Perseverance and Inheritance

I think Nehemiah and I would've been good friends. How do I know this? Because 5.7a reads, "I took counsel with myself..." He was his own best friend. He thrived on self-reflection and hard work. Sure he had counselors but ultimately, he was confident in his own knowledge of God's word- his promises.

...maybe we wouldn't have been friends. Nehemiah wouldn't appreciate that I've only got self-reflection- very little hard work. Or at least, not hard enough work to rebuild a wall. I might talk a lot about rebuilding walls (like the equivalent of talking about changing present day injustices)...

Yet more than self-reflection and hard work, Nehemiah asks God twice (5.19; 13.31) "Remember for my good...all that I have done for this [your] people."

In the first chapter, Nehemiah writes, "(8) Remember the word that you commanded Moses saying, 'If you are unfaithful, I will scatter you among the peoples, (9) but if you return to me and keep my commandments and do them, though your outcasts are in the uttermost parts of heaven, from there I will gather them and bring them to the place I have chosen, to make my name dwell there."

Verse 6b, Nehemiah writes/prays, "Even I and my father's house have sinned."

I'm pretty sure Nehemiah is looking back on the sins of his ancestors (and obviously his own sins) because they've yet to be forgiven. Now he acknowledges them (even on behalf of his people: scattered, outcasts) to say, "We know to do better. We will do better. We will keep our half of the covenant. So that you will keep your half, God. Please." 

That was the original deal. 

They don't return to the Promised Land to rebuild the walls to boost morale and thwart enemies' threats, but to keep on the promises made to their ancestors.

Of course, that's a lot of pressure: to keep up a promise you inherited. How is that fair? It certainly wasn't your decision to partake in that promise- to want that promise; to reap the benefits or consequences of that promise. I don't want it. 

Yeah, I don't want to be an adult anymore, but my not wanting it doesn't change a thing. I'm still an adult. You're still in that promise. (That's as far as that comparison goes.)

Still, why should you suffer the consequences of your father's choices?

Well, yes and no. Certainly, you can hardly be imprisoned for a robbery that your great-grandfather committed, but then if your great-grandfather worked hard, and became successful, only to die for you to take on a Fortune 500 company... Both are consequences, one is 'bad' and the other is 'good'- but they're still both consequences, and you still reap something from both of them: either a bad reputation, or a lot of money- both still entail a lot of pressure. 

Nehemiah is asking God to uphold a promise God made to Moses. Nehemiah is not Moses. Moses didn't even get to see the promised land. Actually, let's go even further back! Abraham didn't get to see the promised land. He didn't even get enough children to outnumber the stars- he just got the one kid. And yet, the promise God made to each of these forefather's- the promise was made to be inherited by future generations. 

Because that's what an inheritance is: a promise to future generations. Nehemiah inherited negative consequences because of the poor choices of his father. He's giving his future positive consequences--blessings, in fact. 

"Here, future. God remembers the evil we've done, but much more, he remembers the good. Take it. Take the good. Keep doing good. Thrive behind the proud walls of this, the Promised Land. Remember where our ancestors once were- don't go back into slavery and exile."

Maybe further still, when Nehemiah asks God to remember him for his good, "Look, I've done this for you because you were true to your word: you sent us into exile until we kept our word. Now I'm keeping my word. Please. Preserve my nation. Preserve your nation." 

Job hunts are like relationships. Bad relationships.

Dear Justine,
   Thank you very much for your interest in ----. We appreciate your time and effort. Although your background and experience is extensive, we have decided to move forward with other candidates that best fit the position. We wish you great success in your career search.

You wish me 'great success'? My 'background and experience is extensive' but apparently, I'm still lacking. Generally, every candidate will lack something, but I obviously lacked that one thing. That one thing!

You know that movie He's Just Not that Into You?

There's this part of the film where two women talk about the different lines guys use to break up.:

"He'll tell me 'Oh. You're too good for me.' Or!- 'You'll make someone else really happy. He'll be lucky to have you."
   "Yeah, yeah, yeah, and you feel good about yourself. But then you realize, 'That could've been you!"

This is how job hunting feels like- I'm good enough, but for someone else. I'll get a job, I will. Because I'm a hard worker, competent, and intelligent. I just...okay. I'll wait. I can keep waiting. You're right.

Whoever will hire me will be lucky to have me.

...I wish you wanted to be the lucky one. I must have bad taste, or something.

How is this a teaching tidbit (TTB)? Aren't TTBs on Fridays? It's Saturday today.

Because wanting a job that seems 'perfect' for me, well, it may not be. I don't have to learn why I'm fit for the job. I just have to learn to move on. To keep looking. Maybe it'll find me. Maybe it won't. Still, a couple bad experiences don't dictate every other experience I'll ever have.

There's still reason to hope.

I'm only two years into job hunting. The way I see it, I'm a sophomore in job hunting. So...two more years.

Yay.

----

I'm not going to pretend. I didn't read my Bible at all this week. Actually, no- I take that back. I read my Bible last Monday. I don't remember what I read though. Admittedly, I have been preoccupied, obviously meditating on thoughts I shouldn't entertain.

I guess that's another thing I have to learn. If I expect to do this every Saturday, I need to be prepared to do it. I have to prepare throughout the week. I need to plan better. Okay. I can do that. It's a new week tomorrow. I got this.

Tomorrow, too, you'll get your song [:

Hopeful

Apparently, this month is also not going to be a month of full of blogs. It's like, have you ever mentally answered a text but you never sent it? That's what my blog is like now. Gah.

what should have been yesterday (Friday):
A couple weeks ago I read Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption by Stephen King. A novella. Read it in a day. Loved it. Even if you've seen the 1994 movie, the main character, Andy Dufresne, is just as endearing. So you know that while he is imprisoned, Andy builds a library and from that, helps people earn their GEDs/high school equivalencies. Don't ask me when Andy said this, or to whom he said this, but he at one point talks about what makes or breaks a man- frankly, what it is that makes a person:

But it isn't just a piece of paper that makes a man. And it isn't just a prison that breaks one, either.

Even two years out of college, it's easy to still think of my success and failures in terms of percentages and letters. And, no, I've never been in prison, but if it's anything like what Brooks Hadley (from the movie) experienced, it's sad: a poor definition that limits him as a human being. Or, as Red would say, institutionalized.

What makes or breaks a person is not as easy to point out. To each his own weakness, but also to each his own strength, and unfortunately, the two are often intertwined making it harder to understand and know what we need to do in order to develop and improve.

If only I arrived the moment I graduated. If only he were completely torn down when he was imprisoned. But either way, that's not how it works. We read stories like the Shawshank because of the hope it gives. Hope that there is more to me than papers and stone.

Speaking of hope...

what is today (Saturday):
I decided I want to reread Nehemiah, one of my favorite books of the Bible. So much so that I want to name future daughter after him. Daughter, you ask? Uh, yeah! So I can call her Miah (MYa) for short! Anyway, anyway.

I only reread the first two chapters, which brought a question to my mind: Why does Nehemiah have to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem? No, no. I totally get what walls meant back then. I mean, have you seen the blue walls of Babylon?! The walls of a city are its pride- the first wave of protection. A city without walls is a vulnerable city, susceptible to any attack. No city wants that.

But still... Why Nehemiah? You're not even living in Jerusalem anymore. You're cup bearer to Artaxerxes, King of Persia. Why go back? Because it's where he belongs: it's still home.

But then I ask, why was it destroyed in the first place? If we believe in the same God that means Nehemiah and I both know that God allowed the walls to be destroyed. But why, God?

Nehemiah answers, ...even I and my father's house have sinner (7) We have acted very corruptly against you and have not kept the commandments, the statues, and the rules that you commanded your servant Moses.

From what I've read and studied so far, God's relationship with his chosen people is short-term conditional. Before the Messiah comes, they have to follow all those rules. (8) Remember the word that you commanded your servant Moses, saying, "If you are unfaithful, I will scatter you among the peoples- Nehemiah is cup bearer in Persia- far from home- (9) but if you return to me and keep my commandments and do them, though your outcasts are in the uttermost parts of heaven, from there I will gather them and bring them to the place I have chosen, to make my name dwell there. (emphasis mine)

Generally, God will act with or without his people, but I sense that he prefers to work with his people.

