We now have chairs -- lots of chairs. However, we still don't have any song books.
There are some other needs, but I'll raise one for your prayer support: a newer laptop. Here's my feeble justification. My handwriting stinks; I often can't read my own. Yet I must study and write, in keeping with my calling. Had there not been a printer attached to that first 386 computer I got, I'd never have gotten it. A typewriter wouldn't do, since I need to make frequent corrections, and wanted to save my stuff for future edits, etc. My large desktop system works well enough, but I have to keep it in the living room. We have plenty of visitors and traffic... and noise. I don't get as much use of it as I like, because I can't concentrate when anyone other than my dear wife is here with me (something like ADD). And, as someone already noted, I need to ditch this big CRT in favor of an LCD because the sub-audible noise from a CRT will aggravate my condition.
For the price of a new LCD monitor, I could as easily get a better laptop. I'd be glad to exchange my big workhorse for a good laptop. My old Gateway Solo 2500 sports a mere 266Mhz CPU, and all of 160MB RAM. For Linux, I'm limited to the commandline. I can do that, but there are webpages which simply will not work from the console. There's no Linux GUI which runs on that, so I'm using Win2K. Yuck; I hate Windows. Nothing else will work with that ancient hardware. It's terribly slow, particularly when you include the necessary AV and anti-spyware packages. Laptops are supposed to be convenient; this one has only the advantage of mobility. So when the apartment gets noisy, I take the old toy laptop upstairs and do my work there.
Here's my prayer request: I believe I could run Linux with a GUI on something starting around 700Mhz, and perhaps 256MB RAM or better. I already have working peripherals for wireless, ethernet and phone modem, but it would be dandy if I had one with those built-in and Linux compatible.
I'm cheap, because I'm not looking for a toy, but a tool for Kingdom service. It's not about streaming the latest YouTube videos, pirating copyrighted works, hacking code, or playing games. It's about studying the Word and writing. Having it in a mobile package means taking it with me to places like the library, or having it handy when I go to help folks (mostly seniors) with their troubled computers. Unlike a certain disgraced big-shot Evangelical preacher, we aren't plugging for a major wad of cash to fund an extravagant lifestyle. This is not a direct appeal to my readers for anything except your prayers.
Friday, August 31, 2007
Thursday, August 30, 2007
Revelation 7
Jesus taught us to deny the flesh, to sacrifice it on His Cross. Paul warned the flesh would hinder spiritual growth. We learn thus the sufferings of this world are of no significance in the Kingdom. Pain, sorrow, loss of property and the loss of life itself are but circumstances in the Kingdom of Heaven, and we are called to bear them with grace. Losing all in that sense means being set free. However, there are times when it serves the Kingdom purpose to prosper us in the flesh, as well. We should hold worldly things lightly, never to be held by them. They are mere tools of service, not holy in themselves, and certainly not our gods. John left us at the end of the last chapter with the question: "Who is able to stand?" The answer is Christ, and those who are His. We are able to stand all the horrendous judgments of God's wrath because it affects only the flesh, which hardly matters to us.
We now see a vision of the spirits of the Four Winds, holding back destruction until the Saints are marked as such. There is a number given, wholly symbolic in meaning. While the number 12 typically means the Kingdom on earth, squaring it intensifies the concept: the thing in its totality. Multiples of ten adds the symbol of its source being the whole of humanity. That the list of Tribes cannot be taken literally is noted in the absence of Dan -- the premier symbol of idolatry and spiritual failure. The name of Ephraim, who led the way in chaining the Northern Tribes to idolatry and rebellion, is replaced with Joseph. Levi is included, who had no inheritance in the Land of Canaan. At any rate, most of the literal Tribes were lost altogether. Rather, this is but a symbol of the New Testament Israel: the followers of Christ. The act of sealing them is to mark them as God's special possession. The point here is John makes it clear in the midst of trials and tribulations, we dare not lose focus on what really matters. He is our God, and we are His people. He knows our number and our names, individually and intimately. Nothing in Heaven and earth can change that.
