wish we could continue in the luxury on relying on others to shoulder the political fight so we can focus solely on spreading the gospel, but we cannot. We must devote resources in this struggle too, or our ability to spread the gospel may be severely hindered. If we do not bow to our knees in prayer to God, we may find our knees forced to the ground against our wills and then we will be willing to pray to God but it will be a cry out to God in despair.

I found the words of President James A. Garfield, a member of the Christian Church, to be worthy of adoption:

Now, more than ever before, the people are responsible for the character of their Congress. If that body be ignorant, reckless, and corrupt, it is because the people tolerate ignorance, recklessness, and corruption. If it be intelligent, brave, and pure, it is because the people demand these high qualities to present them in national legislature…. If the next centennial does not find us a great nation…it will be because those who represent the enterprise, the culture, and the morality of the nation do not aid in controlling the political forces.—Page 89.

It is time for Christians to be “strong in the strength which God supplies thru His beloved Son.”

The Disciples' Prayer, Hugo McCord

To contact us Click HERE
The Disciples’ Payer, Hugo McCord


Recently, I was requested to present a series on prayer. As I assembled reference materials, I shopped at a local used bookstore and came across a popular book that stated it was the 10th anniversary edition, and I learned it has over 1 million copies sold. I purchased the volume to see if it had any insights or approaches that I might find of use. While the book had several positive points, it also had some negative ones too. I went to my shelf and started reading Hugo McCord’s The Disciples’ Prayer and thought “Now this is a book on the subject that should be in new and used bookstores in a celebrated 10th anniversary edition!” Sadly, many of the works published among churches of Christ do not have the marketing support as some of large publishing houses. I believe brother McCord’s book far exceeds the value of the one I purchased that day.


The late brother McCord wrote this book in 1954 as Vice President of Central Christian College (now Oklahoma Christian University). McCord’s scholarship was well known. He received degrees from Freed-Hardeman College (now University), University of Illinois, and a doctorate from Southern Baptist Seminary. Brother McCord’s dissertation was on the supposed “Synoptic Problem” which I find of interest since it is a theory of many modernists who attack the Bible. The “Synoptic Problem” claims there are discrepancies, even contradictions between Matthew, Mark and Luke. They even go so far as to suggest an imaginary author called “Q” that the gospel writers had to borrow from. Some suggest that Mark’s gospel was written first and Matthew had to borrow from it. Imagine that! Matthew, an apostle who was with Jesus during His ministry, had to borrow from Mark who was not an apostle. Difficult to believe? Indeed. Occasionally McCord writings point out how these critics overlook certain realities that contradict their theories. For example, McCord’s chapter on “Give Us This Day Our Daily Bread” discusses the word “daily” and how modernists have far missed the mark:

Many scholars have doubted that the word “daily,” epiousion, in this petition is a faithful translation. Actually, some great scholars have been unfamiliar with epiousion. Origen (c. 185-254) was bold to say that Matthew and Luke just made up the word. But Chrysostom, Gregory Nyssen, and Basil of Caesarea—all eminent Greek-speaking scholars—thought that epiousion really means “daily”… Centuries elapsed, and modern scholars, still unfamiliar with epiousion, refused to accept the translation “daily” (needful). However, thanks to penetrating scholarship (?), the stigma of coining the word was taken off Matthew and Luke, and laid on the broad shoulders of imaginary author “Q,” from whom Matthew and Luke copied (?). So said modernists Moulton and Milligan as late as 1919. But in 1925 Q was exonerated from coining the word, for lo it was found in an old Greek housekeeping book. (Page 62)

The Disciples’ Prayer discusses the model of prayer Jesus gave in the “Sermon on the Mount” in Matthew and later to a smaller group in Luke. These two accounts are not parallel in the chronological but topical sense since the Sermon on the Mount is five chapters before the model prayer of Luke 11. Also, the wording is not identical in these models which indicate it was never intended to be recited repetitively as some do—a practice Jesus warned about just prior in Matthew’s account. And churches of Christ are not the only ones to point this matter out! I found the words of Martin Luther of interest on this and more pungent:

Thus, as we see, it was carried on in monasteries, nunneries and the whole ecclesiastical crowd, that seem to have had nothing else to do in their calling than to weary themselves daily so many hours, and at night besides, with singing and reading their Horas; and the more of this they could do, the holier and greater worship they called it. And yet among them all there was not one that uttered a real prayer from his heart: but they were all filled with the heathenish notion that one must tire God and one’s self with crying and muttering, as if he neither could nor would otherwise hear; and they have thereby accomplished nothing else than to waste their time and punish themselves…with their praying.— Martin Luther, Commentary on the Sermon On The Mount, Philadelphia, PA: Lutheran Publication Society, 1892, pp. 240-269.

Brother McCord does a thoughtful and insightful analysis of what some commonly refer to as “The Lord’s Prayer” or “The Model Prayer”. McCord points out that it was never a prayer that the Lord actually prayed so to call it “The Lord’s Prayer” would be incorrect unless one is speaking of a pattern of prayer taught by the Lord. The study of prayer has been enriching and this small volume spoke volumes compared to other works I have examined of longer length.

Originally printed West Virginia Christian, Vol. 18, No. 1,January 2011, p. 8. Reprinted by permission.