So, it looks as though, Nehemiah doesn't just rebuild the walls to restore safety and honor to his homeland and people, but also to restore his people's relationship with God. "God you promised this and have upheld your end. Now it's my turn to uphold my end of the promise."

Huh, that is a lot of pressure.

Bad Blogger

I didn't blog yesterday or Saturday. I'm so sorry. I wasn't busier than usual I just... How dare I?! On Saturday, I was four days away from an entire month of blog posts. Next month will have to be an entire month of blog posts straight. I'm sorry. So, I guess today will be a threefer. Yesterday was supposed to be a twofer. Ah, c'est la vie.

what was supposed to be Saturday:
I read all of Galatians that morning because I realized that I'd hardly touched the Bible all week. I've already gone through James 15 times this past month, I wanted to read another letter: Galatians seemed most appropriate. A lot of people read Galatians and are amazed at Paul's explanation of his transition from persecutor to humble servant. It's difficult not to notice that. Really, it's a running theme in all of Paul's works.

Now that I look at it, Galatians is like Paul's version of James'...James, but it has a different twist. Instead of Paul writing that faith without deeds is dead, Paul writes that works of the Law is like old skin, and faith is new. Way back when he was Saul, he worked the Law perfectly, but "For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse: for it is written, 'Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and go them.' Now it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law, for 'The righteous shall live by faith.' But the law is not faith, rather, 'The one who does them shall live by them.' Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us [what we commemorate every Good Friday]...'"

Like James, Paul doesn't suggest that one can be done or had without the other, but he emphasizes faith because all he had before was works. I guess after 'coming to faith' he had a greater reason to work.

what was supposed to be Sunday:
I didn't sing any hymns that I recognized in church. I also attended a new church and stepped out of my social boundary skills so that I could meet A LOT of new people. What?! But!- here's a song from Tenth Avenue North called Beloved. If you want to know what inspired Mike Donehey to write this song (on the first album) click here.


and today:
The following isn't the result of a writing challenge. I think I wrote this two years ago. (Two years?!)

"oh, shit!" she yelled. "oh, shit!" she yelled. "...oh, shit!" she yelled and that's all she would keep yelling if he wouldn't leave the room, and she wants him to leave the room. 'poisonous apparition', she thinks, 'hasn't he poisoned me enough?'
   "you are being dramatic."
   "oh, shit!"
   he clamped her mouth closed with his sweaty hand. "cease." he said. "desist."
   'oh, shit.' she thought.
   "whatever is the matter?"
   "i'd thought i'd lost you!" she mumbled into his hand. he didn't ask her to repeat herself; he'd felt every word and was sorry she was suddenly so afraid of him.
   "why did you think you lost me?"
   "well, i don't know, let's see. oh, now i know: because you left!" she punched his arm to no avail. "you left without saying goodbye! here you are without saying 'hello!' you left! no reason! no explanation! no note! no phone call every now and then! no facebook message! you left! at many points in your lostness i thought you'd died! you- you left! where's my goodbye? you owe me a goodbye."
   "goodbye."
   "i won't accept it."
   "why?"
   "because you didn't mean it! say it like you mean it!"
   he paused. he took in a deep breath. "goodbye."
   "goodbye to you too!" she crossed her arms and turned away from him.
   he stepped outside of the room, left through the front door closing it behind him. he then knocked three times and she answered.
   "hello," he said.
   "hello! where the hell did you go?"
   "i left."
   "to where, damnit?!" she threw a pillow at him, but the pillow left her hand too late and landed at his feet instead of hitting his face at the earlier projection she'd intended.
   "you won't believe me."
   she looked at him and stormed back into the room. he followed swiftly behind her. "i won’t believe you?" she picked up another pillow. "i won't believe you?" she sat down. "i won't believe him!" she yelled at the ceiling.
   "i've already established that."
   "me? the girl who lets you do whatever you want. me? the girl who's patched up your ripped pants and bleeding scabs every time without interrogation. me? the girl who's cried at least once a week, hoping you were all right. me? this girl won't understand?"
   he bit his lip. "only once a week?"
   she threw the other pillow at him and this time did not miss his face. "oh, shit," she murmured. "i can't believe you're alive." she fell onto her chair and pulled her knees up close to her chest. "you're alive."
   the man got off his own seat and knelt at the young woman's trembling side. "i am alive. i'm sorry you thought i was dead."
   "yes. yes, i did. i thought you were more than dead. i thought you were having fun without me!"
   the man smirked and laughed. "while my adventures away from you were exciting beyond comparison," she shot him a look. "although i'm sure yours are just as exciting—all my adventures have proven one thing."
   "what's that?"
   "that i miss you."
   the young woman perked up and smiled. "you had to go on stupid, crazy adventures to figure out that you'd miss me? you couldn't take a personal holiday like a normal person and miss me? communication included?"
   "me? a normal person? me? the boy who's manipulated kings into believing me their lost prince. me? the boy who's planted dandelions in the amazon and fed poisonous scones to british intelligence? me? a normal person taking a normal holiday to figure out the most natural and inspiring thing is that i miss you?"
she bit her lip. "you only missed me?"
   he kissed her gently and quickly on her mouth and loved the feel of her shy smile. "no," he said. "i more than missed you." he took her hand. "now, it's time to go to confession."
   "excuse me?"
   "yes! you've just kissed an apparently dead man and said 'shit' at least ten times!"
   "don't forget 'hell' and 'damnit'." she mumbled.
   "off to confessional! christians are not supposed to touch, let alone kiss, dead bodies; nor are christians supposed to curse."
   "yeah, well," she said pulling on her sweater. "you make me feel human."
   "and that is why i have missed you."
   "dante says there’s a special circle in hell for you."
   "and which circle is that?"
   the woman paused and laughed. "my heart."
   "you cliché little she-devil."
   "ah, apparently you missed the clichés, you brazen bard!"
   "i thought you were almost going to call me a bastard."
   "i've filled my daily curse quotient."