The next vision is the same image from a different perspective. While the first offers a symbolic number announced from Heaven, the second is not numbered, nor is John able to estimate, nor could anyone else. God knows, but He's not telling, except in the symbolic sense above. We find this multitude celebrating their election, giving all glory and honor to their God. Heaven itself cannot help but join the celebration. When John is asked who they are, he has no answer. He is told these have passed through "the great tribulation." Getting lost in making this some literal event misses the most important point: God's people will tribulate. That is, inherent in serving God is tribulation. Just shedding the weakness of the flesh requires a mountain of grief, for only by passing through the fire of testing can we be refined. This massive multitude gains their purity and identity by having passed through such testing. To the churches on Western Asia of that day, this reaffirms Rome's persecution as the ultimate mark of God's favor. While such attention would be death, the ultimate end of all things for sinners, it is life and hope for Christians.
This is the whole point behind the Apocalypse -- giving hope and strength to believers under the Roman lash. John is telling them not to get wrapped up in this world and its sorrows, but to see their privileged status as those who dwell spiritually in the Courts of God. What they stand to lose here is abundantly replaced with eternal promises. This pulls the churches into a wholly other-worldly viewpoint. Yes, we weep at the loss because it hurts, but we dare not let such loss make us think Our God does not love us. Indeed, He loves us enough to break us from our reliance upon the things of this world for any comfort. We ought instead to be glad we are rid of such concerns. This is what John's Revelation is all about, what it meant to his flock. Any attempt to draw from this book a weight of concern about events on this earth does violence to the text.
How I sorrow that the Church has been enticed away from this truth, to become wrapped up in human concerns. Calling it "meat" and finding excitement in some pseudo-Gnostic secret meaning reflected in the news reports of today is idolatry. Indeed, the mainstream of Evangelical faith is a prostitute to such petty political wrangling because they refuse to see all things of importance are rooted in Heaven; all things on this side of Eternity are mere circumstance. He is risen; He resides in Heaven where our focus should be.
We now see a vision of the spirits of the Four Winds, holding back destruction until the Saints are marked as such. There is a number given, wholly symbolic in meaning. While the number 12 typically means the Kingdom on earth, squaring it intensifies the concept: the thing in its totality. Multiples of ten adds the symbol of its source being the whole of humanity. That the list of Tribes cannot be taken literally is noted in the absence of Dan -- the premier symbol of idolatry and spiritual failure. The name of Ephraim, who led the way in chaining the Northern Tribes to idolatry and rebellion, is replaced with Joseph. Levi is included, who had no inheritance in the Land of Canaan. At any rate, most of the literal Tribes were lost altogether. Rather, this is but a symbol of the New Testament Israel: the followers of Christ. The act of sealing them is to mark them as God's special possession. The point here is John makes it clear in the midst of trials and tribulations, we dare not lose focus on what really matters. He is our God, and we are His people. He knows our number and our names, individually and intimately. Nothing in Heaven and earth can change that.
The next vision is the same image from a different perspective. While the first offers a symbolic number announced from Heaven, the second is not numbered, nor is John able to estimate, nor could anyone else. God knows, but He's not telling, except in the symbolic sense above. We find this multitude celebrating their election, giving all glory and honor to their God. Heaven itself cannot help but join the celebration. When John is asked who they are, he has no answer. He is told these have passed through "the great tribulation." Getting lost in making this some literal event misses the most important point: God's people will tribulate. That is, inherent in serving God is tribulation. Just shedding the weakness of the flesh requires a mountain of grief, for only by passing through the fire of testing can we be refined. This massive multitude gains their purity and identity by having passed through such testing. To the churches on Western Asia of that day, this reaffirms Rome's persecution as the ultimate mark of God's favor. While such attention would be death, the ultimate end of all things for sinners, it is life and hope for Christians.
This is the whole point behind the Apocalypse -- giving hope and strength to believers under the Roman lash. John is telling them not to get wrapped up in this world and its sorrows, but to see their privileged status as those who dwell spiritually in the Courts of God. What they stand to lose here is abundantly replaced with eternal promises. This pulls the churches into a wholly other-worldly viewpoint. Yes, we weep at the loss because it hurts, but we dare not let such loss make us think Our God does not love us. Indeed, He loves us enough to break us from our reliance upon the things of this world for any comfort. We ought instead to be glad we are rid of such concerns. This is what John's Revelation is all about, what it meant to his flock. Any attempt to draw from this book a weight of concern about events on this earth does violence to the text.
How I sorrow that the Church has been enticed away from this truth, to become wrapped up in human concerns. Calling it "meat" and finding excitement in some pseudo-Gnostic secret meaning reflected in the news reports of today is idolatry. Indeed, the mainstream of Evangelical faith is a prostitute to such petty political wrangling because they refuse to see all things of importance are rooted in Heaven; all things on this side of Eternity are mere circumstance. He is risen; He resides in Heaven where our focus should be.
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Daniel 7: Prelude to Revelation 7
The symbols of the Old Testament explain those of the New Testament. Daniel's vision in chapter 7 is not as hard as many would make it out to be, provided we adopt the Eastern Hebraic perspective. The biggest mistake is assuming things are relentlessly chronological. Demanding we find a one-to-one relationship between every detail of the vision and some discrete, physical reality is childish, flat out wrong. Fuzzy logic is irritating to modern Western thinkers, but is exactly the sort of logic inherent in Scripture, particularly in visions.
We begin with the Four Winds, described as servants of God, the standard image of wind or breath, which equals spirit. These four spirits are stirring the Great Sea, symbol of human flesh. Arising from the world-wide mass of humanity we see a series of beasts, which we are told represent kings. Even here, it is not meant literally -- the kings are not people, but roles. Each represents a known historical empire. The first is Babylon, under which Daniel serves at the time of the vision. The next is Medo-Persia. Third comes the Greek Empire, four heads representing the four generals who inherited the empire at Alexander's death.
The final empire is Rome. However, Rome itself is a symbol of all governments following her. From the biblical perspective, Rome started something evil, something which made it particularly foreign to nature. This monstrosity bore features which no government ever should have. Rome pioneered making government altogether impersonal. In the process, it was by far the most dehumanizing, the most brutal, utterly lacking in grandeur and nobility. This sort of government is smothering, overwhelming in poking into every detail of human life. It is total rule, down to the last detail of human existence. The seeds of this sort of government eventually sees the rule of impersonal committees, ordinary people without a sense of greatness, arrogantly replacing the natural order. Oddly, in our modern Western pretense to a rule of law as the foundation of democratic political theory promote that very thing.
Horns always represent power and authority. These horns do not represent any particular list of rulers, nor any known confederation or other inheritors of this awful legacy. Rather, the number ten represents the complete range of human power throughout human history. The three uprooted are those last three empires already seen in the previous beasts. Their legacy is wiped away by the last, new horn. This represents a particular success Satan has in creating this whole new type of total government. It boasts of things even greater than even the self-proclaimed "divine" monarchs.
It is this which sets the stage for Last Things -- that is, these Last Days in which we live today. When the final manifestation of this evil form of government comes to power, Heaven prepares the Final Judgment on sin in the Cross. Eventually, this beastly last government will be destroyed in a spiritual sense. Other governments had their time, but the memory of their grandeur is not forgotten. Finally, in proper logical order comes the Son to take up His inheritance, Who will assume His rule from Heaven over His people. The Kingdom of Heaven is established, and all human authority is subject to Him, at least in the hearts of His people. In the guise of the Roman Empire, human government forfeited it's claim on the loyalty of God's children. Christians now submit directly to Christ, who lives inside their very persons. He is the ultimate Ruler, and all the demands of human government are mere background noise.
Daniel found this whole thing utterly shocking, distressing. Daniel wasn't just being polite when he spoke highly of the Babylonian Imperial glory as symbolized by the golden head of the great statue (chapter 2). Brutal and ugly Bablyon may have been, but there was in that reign something which was noble and stirring in holy hearts. It was a grand fulfillment of the Noahic Covenant of human civil government. The vision in chapter 2 and chapter 7 are much the same, but the latter shows Daniel something of the nature of things from the spiritual viewpoint, while the former was granted as an understanding to fallen, pagan men -- in this case, Nebuchadnezzar. From at least that point in history, human governments have been warned the Kingdom of Heaven would brook no opposition.
This sets the stage for understanding John's Revelation.
We begin with the Four Winds, described as servants of God, the standard image of wind or breath, which equals spirit. These four spirits are stirring the Great Sea, symbol of human flesh. Arising from the world-wide mass of humanity we see a series of beasts, which we are told represent kings. Even here, it is not meant literally -- the kings are not people, but roles. Each represents a known historical empire. The first is Babylon, under which Daniel serves at the time of the vision. The next is Medo-Persia. Third comes the Greek Empire, four heads representing the four generals who inherited the empire at Alexander's death.
