What The World Needs Now is Love

or The Five Most Important Things


Over the years I have been contacted on a variety of topics related to this site. Some were pleasant, others not as much, but the overarching theme has been about "doctrine" or "the pursuit of knowledge". 

The thing most important to people seems to be, "what do you believe?" or "what do they believe?"  If one visits the website of most churches you will find a "statement of faith", or similar document, that spells out the doctrinal views of that particular church. In this way one can select a church that aligns with their own doctrinal perception, or views, and avoid as much internal or external conflict as possible. But one must ask, is doctrine or knowledge the most important thing when deciding on a church?  Is this the best way to find people who will "comfort each other and edify one another" as Paul, Silvanus and Timothy wrote to the Thessalonians?

Oftentimes our personal beliefs are just minor variations of a similar doctrinal concept believed by another, but viewed from a different perspective. Everything we see, taste, touch, perceive and believe, is  relative to us alone and no two persons will ever see things precisely alike. To remain congenial, we must sometimes agree to disagree. We must  be willing to accept one another, despite our differing views, knowing we too are not right one-hundred percent of the time. All we think and perceive is relative to us alone.  God did not intend for mankind to be made in a cookie cutter image.

Einstein conceived of the concept of relativity, in a technical sense, but this concept can carry over to other areas of life as well. One facet of relativity is that we each occupy our own space and no person can ever occupy that exact same space at the exact same time. All part of being human I suppose. As compared to being, say, a quark but quarks may have limits too, not sure, I'll need to ask Pauli that one.

When we view the world we see it from our own relative space and time and, while we may each view the exact same object or doctrine, we have no choice but to view it from a slightly different angle, or perspective, because that is the place relative to us alone. A slightly altered view, by every other person, is inevitable, no matter how close the ties.

If we fail to accept another person's view as being legitimate to them, the differences we perceive between us may become barriers to valid communication. That is not to say all things are true, simply that we are not able to view a concept, or a doctrine, through the eyes of another person. Their words, and our own, being imperfect, may not accurately portray what is actually in their or our heart. Additionally, sometimes things are just plain undefinable so we can only do the best we can to approach a logical explanation. 

Without pointing to a color chart, or a fruit, describe the color orange. Go ahead, do it now, I'll wait. 

Are you done? Was it tough? Great! Orange is not describable without pointing to something orange. But here's a thought, perhaps the color and hue of the orange you perceive looks entirely different than the perceived color and hue of another person. There is no objective test for this, and we'll never know because orange is undefinable in words. It is only defined by viewing that color with our eyes, not knowing if that color atually appears the same to another person's visual cortex. We know one of our other senses, taste, is perceived differently by another person's brain. Some love the taste of bananas, while others find the taste awful. Why could that concept not also translate to color?

Doctrines will perish. Knowledge will perish. All things we see, touch, hear and smell will perish. None of these points of knowledge we cling to have much importance in the eternal, and can actually lead us astray from the five most important things if we cling to them too tightly. Learning is great, I love learning, but when it supplants common decency, tolerance and love we run the risk of  creating divisions, and may even lose our way completely. As Paul wrote to the Corinthians:

If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. If I give away all I have, and if I deliver up my body to be burned, but have not love, I gain nothing.

To the Ephesians he wrote, almost in the form of a prayer:

For this reason I kneel before the Father,  from whom every family in heaven and on earth derives its name. I pray that out of his glorious riches he may strengthen you with power through his Spirit in your inner being, so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith. And I pray that you, being rooted and established in love, may have power, together with all the Lord’s holy people, to grasp how wide and long and high and deep is the love of Christ, and to know this love that surpasses knowledge—that you may be filled to the measure of all the fullness of God.

That bears repeating. "this love that surpasses knowledge".

Jesus said to the Pharisees of his day:

Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cumin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness

There are five most important, or weightier things, and these are the first three in that list; justice, mercy and faithfulness. These are likely derived from the writings of Micah:

"With what shall I come before the Lord,and bow myself before God on high? Shall I come before him with burnt offerings, with calves a year old? Will the Lord be pleased with thousands of rams, with ten thousands of rivers of oil? Shall I give my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?” He has told you, O man, what is good;and what does the Lord require of you
but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?"