Psalm 139

Psalm 139.4-6 reads,

Even before a word is on my tongue,
behold, O LORD, you know it altogether.
    You hem me in, behind and before,
    and lay your hand upon me.
Such knowledge is too wonderful for me;
it is high: I cannot attain it. 

I don't generally have a problem with swearing. I think there can be an excessive and inappropriate use of it, but generally, swear words make me laugh more than cringe. No need to test me. Along with swear words, the phrase, "Oh, my God!" doesn't necessarily bother me either.

What does bother me are words said in vain. And I heard a lot of them. I say things in vain, too, don't get me wrong, but when I read these few verses in the 136th psalm: Even before a word is on my tongue, behold, O LORD, you know it altogether. See, most people don't know what I'm going to say next- it's always a surprise what they're reaction will be. Hell, I don't know what I'm going to say next sometimes, but how intimidating that God knows what I'm going to say next. Not just the 'bad stuff' I say, like swear words, I guess, but the empty promises I make. I may not even intend to be empty.

I've said things I regret, and to know that God knew them before I said it...not even, "God, why didn't you stop me from saying that?" but, "Why do I still say stuff like that?" or "Why do I think like that?" I wouldn't say it if I didn't already think it. For out of the mouth, the heart speaks.

Perhaps that's why the psalmist continues with, You hem me in, behind and before, and lay your hand upon me. It's all a part of my training. Though I may regret words I've spoken, or words that were spoken to me, that makes them no more or less valuable to the experience you've planned for me. You know how I am, what I say and do, who I'll befriend, what I like, what I dislike, and intend to use every part of me to become better (vs. 23).

I may ascend to heaven, or descend to the depths of Sheol (vs. 10) and you are still there.

I praise you for I am fearfully and wonderfully made.
Wonderful are your works;
my soul knows it very well. (vs. 14)

Now, for my head to know it, and my hands to practice it.

Onward.

Father of Great Lights and death

Psalm 136. 7-9 reads,

to him who made the great lights,   for his steadfast love endures forever;the sun to rule over the day,   for his steadfast love endures forever;the moon and the stars to rule over the night,   for his steadfast love endures forever

Then verse 10a reads,

to him who struck down the firstborn of Egypt...

Definitely never going to hear that in a hymn, am I right? The only deaths Christians like to talk about are death of sin, and Christ's death (we need to hear more about his Resurrection).