The final empire is Rome. However, Rome itself is a symbol of all governments following her. From the biblical perspective, Rome started something evil, something which made it particularly foreign to nature. This monstrosity bore features which no government ever should have. Rome pioneered making government altogether impersonal. In the process, it was by far the most dehumanizing, the most brutal, utterly lacking in grandeur and nobility. This sort of government is smothering, overwhelming in poking into every detail of human life. It is total rule, down to the last detail of human existence. The seeds of this sort of government eventually sees the rule of impersonal committees, ordinary people without a sense of greatness, arrogantly replacing the natural order. Oddly, in our modern Western pretense to a rule of law as the foundation of democratic political theory promote that very thing.
Horns always represent power and authority. These horns do not represent any particular list of rulers, nor any known confederation or other inheritors of this awful legacy. Rather, the number ten represents the complete range of human power throughout human history. The three uprooted are those last three empires already seen in the previous beasts. Their legacy is wiped away by the last, new horn. This represents a particular success Satan has in creating this whole new type of total government. It boasts of things even greater than even the self-proclaimed "divine" monarchs.
It is this which sets the stage for Last Things -- that is, these Last Days in which we live today. When the final manifestation of this evil form of government comes to power, Heaven prepares the Final Judgment on sin in the Cross. Eventually, this beastly last government will be destroyed in a spiritual sense. Other governments had their time, but the memory of their grandeur is not forgotten. Finally, in proper logical order comes the Son to take up His inheritance, Who will assume His rule from Heaven over His people. The Kingdom of Heaven is established, and all human authority is subject to Him, at least in the hearts of His people. In the guise of the Roman Empire, human government forfeited it's claim on the loyalty of God's children. Christians now submit directly to Christ, who lives inside their very persons. He is the ultimate Ruler, and all the demands of human government are mere background noise.
Daniel found this whole thing utterly shocking, distressing. Daniel wasn't just being polite when he spoke highly of the Babylonian Imperial glory as symbolized by the golden head of the great statue (chapter 2). Brutal and ugly Bablyon may have been, but there was in that reign something which was noble and stirring in holy hearts. It was a grand fulfillment of the Noahic Covenant of human civil government. The vision in chapter 2 and chapter 7 are much the same, but the latter shows Daniel something of the nature of things from the spiritual viewpoint, while the former was granted as an understanding to fallen, pagan men -- in this case, Nebuchadnezzar. From at least that point in history, human governments have been warned the Kingdom of Heaven would brook no opposition.
This sets the stage for understanding John's Revelation.
Public Notice to Readers
This could be my last post!
Just in case something happens, I'd like my readers to know Google does practice censorship of sorts. This blog is hosted by Blogger, which is owned by Google. I'm not exactly sure of the limits, and I suspect they are based on who notices what you say and takes offense. I suppose in theory this would be alright if you post slanderous material. The problem is, the standards defining slander are probably not at all objective.
I've not read Zionist Watch that much, but what I have read was typical political blather. This includes hyperbole and talking bad about major figures who thrust their faces into the public consciousness. In my experience, the only people zealous about their public image are people who deserve a bad one. Those we tend to think of as "good people" seem to weather such storms rather well.
In this case, I believe the object of criticism was the State of Israel. I'm convinced this was the cause of the lockdown. While I don't bother to engage in verbal attacks on Israel, it's no secret I don't support her. Make me king for just one day, and I'll close the place down and give the land back to Jordan, forcing the citizens of Israel to go someplace else. Call that what you will, but I find this appeals to my sense of justice, given the true story behind it all. I'll even link to my critique of Zionism's birth, and it's relation to American religious politics. However, I am not calling for any particular form of action, especially violent action. I'm not even interested in fair and open debate, because I don't believe it exists on this question -- Zionists won't let it happen. I'm calling for prayer and teaching, getting the truth out.
I find the only people who ignore the egregious and unconsionable conduct of Israeli forces and government figures, and of some citizens not serving in government, are those who seem utterly convinced God needs a modern Israel to finish up business before Christ returns. For them, there has to be another Temple with a restored ritual sacrifice. I've made no secret of calling this a heresy. My rejection of this mess underlies my series on Revelation.