That is truly not a question in Micah. It is a statement. "...to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God." These are the first three of the five most important things. Seeking knowledge does not make the list at all. This is wisdom which, like the color orange, cannot be defined with word and must be embraced, not learned.

Who among you claims to be wise and intelligent? Let him show that his actions are the outcome of a good life lived in the humility of true wisdom.

In the ABC we sang these words from Micah 8, yet when I began speaking this message, that the adamant pursuit of a "perfect knowledge" was  creating a lack of peace and love, I found my words  rejected. I found persons would look at me askew, as though I had said something foreign. Eventually I was pushed away entirely. 

God is intangible. Doctrines and knowledge can feel tangible to us, so they are seemingly more comfortable to embrace than wisdom. Believing in an intangible God can feel uncomfortable since we have nothing to grasp and hold onto. We instead attempt to hold onto tangible doctrines in our mind, falsely believing an expanding, or deepening, of our knowledge will gain us a better righteousness. It does not. It only builds knowledge which can decay humility. Solomon fell deep into this trap.

In the armor of God, the breastplate of righteousness is not the pursuit of knowledge, it is faith and love. 

But let us who are of the day be sober, putting on the breastplate of faith and love, and as a helmet the hope of salvation

Even that piece of armor which protects the mind, the helmet, is not the pursuit of knowledge, it is a hope we will achieve a better end. Hope is another one of those intangibles derived from faith and love alone. These three things; faith, hope and charity; are inseparable and indestructible. Everything else will be destroyed, including our adamant doctrines, but not these three.

To put it bluntly, seeking to "deepen our knowledge" is not part of the Fruit of the Spirit. Seeking to "deepen our knowledge" only results in party arguments, divisions and the like. These are works of the flesh. True faith is the accepting of those things we cannot "pin down", those things we cannot fully see or prove, the acknowledging that perhaps quarks really do exist in creation, even though we will never see, smell taste or touch one. It is the acceptance that a God invisible to us is much more vast than we can ever possibly understand. This requires wisdom to comprehend, not knowledge. Moses wanted God to be strictly defined, but God simply said back "I am". That's the best we get too. The rest we just take on faith and hope.

Justice, kindness (mercy) and to "walk humbly"(faithfulness) are the first of the three most important things. But, what does it mean to be "humble"? Jesus summed that up well in a parable.

To some who were confident of their own righteousness and looked down on everyone else, Jesus told this parable:  “Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector.  The Pharisee stood by himself and prayed: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other people—robbers, evildoers, adulterers—or even like this tax collector.  I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.’ “But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, ‘God, have mercy on me, a sinner.’ “I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For all those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.”

We are all in the same boat. I am just as guilty, in the past, of feeling that to please God I must fill up my phylactery with knowledge. I had an epiphany one day, if there is really such as thing as an epiphany, and began to teach there is no test of knowledge at the judgement seat. Knowledge, doctrine, understanding, all of these things, unlike faith, hope and love, will pass away and be burned. An endless pursuit of knowledge must take a back seat to the five most important things. I will disclose that fourth and fifth important thing in a moment.

If we read the second chapter of Colossians we see this same pattern fulfilled:

I want you to know how hard I am contending for you and for those at Laodicea, and for all who have not met me personally.  My goal is that they may be encouraged in heart and united in love, so that they may have the full riches of complete understanding, in order that they may know the mystery of God, namely, Christ,  in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.  I tell you this so that no one may deceive you by fine-sounding arguments.  For though I am absent from you in body, I am present with you in spirit and delight to see how disciplined you are and how firm your faith in Christ is.

So then, just as you received Christ Jesus as Lord, continue to live your lives in him, rooted and built up in him, strengthened in the faith as you were taught, and overflowing with thankfulness.

See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ.

For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, and in Christ you have been brought to fullness. He is the head over every power and authority. In him you were also circumcised with a circumcision not performed by human hands. Your whole self ruled by the flesh was put off when you were circumcised by Christ, having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through your faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead.

When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness, which stood against us and condemned us; he has taken it away, nailing it to the cross. And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross.

Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ. Do not let anyone who delights in false humility and the worship of angels disqualify you. Such a person also goes into great detail about what they have seen; they are puffed up with idle notions by their unspiritual mind. They have lost connection with the head, from whom the whole body, supported and held together by its ligaments and sinews, grows as God causes it to grow.