But that's what God did. He struck down the firstborn of Egypt, and the psalmist in 10b continues for his steadfast love endures forever. Because why shouldn't it? I could be wrong, but I don't think the psalmist rejoices in the death of hundreds or thousands of firstborns, I do think, however, (because he keeps repeating 'for his steadfast love endures forever') that he is rejoicing in God's steadfast love despite troubling circumstances. When the Hebrews were slaves to the Egyptians, God promised to save them, and he did in such unexpected, unrepeatable ways...

I'm not saying that I deny God's steadfast love, or for faithfulness to fulfill his promises, I just wonder at his methods. But then... Isaiah 55.8,

' "For my [God] thoughts are not your thoughts,
   neither are your ways my ways," declares the LORD. ' 

I don't know what comfort that should bring me, certainly not the kind of fluffy, cushioned comfort of feather beds, but comfort that I have a firm grasp on this mountain I'm trying to climb. Now, if only my legs would steady themselves.




If God will do anything to protect me, a Gentile, how much more so will he protect his Chosen People? Right? Am I walking into a trap, here?

People Pleaser

1 Corinthians 10.13 (ESV) reads,

No temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your ability, but with the temptation he will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it.

 Then 10.14 reads,

Therefore, my beloved, flee from idolatry.

 Because why should I endure temptation and have to escape it, if I can avoid it altogether.

I doubt that Paul here is saying we should live in little bubbles so that we never interact with all life, including the best it has to offer- I mean, have you seen (read?) Paul's life all the stuff he did, and all the stuff that happened to him?! Bitten by snakes; shipwrecked; stoned (ahaha). He didn't avoid life, he threw himself into it.

Now, I'm also not saying (nor is Paul saying) we should all want to be bitten by snakes, and shipwrecked, and stoned (haha), but why walk into a trap when there's already a huge warning sign that says,

"TRAP!"

That's probably why Paul goes on to say for Christians that when you go to someone's house and they offer you food, just eat it. Be kind for they were kind to you. But in the same way, if your host says, "This has been offered in sacrifice..." -wait, what would be the modern equivalent of that? So, if your host says, "This food was made my enslaved, poorly treated house elves," you probably shouldn't eat it.

Now, admittedly, I don't really understand what Paul is trying to say in 1 Corinthians 10.29,30. I should not partake of the food not because of my conscience but for my host's conscience? I don't know why I should be denounced because of that for which I give thanks, Paul, why are you asking? I have to go find a pastor for that.

Anyway, 1 Corinthians 10.31-33 finishes with,

So, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God. Give no offense to Jews or to the Greeks, or to the church of God, just as I try to please everyone in everything I do, not seeking my own advantage, but that of many, that they may be saved. 

I doubt that a man who was bitten by snakes, shipwrecked, (almost imprisoned multiple times), and stoned was a people pleaser like we know people pleasers today; so, I think when Paul writes that he tries to please everyone in everything I do, he's not colorblind; he's aware of customs and cultures different from his own. He's not going to pretend that the rest of the world is just like his world and for that I am thankful. We need a lot more people like that. He couldn't write 1 Corinthians, chapter 10 (or the rest of his letters for that matter) if he didn't practice what he preached, yeah? :P

So, even though I don't know whose conscience I should be worrying about (probably my own because I can't read anyone else's mind, or live anyone else's life), I should do all the glory of God. Everything. I should live blamelessly. Like Christ. Yeah. I can do that. Okay. I guess I have to get out of bed to do that.

Friendly Neighborhood Diagramming

First of two things: I diagrammed a sentence, Matthew 5.16 to be exact [: Wan'a see it?

I don't know that I put the word -that- in the right place, hence the floating question mark, but I figured the word -that- functioned the same as a conjunction (and, but, or). Although I guess technically -that- has an implied -so- so that is a conjunctive adverb... Right?




Second of two things: Who is my neighbor?

I am more familiar with the New Testament than with the Old Testament, I'm sure there are a bajillion reasons why that is, but for now, none of those will be expressly discussed. For now, I want to point something out.