It would do no good to protest here about Google, though I most certainly have lost a great deal of respect for them. On the other hand, I have to wonder how much my web publishing would suffer if the full weight of the Zionist political machine came after me. You have to consider Google is essentially beholden to the CIA, and the CIA is easily one of the greatest threats to freedom and open discussion, not to mention the safety and prosperity of US citizens.
If this is the last post you get to read here, you'll know I've gotten somebody's attention.
Just in case something happens, I'd like my readers to know Google does practice censorship of sorts. This blog is hosted by Blogger, which is owned by Google. I'm not exactly sure of the limits, and I suspect they are based on who notices what you say and takes offense. I suppose in theory this would be alright if you post slanderous material. The problem is, the standards defining slander are probably not at all objective.
I've not read Zionist Watch that much, but what I have read was typical political blather. This includes hyperbole and talking bad about major figures who thrust their faces into the public consciousness. In my experience, the only people zealous about their public image are people who deserve a bad one. Those we tend to think of as "good people" seem to weather such storms rather well.
In this case, I believe the object of criticism was the State of Israel. I'm convinced this was the cause of the lockdown. While I don't bother to engage in verbal attacks on Israel, it's no secret I don't support her. Make me king for just one day, and I'll close the place down and give the land back to Jordan, forcing the citizens of Israel to go someplace else. Call that what you will, but I find this appeals to my sense of justice, given the true story behind it all. I'll even link to my critique of Zionism's birth, and it's relation to American religious politics. However, I am not calling for any particular form of action, especially violent action. I'm not even interested in fair and open debate, because I don't believe it exists on this question -- Zionists won't let it happen. I'm calling for prayer and teaching, getting the truth out.
I find the only people who ignore the egregious and unconsionable conduct of Israeli forces and government figures, and of some citizens not serving in government, are those who seem utterly convinced God needs a modern Israel to finish up business before Christ returns. For them, there has to be another Temple with a restored ritual sacrifice. I've made no secret of calling this a heresy. My rejection of this mess underlies my series on Revelation.
It would do no good to protest here about Google, though I most certainly have lost a great deal of respect for them. On the other hand, I have to wonder how much my web publishing would suffer if the full weight of the Zionist political machine came after me. You have to consider Google is essentially beholden to the CIA, and the CIA is easily one of the greatest threats to freedom and open discussion, not to mention the safety and prosperity of US citizens.
If this is the last post you get to read here, you'll know I've gotten somebody's attention.
Monday, August 27, 2007
Attack from a New Quarter
In his book, The Church on the Other Side, Brian McLaren of all people attacks the house church movement. For the most part, he insists a house church cannot remain "disorganized" or it will fall apart.
He goes on at some length, describing what he believes are the necessary dire consequences of "anarchist ecclesiology." There are at least two major errors here, both assumptions. I'll dismiss without comment his tart accusation about the definition of "institutional church" as used by house church folk. A house church "actually exists."
First, it's pretty easy to pick apart, but he'll never accept he has made a Straw Man argument. I know of no credible house church which is anarchist. Even if we stretch the term as hyperbole, it still won't fit. He describes a level of pretend anarchy which I've not ever seen, nor described by home worshipers. As a student of Organizational Theory, I have no problem calling him on this. House churches are organized, just not as he envisions it.
The primary model is the Eastern feudal household, an extended family. In this case, it's less about DNA and more about spiritual bonds. This is the basic assumption underlying the whole New Testament. For contrast, Western feudalism is about tangible property, especially real estate -- servants are virtually insignificant. A Western feudal noble is about stuff. An Eastern noble is about his servants. While he, too, has a domain, a man would be known by his servants, not his stuff. This is the Kingdom of God. What is so hard about giving up our Western-style individuality in favor of the Body? McLaren assumes it simply cannot be done, it seems. His whole critique assumes the merchant-corporate model is the only thing one is permitted to call "organization."
Second, who's to say any organization must continue for God to bless His children? Any given organization must fit the context. Once it ceases to do so, it is set aside like a tool which is broken, or a tool for a job which is finished. What's so wrong about dissolving an old organization and reforming from scratch with a new bunch of people? What's wrong with switching leaders when things change? How does this harm the Kingdom of God? Surely, stability matters, but that is achievable without a staff, titles, budget and planning, etc. The two are not inextricably linked. Just because McLaren's never seen the very real spiritual growth of believers in what he calls "eccesiological anarchy" is no reason to assume it can't happen. I see it every day.