Since you died with Christ to the elemental spiritual forces of this world, why, as though you still belonged to the world, do you submit to its rules: “Do not handle! Do not taste! Do not touch!”? These rules, which have to do with things that are all destined to perish with use, are based on merely human commands and teachings. Such regulations indeed have an appearance of wisdom, with their self-imposed worship, their false humility and their harsh treatment of the body, but they lack any value in restraining sensual indulgence.

I've never traveled to this area of the world and, lacking a time machine, cannot travel back in time to determine exactly how the Colossians were getting off track, but there are clues. One need not be too specific about this though because this is, after all, a letter written specifically to these people, at that time, and in that place. We are now simply privy to its content and can extract what we can use for our own benefit, even if that is imperfect. That which is perfect has not yet come so we must graciously accept imperfection because that is all we have. We can't read these letters and "find then a law" in them with which we can afflict ourselves or others. It isn't said much plainer than in the letter to the Corinthians, right after it speaks of love;

For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.

The section of the letter to the Colossians I referenced earlier, is used by the ABC to prove the need for baptism and circumcision of the heart. These are important matters that need understanding, but there is much more written in this letter which holds lasting importance to us  that has not been given it's due.

In the ABC we spoke often of the command to be baptized, then ignored the rest written here about the frivolity of the excess seeking of knowledge, self-imposed worship standards, false humility and the harsh treatment of others. We focused on instituting a specific pattern of worship, appearing to be humble but then, with a pride of purpose, looked down on those we felt less than ourselves. We felt this was righteousness. The flesh loves this because the flesh loves to feel superior. Or as Paul and Timothy wrote to the Philippians:

Let nothing be done through selfish ambition or conceit, but in lowliness of mind let each esteem others better than himself.

We should not let anyone who is falsely humble disqualify us from seeking God. They can't disqualify us, they can  only muddy the waters a bit. On the flip side, when we each consider any other person better than ourselves we will always meet them in the middle.

When Jesus was put to the test about what was the most important thing, this is how he responded, per Mark:

And one of the scribes came up and heard them disputing with one another, and seeing that he answered them well, asked him, “Which commandment is the most important of all?” Jesus answered, “The most important is, ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’ The second is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.”  And the scribe said to him, “You are right, Teacher. You have truly said that he is one, and there is no other besides him.  And to love him with all the heart and with all the understanding and with all the strength, and to love one's neighbor as oneself, is much more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices.”  And when Jesus saw that he answered wisely, he said to him, You are not far from the kingdom of God.” And after that no one dared to ask him any more questions.

Matthew gives a similar account:

But when the Pharisees heard that he had silenced the Sadducees, they gathered together.  And one of them, a lawyer, asked him a question to test him.  “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?”  And he said to him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.  This is the great and first commandment.  And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself.  On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.” 

Luke defines this even further:

And behold, a lawyer stood up to put him to the test, saying, “Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?”  He said to him, “What is written in the Law? How do you read it?”  And he answered, “You shall love the Lord your 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 he said to him, “You have answered correctly; do this, and you will live.” But he, desiring to justify himself, said to Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?”  Jesus replied, “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers, who stripped him and beat him and departed, leaving him half dead.  Now by chance a priest was going down that road, and when he saw him he passed by on the other side.  So likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan, as he journeyed, came to where he was, and when he saw him, he had compassion. He went to him and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he set him on his own animal and brought him to an inn and took care of him.  And the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper, saying, ‘Take care of him, and whatever more you spend, I will repay you when I come back.’ Which of these three, do you think, proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell among the robbers?” He said, “The one who showed him mercy.” And Jesus said to him, “You go, and do likewise.” 

I could belabor these points further but, like the color orange, a picture is worth a thousand words. Below are the five most important things written on a chalkboard. In the Old Covenant there are three and in the New Covenant there are just two. These two, extracted from the previous three, can then be boiled down to just one; love. There is a simplicity, not a complexity, in Christ...always! The Old Covenant was not destroyed, it was memorialized in it's place and we have now been freed of it's burdens. We now no longer have a set of rules that bind. Here is that picture:


All of these five things can be encapsulated into the one greatest command: Love.

Love suffers long and is kind

Love does not envy

Love does not parade itself, is not puffed up;

Love does not behave rudely, 

Love does not seek its own, is not provoked,

Love thinks no evil; 

Love does not rejoice in iniquity, but rejoices in the truth; 

Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.

