Insightful Musings on the Scriptures
by
Raymond P. Sparre
Northwest University class of '67
Greetings on a wet Tuesday morning, dear ones.
I made use of the dry day yesterday to put together an itinerary into Portland to firstly drop Thano’s truck off at our mechanic’s shop, purchase a bunch of sign supplies, meet an architect who has contacted me about milling some trees on a property in Gresham that they will be developing, pick up resharpened sawmill blades at Wood Mizer, and I was also able to pick up Thano’s chainsaw that was in for repairs at a shop in Estacada. Before that last stop, a fellow in a van came up beside me and motioned for me to stop. I did. He got out, walked back to my open window, and said, “You lost a sheet of material about 5 miles back.” Sure enough—that 4’x10’ sheet of Lexan (poly-carbonate) was missing. I grabbed a U-turn and ran back to where he said it was laying beside the road. It was still there and amazingly not very scarfed up. Whew! That sheet cost me about $175—destined for a church sign in Brooks. Glad to get it back. More boring trivia.
I need to keep an eye on the clock—as I’m scheduled for an appointment with the City Manager in just one hour to discuss some signage for the city.
So bye—blessings—love, Dad/Ray.
It is very difficult to objectively discuss important concepts and ideas with a person whose mind primarily functions on a subjective level. Objective reasoning gathers facts and observable data and makes choices and conclusions accordingly, “uninfluenced by emotion, surmise, or personal opinion” (Dictionary definition). Subjective reasoning tends to ignore facts in favor of feelings, traditions, and opinions—“Of, produced by, or resulting from an individual’s mind or state of mind—existing only within the experiencer’s mind and incapable of external verification” (Dictionary definition).
By my own objective observation, Nicodemas was a composite of both. I guess we all are. But he demonstrates a willingness (maybe a commitment) to objectively examine his own subjective discomfort over hearing so much negative stuff about Jesus while, at the same time, observing the positive supernatural stuff He was doing. He apparently reasoned that a more objective way to critique this controversial figure was to take the initiative to go talk TO Jesus—and not just talk with other people ABOUT Jesus. Bingo! Therein, I believe, is the key to Nicodemas’ success in life. In this regard, I judge that he becomes a worthy role model for us all.
In contrast to Nicodemas, the mainstream of the religious elite displayed a biased bondage to the subjective fact that they simply did not like Jesus. Miracles did not even matter. He simply did not fit into their box of traditions, preconceived opinions, and freedom to exploit the regular people by their arrogant positions of leadership. Jesus messed up their comfort zone. They were so ticked that they even plotted to kill Jesus on the heels of His performing miracles of healing right before their eyes (Matthew 12:13-14). How rational is that?!
The way my head works causes me to see here a parallel to the whole modern debate about God—whether or not there is one. We can let the religious elite of Jesus’ day represent the science elite of our day. These people claim to be completely objective and scientific in their reasoning—claiming that the idea of a supernatural God is incompatible. But their claim to pure objectivity is clearly contaminated by their own subjectivity—they simply don’t like the whole idea of God—He messes up their comfort zone of self-centeredness and self-sufficiency. I would argue that true objective science recognizes that life itself (including one’s ability to think and reason) is a “God thing”—it is supernatural in the sense that natural rock and water (mud) can’t do that! It demonstrates design and intention over accident and chaos. Considering even a fraction of all the components that make life possible leads me to the firm dogmatic conclusion that THERE CANNOT NOT BE A GOD! And since I have chosen, like Nicodemas, to talk TO God and not just ABOUT God, my objective reasoning along with my resulting subjective experience blend together to adequately prove His reality to my satisfaction. Is it reasonable to believe that I’ve been BORN AGAIN?