Finally, we know from Organizational Theory any spiritual body larger than 75 is probably too big to be effective. We all know organizations are self-perpetuating, regardless who makes up the group. This is completely outside the assumptions of the New Testament. It was always about Christ, and about the people who serve Him. He is the Lord, and we are the servants. It's not some kind of Utopian dream to expect the Holy Spirit to handle the details of form and leadership. I've done it repeatedly in different situations, swapping between follower and leader within the same group over a period of several years. It didn't hurt a bit.
Of all the people, a major figure in the Emergent Church movement has no business poking at something he clearly does not understand.
(Note: I do not actually have this book, but read an extended excerpt.)
(Edit: Zane Anderson has the excerpt to which I refer.)
Take, for example, a church with an anarchist ecclesiology. (Don't laugh -- it's more common than you think.) This ecclesiology sees problems in "the institutional church" (which is another term for "the church wherever it actually exists") and concludes that they result from its being "organized." According to this way of thinking, the early church was blissfully spontaneous. The Holy Spirit led individuals with such power and mastery that the early church performed like a symphony without a score. The beautiful music poured out harmoniously from the untrained musicians as they were moved extemporaneously by the Invisible Conductor. (p. 96f)
He goes on at some length, describing what he believes are the necessary dire consequences of "anarchist ecclesiology." There are at least two major errors here, both assumptions. I'll dismiss without comment his tart accusation about the definition of "institutional church" as used by house church folk. A house church "actually exists."
First, it's pretty easy to pick apart, but he'll never accept he has made a Straw Man argument. I know of no credible house church which is anarchist. Even if we stretch the term as hyperbole, it still won't fit. He describes a level of pretend anarchy which I've not ever seen, nor described by home worshipers. As a student of Organizational Theory, I have no problem calling him on this. House churches are organized, just not as he envisions it.
The primary model is the Eastern feudal household, an extended family. In this case, it's less about DNA and more about spiritual bonds. This is the basic assumption underlying the whole New Testament. For contrast, Western feudalism is about tangible property, especially real estate -- servants are virtually insignificant. A Western feudal noble is about stuff. An Eastern noble is about his servants. While he, too, has a domain, a man would be known by his servants, not his stuff. This is the Kingdom of God. What is so hard about giving up our Western-style individuality in favor of the Body? McLaren assumes it simply cannot be done, it seems. His whole critique assumes the merchant-corporate model is the only thing one is permitted to call "organization."
Second, who's to say any organization must continue for God to bless His children? Any given organization must fit the context. Once it ceases to do so, it is set aside like a tool which is broken, or a tool for a job which is finished. What's so wrong about dissolving an old organization and reforming from scratch with a new bunch of people? What's wrong with switching leaders when things change? How does this harm the Kingdom of God? Surely, stability matters, but that is achievable without a staff, titles, budget and planning, etc. The two are not inextricably linked. Just because McLaren's never seen the very real spiritual growth of believers in what he calls "eccesiological anarchy" is no reason to assume it can't happen. I see it every day.
Finally, we know from Organizational Theory any spiritual body larger than 75 is probably too big to be effective. We all know organizations are self-perpetuating, regardless who makes up the group. This is completely outside the assumptions of the New Testament. It was always about Christ, and about the people who serve Him. He is the Lord, and we are the servants. It's not some kind of Utopian dream to expect the Holy Spirit to handle the details of form and leadership. I've done it repeatedly in different situations, swapping between follower and leader within the same group over a period of several years. It didn't hurt a bit.
Of all the people, a major figure in the Emergent Church movement has no business poking at something he clearly does not understand.
(Note: I do not actually have this book, but read an extended excerpt.)
(Edit: Zane Anderson has the excerpt to which I refer.)
Sunday, August 26, 2007
Life of Christ: Matthew 6
This teaching session was kicked off by Jesus turning upside down the typical rabbinical teachings of His day. In this chapter, the focus is on the nature of true spirituality. Jesus contrasts the kind of spirituality they were used to seeing every day against the genuine article.