Love never fails. 

But whether there are prophecies, they will fail; whether there are tongues, they will cease; whether there is knowledge, it will vanish away.  For we know in part and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect has come, then that which is in part will be done away.When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things. For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall know just as I also am known. And now abide faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love.

From the letter to the Corinthians

Paul also wrote to the Corinthians: 

Now concerning things offered to idols: We know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffs up, but love edifies. And if anyone thinks that he knows anything, he knows nothing yet as he ought to know. But if anyone loves God, this one is known by Him.

Paul wrote here about a situation of eating food that had been offered to idols, but he could easily have been addressing a thousand other matters as well. The underlying issue is simply this. Knowledge is not one of the five most important things and it never will be. Knowledge puffs up, knowledge can kill, knowledge is not eternal, knowledge will burn. When we talk of "pinning it down", "diving deeper into the word", or "finding a fuller or better understanding of a scripture or a word meaning", or even the entire Bible itself, this is wood, hay and stubble, not gold, silver and precious stones. In the end, these phylacteries of knowledge we fill in our heads will burn and they provide us no hope of salvation. No one is better than another and these constructs we build of rules, regulations, doctrines, positions, worship orders and the like, are simply not that important. 

But the wisdom that comes from heaven is first of all pure; then peace-loving, considerate, submissive, full of mercy and good fruit, impartial and sincere.  

Blessed are those who find wisdom



The Pentecostal movement; considered to have begun at Azusa Street in Los Angeles but likely had much earlier roots; has been the subject of many research studies due to it's unique beginnings. Below is an excerpt from one such study completed by
David Daniel Kentie in partial fulfillment of his requirements for the degree of Master of Theological Studies at Tyndale Seminary. I don't personally know this individual, but I found his piece very interesting and worth a read.

Kentie titled his thesis "Kingdom Now: A Pentecostal Paradigm of Mission". It's a bit of a heady piece, as every thesis is, but he makes some very good points regarding "literalism" in his writings.  His thesis revolves primarily around those who adhere to "Classical Dispensationalism". Some Pentecostal adherents focus heavily on different dispensations of time, with a heavy emphasis on the end times and rapture. While the ABC does not perfectly fit this model, despite their heavy emphasis on the end times, they do share in many of the doctrines born out of the Pentecostal Movement and Latter Rain Revival movement that followed.

A true "Classical Dispensationalist" believes in the rapture, whereas the ABC teaches "believers" will be taken away for a time "into the wilderness" and will then return to meet Christ in the air, after the tribulation is over. As with all end times teachings, these outlooks are somewhat fluid and have changed over the years. A review of the ABC website shows they currently believe what could only be termed the "anti-rapture", where the  evil are scooped off the earth instead and the righteous remain behind.  A peek through the entire site shows an established doctrine heavy on dispensationalism but, to be fair, the scriptures themselves delineate different periods of dispensational history.

For the purpose of this post, I am strictly focusing on "literalism", not on the end times doctrines espoused by the ABC, or that of "Classical Dispensationalists". From my own perspective Revelation, and the other associated texts, are nebulous at best so I hesitate to make any prophecy or prediction on when the end of mankind will be.  Some who came before me have made various predictions, which then became a moving target as dates passed. The dates left unfulfilled were of necessity pushed forward to another target date. 

For ease of reading I have removed some of the more scholarly segments of text. If one wants to read the entire thesis, without edit, it can be found here: Kingdom Now A Pentecostal Paradigm of Mission The excerpt below is from Chapter 3, Section 2, Subsection 2. 

This strict biblical literalism is the result of an extremely high view of Scripture...They observe Scripture as firmly inerrant, and historically have behaved militantly towards those who oppose their...perspective.129  ...all Scripture, including prophecy, is to be interpreted as plainly written. There is no room for allegory or metaphor.130 Those who oppose this high view of Scripture are often deemed “willfully blind to the plain teaching of the Word of God, and thus apostate.”131  Most perplexing about the extremism present within th(is) brand of biblical literalism is the utter disregard for linguistic context. For instance...Thomas Holdcroft argues that the “words of the Bible should be taken to mean just what the same words would mean in any normal context.”133 A glaring problem presents itself here: what defines the “normal context” of meaning? In terms of Scripture, the words that we receive in English are, in fact, interpretations of more ancient languages, influenced and shaped by those respective cultures and time periods. There is no normal context of meaning that remains constant across a millennia of cultural transition. This is not to say that no Scripture can ever truly be grasped. Certainly one can receive impressions, general concepts, and rudimentary instructions through Scripture, but there is apparent assumption...that they have the “true” and normal interpretation, even when it defies basic historical...principals of contextualization. In other words, (one) cannot come objectively to the text and declare their interpretation of Scripture as the normal and definitive interpretation being themselves products of contextual influence.