In God We Trust

To contact us Click HERE



Onemay recall the treasury stamping “In God We Trust” on the edge, rather than theface, of the president’s series of dollar coins. I recall thinking, “They areslowly pushing God right off the coin by moving it to the edge.” Ironically,a story surfaced that the U. S. Treasury had mistakenly minted coins thatfailed to have this slogan. After so much effort by secularists to distorthistory by claiming the founding fathers desired to create a religious neutralgovernment, I was irritated that it appeared yet another inch was beingsurrendered. It is a fact that the founding fathers desired to create agovernment that did not interfere in church government, but they in no waysought to remove Christianity from the government. Onewonders how the press would react if they were treated the same way thesecularists desire to have Christianity treated? The same amendment that givesthe press its freedom gives religion its free exercise! It seems many haveforgotten that the Bill of Rights was passed to avoid government oversteppingits bounds. For those who have not read the Bill of Rights in a while, thefirst amendment reads, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishmentof religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedomof speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assembleand to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” Thesource of the phrase “In God We Trust” is believed to be from the fourth stanzaof the poem upon which our national anthem “The Star-Spangled Banner” wasbased. “In God We Trust” was adopted as our national motto in 1956, although itfirst appeared on the currency by act of Congress in 1864 on a two-cent coin.The mint has not always utilized this motto on coins. In 1907 the slogan wasremoved from the gold double eagle coin. Interestingly,Theodore Roosevelt opposed having “In God We Trust” on U.S. currency, but thereason does not fit the secularists’ viewpoint. The secularists believe havingGod in government harms the government; however, Roosevelt felt that usingGod’s name on the currency was irreverent toward God, not the nation. Ina letter to William Boldly on Nov. 11, 1907, Roosevelt wrote: “My own feelingin the matter is due to my very firm conviction that to put such a motto oncoins, or to use it in any kindred manner, not only does no good but doespositive harm, and is in effect irreverence, which comes dangerously close tosacrilege ... it seems to me eminently unwise to cheapen such a motto by use oncoins, just as it would be to cheapen it by use on postage stamps, or inadvertisements.” Thepublic outcry was so great that Congress, on May 18, 1908, passed legislationto have the motto restored. Apparently the outcry was effective since all U. S.coins have included our national motto since 1938. The slogan did not appear onpaper money until 1957.Didyou notice the driving force that restored our national motto to our currency?The public outcry! Sometimes things are discouraging, but that is the time tobe heard. We are blessed to live in a country where we can tell our electedofficials exactly what is on our minds – both at the ballot box and duringtheir term. Maybeyou think, “It is hopeless. We live in a far more dark time than in days ofold.” Wake up! With the Internet, you can go to www.senate.gov,www.house.gov,and www.whitehouse.govand type a message directly to our elected officials in Washington, D.C. forfree. Perhaps you do not like getting involved in political matters. Well, beaware that if we do not speak out for the moral fabric of our country, thesecularists will, but it won’t be the morals of the Bible. Canwe make a difference? Yes. In fact, on Dec. 5, 2007, the House introduced S.2417 to return the national motto to the face of the coin. Result? “In God WeTrust” was returned to the face of the dollar coins beginning with the 2009coin honoring William Henry Harrison as the ninth president. Why? BecauseGod-fearing citizens took a stand. God has blessed us with living in a freenation. May we do all that we can to honor Him in both in word and deed.
 ------------------------- David R. Kenney preaches and teaches for the Wadsworth church of Christ at 236 West Good Avenue, Wadsworth, Ohio 44281.
This article originally appeared in the Wadsworth Post, October 20, 2012

Profiles in Restoration History: Thomas Campbell

To contact us Click HERE
Thomas Campbell (1763-1854) is one of the key figures in man’s efforts to leave the fragmented world of denominationalism and seek to return to the New Testament pattern. Born in County Down, Ireland, he was an esteemed educator and instilled the value of Christian education in his son, Alexander. Thomas graduated from University of Glasgow in Scotland and then studied for five years at Whitburn Seceder Seminary which was the Anti-Burgher branch of the Secession Presbyterian Church. The divisive nature of denominationalism of the time is seen in the way Thomas Campbell had to define himself. He was an Old-Light Anti-Burgher Seceder Presbyterian.

Thomas became troubled by the religious division. He studied the New Testament to reconcile these variances. His health deteriorated to the point that all the doctors could recommend was relocating to the New World. Accordingly, he left for America April 1, 1807. When he arrived, he continued studying and preaching from the New Testament favoring its teaching to Presbyterian doctrine which brought him suspension from the area Synod. He resigned from the Presbyterian Church on September 13, 1807.

Once he had made up his mind to follow the New Testament pattern, he came to realize that religious movements tend to attach their doctrines & traditions that, left unchecked, encroach on the New Testament pattern. His followers encouraged him to write a guide for their plea. On September 7, 1809 he completed The Declaration and Address which was printed and sent out to area churches with a plea to join in the effort to following a guiding principle—“Where the Scriptures speak, we speak; and where the Scriptures are silent, we are silent.” An honest investigation of the intent of silence leaves no doubt that the Campbell Movement viewed silence as restrictive rather than permissive. Thomas Campbell made many contributions to the Restoration Movement. Perhaps among his chief contributions was his rearing of Alexander Campbell.

The journey that Thomas Campbell made to the New World must have been filled with excitement; however, the journey back to Jerusalem to follow the early apostolic church’s doctrine and practice was the one that thrilled his soul. May we have others with such desire! To learn more about the life of Thomas Campbell, see http://www.therestorationmovement.com/tcmbl.htm

by David R. Kenney