He begins with what was commonly referred to as "acts of mercy," which today we typically call "acts of charity." We are aware of two different practices Jesus mocks in saying "sounding a trumpet in the streets." One is quite literal, when those with great wealth and power would summon the unfortunate to assemble for mass distribution of food, clothing and such. The other was peculiar to Jerusalem, where the Temple stood. Built into parts of the external wall were convenient drop boxes with heavy brass funnels protecting the depository. The large opening faced out on the wall, which narrowed and curved downward so thieves could not simply reach into the box. Tossing a large handful of worthless coins would make quite a racket. The jaded citizens called this "sounding the horn." Such public notice was the full extent of blessing hypocrites received. True spirituality cared nothing for mans' approval, but only for the Father's, Who saw all secret acts.
The Talmud prescribed rather extensive ritual prayers. Writing in rather flowery language, they lent themselves well to dramatic gestures preferred by hypocrites. Pharisees would typically ensure they found themselves in very public places during when the hours of prayer, is if they somehow were accidentally caught by the timing. Had they made it a point to be in the Temple or any synagogue, it would have been more honorable. However, even there they mimicked the chanting of pagan idolaters. Prayer is hardly a matter of getting the attention of a busy or distracted god. Jehovah knew all things, so prayer was not for Him but for us.
Jesus proceeds to lay out a model prayer. While there is no harm in reciting this in worship, that misses the point. It is not a matter of precise holy wording, but grasping the character of this outline Jesus provides. I take the liberty here of paraphrasing it to help us understand that:
Notice there is precious little here about worldly needs, except to ask for it in like measure to a Roman soldier's daily ration. It was never enough for the man to desert his commander, but enough to make it through that day. The whole passage aims at binding us to God, seeking only for ourselves what it takes to bring Him glory and fulfill His purpose. Jesus goes on to make again the point about forgiveness. If you do not pass on the Lord's mercy and grace to others, it can do nothing for you. This is the character of prayer, of seeking to commune with God Almighty -- that we be changed. More precisely that we be changed into a people whose whole focus is God's business, God's way.
Contrast this to the hypocrites who advertised their fasting by overdoing the sackcloth and ashes business. Such was originally designed to shock oneself into realizing the seriousness of some grave sin. Jesus describes those who obviously don't have a sense of sorrow over their sins, but a deep need for human pity and approval: "Oh, he is such a martyr!" While people notice, it never comes to God's attention. Fasting is a commitment of the heart, some internal concern which need not be a burden to those who don't know. God will know, and respond appropriately.
Jesus again hammers the Jewish elite for their worldliness by discounting the necessity of piling up material wealth. Such acquisitiveness leads merely to worry over how very much everyone else wants it, too. Hide it away too well and natural processes will render it useless. If, instead, you are focused on spiritual treasure, there is no way it can be lost. If your eyes are trained to see the world with price tags, the light of truth can never come in, and your soul will be darker than the pits of Hell. God will not share your loyalty with the god of material possessions.
The wealthy Jews often chided the peasants for not saving, blaming them for their own poverty. It was a hard-hearted meanness which characterized the comfortable class of Jews all over the known world. They seemed afflicted with an abject fear of losing what they were so sure was God's blessing. Perhaps it was that, but the only blessing they would ever know. Peace was denied them; they were held fast in the anxiety of a shalom which was measure merely in tangibles. A rote observance of Moses promised little else. Yet the whole of Moses and the rest of the Old Testament pointed to something much higher. It was a shalom of inner peace, a security of the spirit which trusted God to provied what was truly needed. Instead of presenting God with a list of requirements, the truly spiritual would request from God His requirements.
If one could not trust the God Who made him, and all things he could see, and many things he could not see, this world was a sad and dark place full of danger. Jesus noted far lesser creatures, whose lives appeared to have no significant purpose, seemed quite well taken care of by their Creator. How could anyone imagine the God who called them to service would do any less for them?
He begins with what was commonly referred to as "acts of mercy," which today we typically call "acts of charity." We are aware of two different practices Jesus mocks in saying "sounding a trumpet in the streets." One is quite literal, when those with great wealth and power would summon the unfortunate to assemble for mass distribution of food, clothing and such. The other was peculiar to Jerusalem, where the Temple stood. Built into parts of the external wall were convenient drop boxes with heavy brass funnels protecting the depository. The large opening faced out on the wall, which narrowed and curved downward so thieves could not simply reach into the box. Tossing a large handful of worthless coins would make quite a racket. The jaded citizens called this "sounding the horn." Such public notice was the full extent of blessing hypocrites received. True spirituality cared nothing for mans' approval, but only for the Father's, Who saw all secret acts.