129 Thompson, Kingdom Come, 26.130 Bass, Backgrounds to Dispensationalism, 22.
131 Thompson, Kingdom Come, 27.
132 Bass, Backgrounds to Dispensationalism, 22.
133 L. Thomas Holdcroft, Eschatology: A Futurist View (Abbotsford: CeeTec Publishing, 2001), 50.


One of the difficulties with literalism is filling in the gaps that occur when we don't have enough information. It is not possible to put pen to paper and tell an entire story so we, as human, tend to paint the rest of the picture in our mind based on our own perspective. This diversity is how God created us, we need to respect that diversity and we must be humble in our understanding of all things. This is where true "reasoning together" plays a role. 

There will always be gaps. When we read a novel, the author hopes the reader can fill in those gaps from the slight nuances in the tone of the character. The scriptures are no different. When we read scripture, we must interpret the meaning best we can, based on the information provided, knowing the information at hand is quite incomplete. We then fill in the gaps with conjecture and reasoning. 

Per ABC teaching, put forward by Gilbert Larson, the earth was created in six human day lengths, with one human day of rest directly after. Thus we have a seven day week but this was not always so. The seven day week was a Babylonish invention in about 700 BCE based on the phases of the moon. The rest of all earth eternity began on the eighth day per the most common Christian teaching. But this is the story of the creation of Earth, not the universe. Prior to the moon and the sun, there was no earth time, just infinity and cosmic motion.

By the time we get to the "end of days" story, Gilbert Larson now teaches each one of God's days are equivalent to one-thousand human years. Creation, per ABC teaching, is based on human days but Revelation is now based on God's days. If God does not change, how then do we go from human days in Genesis to one thousand years per day  in Revelation? Why do we even try to restrict God to human days?  Certainly the geologic and cosmic evidence around us does not point to earth being created in just six human days. We have physical evidence of eons of chaos during the formation of the earth. Time is irrelevant to a God that is infinite, is it not?

When we view Genesis with literalism, based on very incomplete text, we  put God in a box bounded by human time. Time is a construct that helps us manage our days, but God is not restricted by this measurement of time. Every day we witness sunup, sundown but when we  move beyond the bounds of earth there is no sunup and sundown. Just blackness and pinpoints of light on into infinity. God does not see the universe through human eyes, only we do.

We read in Genesis, Adam and Eve were created then had two children, Cain and Abel. If I were to read this in a strictly literal sense, there are now just four people living on earth; Adam, Eve, Cain and Abel. However, when Cain impregnates his wife... 

Wait, Cain had a wife? Where did she come from?  How could Cain find a wife if there was only one female and three males living on earth at this time?  Well, I'll figure that out later. Back to the story. 

Cain's wife gives birth to Enoch in Ge. 4:17, while Cain is away building an entire city to be inhabited by whom? And who were his laborers that helped him build this entire city? At a time when Genesis tells us there were four people on earth. There is a huge gap of time, and knowledge, here in Genesis and the writer, assumed to be Moses, leaves it to us to fill in the blanks best we can. It is likely there was other assumed knowledge during this era, passed down verbally, so the writer just left that part out. 

The scriptures are a great resource handed down for many many centuries, but it is incomplete knowledge. I have heard the position that God intervened and assured the translation between languages was translated perfectly. I find no evidence to support this and , in fact,  languages were developed by God, per scripture, to keep us from communicating perfectly. Languages were intended to create a bit of mayhem so we couldn't try to reach into the heavens again. And even if it were translated perfectly, and literally, we all see the world slightly different in our brain and don't read things alike.

Some time back I purchased a tool made in China. On the outside of the box someone, in China apparently, translated literal Chinese into literal English:.  

