Skip to content

Spam Town USA

July 3, 2007

…is where I am right now. That’s what the people of Austin, MN call themselves. This is the home of Hormel, the maker of Spam, and the people are proud of it. But I decided not to spend the day yesterday at the Spam museum.  Instead I had a good time in Psalm 136, Romans 12, and the book on baptism through which I, through a circuitous route, finally discovered the best understanding of the warning passages of Scripture.  Meditate on the non-contradiction between Acts 27:24 and Acts 27:31 until you hear the sound of one hand clapping.   If you don’t figure it out in the comments, maybe I’ll post on it tomorrow and explain why it relates to baptism.  Right now I gotta go.

5 Comments leave one →
  1. July 3, 2007 12:07 pm

    I grew up in Rochester, about an hour east of there.

  2. July 3, 2007 2:33 pm

    Is this one of those conditional “ifs”? Like Romans 8.13 – you don’t live because you put to death your sins, instead you put to death your sins because you have been given life? So in this case it’s not that the sailors will be safe only if they stay in the boat, it’s that they will stay in the boat because God has assured them of their safety. So for baptism, it isn’t that you need to be baptized in order to be saved, rather, it is because you are saved that you will be baptized. ?

  3. July 3, 2007 4:45 pm

    And by conditional “if” I think I really meant the unconditional kind of conditional if, or as John Owen put it, “there is a certain infallible connection and coherence” between the two things. :D Is there a good name for that sort of thing?

  4. Ebenezer permalink
    July 4, 2007 10:20 am

    Well, my thought (as wrong as it might be) is that the angel told Paul in vs. 24, “God has granted you all who *sail with* you.” In vs. 31, when Paul says that the men must stay in the ship, it seems that the implication is if they deshipped, they would no longer be sailing “with” Paul (being now out of the ship and in the sea; no longer identified “with” Paul) and the mercy of God in this situation wouldn’t extend to them.

    I also noticed that the angel said, “God has granted” (not He *will* grant)…which I’m sure is important. Although right now I’m not clear on why. But it might tie in to what Ellie said, “…they will stay in the boat because God assured them [through Paul] of their safety.” God already granted the safety of the men who stayed with Paul in the boat, which means that they WILL stay in the boat, which also means that God predestined (in a sense) the men in the boat, because if He already saved them, He already knew they would remain in the boat with Paul (if they got out, they would not be saved, but He already granted their safety, so they can’t/won’t jump ship). Does that make any sense? Am I completely off?

    Now, as to how this all relates to baptism…hmmm. If we are not baptized (i.e., associated with Christ’s death and resurrection thought the outward act of being baptized), the mercy of God does not extend to us, since we are not identified “with” Jesus? No, that can’t be right.

    Of course, if I got the first part of this quiz wrong, the whole baptism thing wouldn’t relate correctly, anyway. :)

  5. July 4, 2007 5:55 pm

    Ebenezer and Ellie,

    As you may have already noticed in today’s post, you got the first part of this quiz right. Well done.

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

%d bloggers like this: