Yeah, well no-one is perfect


GOD often seems to work with imperfect instruments.

Consider, for example, this biblical cast list: Noah was a drunk, Abraham was too old, Moses had a stutter, Gideon was afraid, Sampson was a womaniser, David had an affair and was a murderer, Isaiah preached naked, Jonah ran from God, Elijah was suicidal, John the Baptist ate bugs, Peter denied Christ, the disciples fell asleep while praying and Paul was a terrorist.

In the end, they changed by living outside the human expectations and inside the grace of God.

THEY were not imprisoned by their shortcomings, but dramatically transformed by faith. They knew they were most empowered when least encumbered.

Winston Churchill said the human story did not always unfold like a mathematical calculation on the principle that two and two make four. “Sometimes in life they make five or minus three; and sometimes the blackboard topples down in the middle of the sum and leaves the class in disorder and the pedagogue with a black eye.”

We only live once on this planet, but if we work it right, once is enough. We just have to realise that God often chooses the foolish things of the world to confuse the seemingly wise. The bottom line is that people are never perfect, but God’s love is.

If God really knows the numbers of the hairs of our head, then nothing can dim the light that shines within us, even if others can’t see it. Even if we sometimes can’t see it ourselves.


6 thoughts on “Yeah, well no-one is perfect

    • HI again Bryan,

      Rather appropriately perhaps in this blog dealing with imperfections, I’m bringing up an issue from the recent past. – another example of you pulling a swiftie on me. Several days ago, I offered an argument disputing your contention that the early and first Christian church was single and undivided.. You answered by describing my posting as merely ‘opinion’ and stated that I had offered no real evidence to prove my claim. Heck this is exactly the sort of treatment I got from Alexie and PG some months back.

      Well, I promptly spent some three hours that evening personally going through the pages of my Christian Testament and provided some thirty odd texts there from, that demonstrated very severe dissension among the earliest Christians, especially as soon as Paul joined in. These verses described false teachers and dissenters among the brethren, and the dissemination of the worst kind of heresies very quickly.

      And as well there was the intriguing example from the Gospels of a rival Christian practitioner who was commanded by the missionary disciples from casting out demons in Christ’s name, ‘because he was not one of us’. This was a clear case of a separate denomination, as we would see it in today’s world. Now even if the disagreements with Paul by the Jerusalem Christians were eventually ironed out as davinci described it, nonetheless it was a very serious dispute that rocked the church for a while.

      Now, I was disappointed to note that you made not a single attempt to answer or acknowledge what I had said there, after I had been deliberately reproached and put down by you. I consider this rather unfair, and possibly on the verge of dishonesty. Tell me, and I’ve observed a lot of it with postings of mine here, – are you Christians on this Blog – (and with the exception of Monica who I find is scrupulously honest) –are you just incapable of ever admitting that you have been wrong on some issue, or that the opposition can ever have been proven correct?

      Now, if you still want to protest your original claim about the early church, then kindly give a clear and accurate definition of what you MEAN by the early or first church that was so totally unified, and state further just how long it lasted.

      Cheers, Rian.


      • Show us the texts Rian and we’ll discuss it further.

        However I will make the comment on the Scriptural case you mentioned, about the guy that cast out demons without being part of the twelve apostles.

        The Bible indicates that in addition to the twelve Jesus sent out, He also ordained another 70 and sent them to preach the same message as the first twelve. It is entirely pssible that the two groups had not met so they might nothave been aware of each other’s group’s existence. Hence the oppositiion of the twelve to the members of the seventy. Secondly, if you look in the gospels you often find the apostles arguing with each other about who was to be the most eminent amongst them. These arguments and or disputes with the seventy did not constiute different denominations among the apostles. Jesus on one occasion told them not to argue amongst themselves. Furthermore the 70 were given an identical mission to the twelve. This does not constitute proof of Christian denominations amongst the disciples.
        Once again Rian you are being dishonest about what the scripture actually says.


      • Davinci,
        If you really want to consider the list of NT texts that I am referring to, then you can look back on Bryan’s blog of some fortnight back, which was titled No Denominations in Heaven. I posted there with some indications of my disagreement with Bryan’s thesis, and it got typically put down by our Moderator, describing my comments as just ‘opinion’, and they were supported by no ‘real evidence’ . Naturally I quickly answered, having spent about three hours that evening searching for supporting verses from the Christian Testament. I finished with over 30 quotes out of your inerrant Scripture, designed to give a very clear indication of ‘real evidence’.

        Now, you have come up with a neat explanation about just why the guy ‘casting out demons’ was actually on their side as it were. That is a clever rationalisation you offer, suggesting that the exorcist in question was actually one of the extra 70 who had been commissioned separately by Jesus to go out in his name. You have not proven that of course. It may or may not be true; and it must be observed that Jesus himself does not state that the chap was one of his other reps.

        I notice that I very carefully stated in my complete posting that ‘it reads like a plain description’ of a separate denomination. Think of it this way from the Reformation history. John Calvin was presumably inspired by God to found his theological system. So was John Wesley, and so was Martin Luther. (and loads of others). Not infrequently, despite each having been ‘inspired by God’ they argued with each other and occasionally came to blows over differences. Look how they violently and mutually set on the poor pious Anabaptists, murdering and torturing them most savagely. Just so, this other Exorcist mentioned in the Gospels MAY possibly have been separately commissioned by Jesus, but we cant be certain. Again, my cautious wording was ‘it reads like a plain description of a separate denomination.’ And just as in rival denominations today, the disciples complained that ‘He is not one of us’.
        I was largely amused to observe that you accused me there of being ‘dishonest’, and stating that I was being so AGAIN. I’m almost tempted to make an offer similar to that I tossed unsuccessfully at Brian the other day. In that I offered $1000 if he could prove one of his contentions against me. Just who is being dishonest? So, my dear fellow, please explain just where in this last 14 months have I been dishonest? I would point out that on two or three occasions I have found I was mistaken about something, and promptly acknowledged the fact. Anyway, now as well as being hypocritical, a false prophet, a wolf in sheep’s clothing, a nasty person and a closet or fake atheist etc, I’m now condemned as being dishonest. Wow!

        I must say, if you can excuse me being rather sarcastic here, that I really appreciate the kindly and gracious attitude you guys have so often delivered to me, so illustrative of the Christian capacity for hating the sin, while ‘loving the sinner’. I can only assume that I must be terribly dangerous in your opinion!

        Cheers, Rian.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s