What's Cheaper Than It is no as Good as it, what's Better Than It is not as Cheap as it  

I think they were trying to say "this is a good tool at a good price", but if I read that literally it says to me "this is cheap so it's not as good, if you wanted something good it's going to cost you" The tool was cheap and it was a worthless piece of junk.

When you read this text, you may read into it something entirely different than I do. I have no doubt that string of words in Chinese makes perfect sense and they are all correctly spelled English words, but since they are formatted incorrectly for the English speaking mind, they have completely lost their meaning. The ABC has many books which translate Greek to English, assumed perfectly, but these books do not interpret the syntax and flow of the words in sentences so they can never perfectly relate the mind of the author. What seems a perfect translation to us may not be if one has only defined individual words and not the actual concepts being related.

We are all diverse creatures and all have differing perspectives. Per scripture there was once only one language, but God intentionally broke up the languages so we would have difficulty communicating with each other. The goal was to prevent mankind from building a tower to heaven. I doubt the tower of Babel was high enough to actually reach into the heavens so, again, we are left to assume part of the story. This was obviously more than just trying to build a skyscraper. The world has plenty of those now, despite the language barriers, and God has not stopped them from being built. 

Even if we perfectly interpret words in other languages, we still have that huge barrier of cultural definition, syntax, metaphor, analogy and more to overcome. I, in the Northwest of the United States speak English in a much different way than someone speaking English in Boston Massachusetts, Atlanta Georgia or Gloucester Maine. We can communicate, but we have entirely different vernaculars based on our varied locale and culture so we will never communicate perfectly. 

If I were to take a literal view of Revelation there would be painted horses, dragons and mythical beasts roaming the earth at some point. We accept these things in Revelation as figurative, then fail to see other things in the scriptures are also analogous, figurative or metaphoric. From my view, the creation story may be translated figuratively as well, not simply historic. Days perhaps represent large segments of time, rather than a twenty-four hour human day. No one really knows. The story is compressed, into very few words, and is more of an outline than an actual story. There are huge gaps in the timeline, so not a great deal can be taken fully literally.

The ABC, and others who adopt a mostly literalist view of the scriptures, may be missing the cultural and language nuances that go beyond word definition or context. This can affect the true interpretation of the writing and there may have been errors in translation between languages as well. To be literalist is to be adamant, but we lack enough information to be adamant about anything. Below is a list of synonyms for adamancy. Do these terms speak "fruit of the Spirit" or do they say "work of the flesh"? You decide.  

And now for just a little fun with language.  Imagine yourself a non-native speaker as you read this below. I wrote this back in 2008.


Plain speaking has always begged the question; Why must cliché’s wreak havoc on our language? Take it from me, the cliché is no longer what it’s cracked up to be and has simply become old hat. It’s high time we all step up to the plate and put the whole cliché kit and caboodle behind us…now! Trust me on this, if we don’t change, we are all going to pay the piper for the cliché’s overuse.

Most cliché’s are threadbare from overuse anyhow. They do nobody a world of good in getting any single point across. They, plain and simply, have been worked to death. Nearly all fly in the face of reason. I pity the poor soul who speaks a language other than our own and tries to follow these types of thoughts from start to finish. They are often forced to take a powder when those around take umbrage at their being a stickler for the rules of language, then read them the riot act when they don’t understand. What gives with that?

Now mind you, the use of cliché’s is no skin off my nose personally but, in the grand scheme of things, are we not creating a no-win situation when we overuse cliché’s? To put it even more simply; plain speaking grinds to a halt when we interject clichés that ride roughshod over reason. I propose we bring down the curtain on cliché’s, let them rest in peace once and for all. It really is high time we go back to the drawing board and start from scratch on this one.

I have plans to review my own cliché habits with a fine tooth comb and eliminate these pesky devils from my own speech. I think I am well on my way already. Once I am fully successful, the population at large will be able to follow my train of thought in one fell swoop. I’ll find no  more need to explain my ridiculous cliché’s which have been gumming up the works. Undoubtedly my speaking in public will grind to a halt, at first, while I rethink my choice of words, but with fast and furious thought I will simply put my best foot forward and now speak plainly. Yes, from here on in I am putting my foot down on clichés, putting my money where my mouth is, putting my shoulder to the wheel, my nose to the grindstone and ridding myself, once and for all, of the offending cliché.