Jeremiah 11.13,14 reads (originally formatted as poetry), "Woe to him who builds his house by unrighteousness, and his upper rooms bu injustice, who makes his neighbor serve him for nothing and does not give him his wages, (14) who says 'I will build myself a great house with spacious upper rooms.' who cuts out windows for it, paneling it with cedar and painting it with vermilion. ..." (ESV)

Now, there are hundreds of other references I could pull out that contain the word 'neighbor' (and that's just in the ESV) but I'll just reference the parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10.25-37; ESV) which follows the question and answer:

"What is the greatest commandment? What shall I do to inherit eternal life?" / "You shall love the Lord you God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind and your neighbor as yourself." / "And who is my neighbor?"

A man falls among robbers and is beaten to death. A priest, and a Levite walk by (men who are supposed to practice the greatest commandment), and a Samaritan (half blood/half caste) helps the man.

"Which of these three, do you think, proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell among robbers?" / "The one who showed him mercy."

 Therefore, woe to him...who makes his neighbor serve him for nothing... Neighbors aren't just next door, across the street, or in the same town- the parable does not say that the priest, the Levite, and the victim, and the Samaritan (who probably lived in Samaria anyway, a place the priest and the Levite would've otherwise avoided) lived near each other when they weren't traveling. The parable purposefully chooses four men who are traveling, likely to come across anyone: friend or stranger.

"And Jesus said to him, 'You go, and do likewise." 

Implant

Note: I hadn't intended for my Saturday Bible verses to have any more words than the selected Bible verse, but this time, I can't help it. I have to add my commentary.

----

This morning I decided to read James because we (in my Bible study) are about to start studying James. I've read James before; it's one of my favorite epistles, but with the blessing of rereading comes new insights. I barely got past James, chapter 1 before I found a new word I never before saw: IMPLANT. 

James 1.21, "Therefore, put away all filthiness and rampant wickedness and receive with meekness the implanted word, which is able to save your souls." 

What does implant mean? 

implant: to put or fix firmly; to insert or graft. 

I've heard the word 'graft' before, at least when it comes to trees: a branch is broken off (either purposefully or accidentally), and a new one, probably of a different type, is put in. It's bandaged tightly around, and if the original tree agrees with the new branch, it will accept it- it will be grafted in; implanted in. 

So, I wanted to know where exactly I'd read or heard the term 'grafted' in the Bible. Hello, Romans; Romans 11, to be specific.

So I ask, did they stumble in order that they (the Jews) might fall? By no means! Rather through their trespass salvation has come to the Gentiles, so as to make Israel jealous. Now if their trespass means riches for the world, and if their failure means riches for the Gentiles, how much more will their full inclusion be? ... For if their rejection means the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance mean but life from the dead? ... Then you will say, "Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in." That is true. They were broken off because of their unbelief, but you stand fast through faith**. So do not become proud, but fear. For if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will he spare you.

Apparently, during ancient Roman times to be adopted into a family (probably a wealthy one) was an honor. You were specifically chosen by that patriarch to be in that family- suffice to say you earned your way in. That's no small thing. To be selected to be part of a family is purposeful; born into it is something nearer chance, I guess.

When that of your own blood fails (this is a touchier subject than I let on) and the adopted one takes that person's place, I suppose the adopted one has every right to be proud, to consider himself special, lucky; blessed. And yet, when Paul writes Romans, and discusses the Gentiles being drafted into the Remnant of Israel he tells them to lower their egos. He tells them, "Don't think so well of yourself. You were adopted, yes, which is culturally significant, but you have to remember, you're still not the natural branches. You think you so easily graft into these trees? If you are torn off and replaced by the natural branches, how easily will one accept its own?" (Romans 11.22-24)

How does this go back to James? Well, if I have to put away all filthiness and rampant wickedness, how do I do that? By hearing and doing the word, apparently.

**The book of James is cited all the time when justifying words by action, even vice-versa. There's no question: walk what you preach.

So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. But someone will say, "You have faith and I have works." Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith by my works. ... For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also faith apart from works is dead. 

Oh.

1 + ? = 2 Ehehe, one cannot be without the other, not even in the slightest. Mathematically, if I want to get to 2 starting with the number 1, I'm going to need another 1.

"But there are people who aren't Christian who do good deeds." Yup, that's true, so how much more so should Christians do good deeds? Why are we throwing rocks at each other, at ourselves, instead of doing good deeds? Are you sure you're Christian?