Oh mind you, I expect my position will not be popular at first. As every schoolboy knows, cliché’s ring hollow and mean not what they say. With all due respect, they have left our language in a shambles. Please forgive me if I sound like I am beating a dead horse but, after all, it is the squeaky wheel that gets the grease. As I stated before, cliché’s are a tough row to hoe for the non-native. To them we sound as if we speak nonsense already. When we begin to use cliché’s they  likely think we have bats in our belfry. At the minimum, they probably think we have heads full of rocks. Sure, it seems simple for us, the native speaker, but it is they, the nonnative speaker, who bears the brunt of interpretation. We may even go full circle in explaining our cliché, but they will still think our brains are on the fritz. I propose from here on out we make sure we have both feet firmly planted on the ground and speak only plainly, without the use of cliché’. Even if our words end up sounding as dull as dishwater, we will have been polite and hit the nail on the head, whenever we speak. It should really be our mission to no longer muddy the waters with our ridiculous cliché’s.

Like it or lump it, the cliché death knell is now tolling. It is just a matter of time and we will be off and running; forging ahead in a new direction of plain speaking. You can mark my words on that. I see a new day dawning for all of us. There is a light at the end of the tunnel. Speaking plain and succinct will be our trump card, our ace in the hole if you will. Finally, the cliché will no longer be our own worst enemy. In the long run, as we change our speech patterns, these clichés will no longer be on the tip of our tongue, waiting to spring the trap on unsuspecting foreigners. It is truly in our own best interest to go whole hog in this new direction…right now! You can bet your bottom dollar the non-native will be eternally grateful, to all of us, when we finally initiate this change. No longer will they think of ways to give us a dose of our own medicine or lead us down the garden path too! It will be a brave new world I tell you.

By now a few are thinking my ideas are not worth a plug nickel. Some perhaps even feel I can’t see beyond the nose on my face and are just trying to make the fur fly. There are probably even those that think I am trying to take all of us to hell in a hand-basket with my crazy ideas. Others will even draw a line in the sand, insist language has always played fast and loose. They'll ask who am I to go off half-cocked, sowing my apples of discord. But let me bend your ear just a minute longer on this subject. I am normally a man of few words, and I may sound like a stuffed shirt right now, but cliché’s simply are meant to string the other person along , while saying absolutely nothing of value. I am not alone in my hue and cry. I am quite certain Noah Webster was a man cut from the same cloth as I. Over the years I have grown to respect Noah and his letter perfect dictionary. This is a man who knew which side his bread was buttered on. I hold forth he is probably spinning in his grave right now the way the cliché has taken our language by storm. Why, if he were alive today he would take up the cudgels and knuckle down to the task of eliminating cliché’s from our speech and writings. Regardless of how much we huff and puff; we would find it impossible to take the wind out of his sails. There would be no resting on our laurels in his company. He was no slouch when it came to the jot and tittle of language perfected. To go against his grain would be to meet your Waterloo and, in no uncertain terms, you would be toast! Don’t even go there!

Let me put in one last parting shot about the use of cliché’s. Perhaps, since I brought it up, I should be the one to pave the way for this change. Perhaps I should dish up a serving of humble pie for myself. After all, I am probably guilty in perhaps some small way of using cliché’s. So, as of right now, I pledge that soon you will see neither hide nor hair of cliché in my speech or writings. I, in fact, entertain high hopes for all of us that we can bear this burden together, in the heat of the day, and once and for all lay the cliché to rest. And I don’t mean maybe. We are all in the same boat here. If we do an about face now, take this slow, and not bite off more than we can chew, I know we can change. I tell you, it will be a grand and glorious day when our dear foreign friends no longer need to beat a retreat at our mixed-up words. Are we up to the challenge? Can we run the gauntlet and run these clichés to ground? Let the chips fall where they may. We can’t let this opportunity slip through our fingers. The time is now to get the show on the road, rout out the cliché from every nook and cranny of our speech and writing. We need no longer let the rest of society lead us by the nose. I urge you to return with me to the fold of cliché free speech. It will be a red letter day for all of us if we can get our act together, this very minute. Let's get on the ball and finally nail this puppy to the wall. Then we can all shout in unison. “Way to go!” 

©May 9, 2008, Scott J Haas


I assure you, a non-native speaker, with one hundred dictionaries and thesauruses at hand, could never decipher this mishmash of clichés through interpretation of each individual word. Culture and nuance count.