The Talmud prescribed rather extensive ritual prayers. Writing in rather flowery language, they lent themselves well to dramatic gestures preferred by hypocrites. Pharisees would typically ensure they found themselves in very public places during when the hours of prayer, is if they somehow were accidentally caught by the timing. Had they made it a point to be in the Temple or any synagogue, it would have been more honorable. However, even there they mimicked the chanting of pagan idolaters. Prayer is hardly a matter of getting the attention of a busy or distracted god. Jehovah knew all things, so prayer was not for Him but for us.
Jesus proceeds to lay out a model prayer. While there is no harm in reciting this in worship, that misses the point. It is not a matter of precise holy wording, but grasping the character of this outline Jesus provides. I take the liberty here of paraphrasing it to help us understand that:
Our Father in Heaven, even Your Name is Holy. Bring Your Kingdom into our lives so we obey You as those in Heaven do. Provide us only what we need to serve you today. Teach us to forgive as You forgive. Help us follow you through trials such that we do not fall into the hands of Satan. We seek Your Kingdom's prosperity, by Your power, for Your glory.
Notice there is precious little here about worldly needs, except to ask for it in like measure to a Roman soldier's daily ration. It was never enough for the man to desert his commander, but enough to make it through that day. The whole passage aims at binding us to God, seeking only for ourselves what it takes to bring Him glory and fulfill His purpose. Jesus goes on to make again the point about forgiveness. If you do not pass on the Lord's mercy and grace to others, it can do nothing for you. This is the character of prayer, of seeking to commune with God Almighty -- that we be changed. More precisely that we be changed into a people whose whole focus is God's business, God's way.
Contrast this to the hypocrites who advertised their fasting by overdoing the sackcloth and ashes business. Such was originally designed to shock oneself into realizing the seriousness of some grave sin. Jesus describes those who obviously don't have a sense of sorrow over their sins, but a deep need for human pity and approval: "Oh, he is such a martyr!" While people notice, it never comes to God's attention. Fasting is a commitment of the heart, some internal concern which need not be a burden to those who don't know. God will know, and respond appropriately.
Jesus again hammers the Jewish elite for their worldliness by discounting the necessity of piling up material wealth. Such acquisitiveness leads merely to worry over how very much everyone else wants it, too. Hide it away too well and natural processes will render it useless. If, instead, you are focused on spiritual treasure, there is no way it can be lost. If your eyes are trained to see the world with price tags, the light of truth can never come in, and your soul will be darker than the pits of Hell. God will not share your loyalty with the god of material possessions.
The wealthy Jews often chided the peasants for not saving, blaming them for their own poverty. It was a hard-hearted meanness which characterized the comfortable class of Jews all over the known world. They seemed afflicted with an abject fear of losing what they were so sure was God's blessing. Perhaps it was that, but the only blessing they would ever know. Peace was denied them; they were held fast in the anxiety of a shalom which was measure merely in tangibles. A rote observance of Moses promised little else. Yet the whole of Moses and the rest of the Old Testament pointed to something much higher. It was a shalom of inner peace, a security of the spirit which trusted God to provied what was truly needed. Instead of presenting God with a list of requirements, the truly spiritual would request from God His requirements.
If one could not trust the God Who made him, and all things he could see, and many things he could not see, this world was a sad and dark place full of danger. Jesus noted far lesser creatures, whose lives appeared to have no significant purpose, seemed quite well taken care of by their Creator. How could anyone imagine the God who called them to service would do any less for them?
But seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness; and all these things shall be added to you.
Saturday, August 25, 2007
Makes Me Very Sad
Every day I'm confronted freshly by a particular brand of spiritual blindness. Bad enough there are souls which are spiritually dead, but we have many whom we suppose are born again insisting on using dead thinking.
I make no secret of my love for computers, and the high-level mathematics and physics involved. It takes a particular kind of logic to reason that way, and to make these things work. That same frame of reason can not ever reach into Heaven. It is utterly incompetent to measure the spirit. So why does the vast majority of modern Christendom struggle under the false assumption they can use the tools of rational human reason to wrestle with God?
For those of you who understand, or are willing to research things, I direct your attention to the terms "Aristotelianism" and "Thomism." The latter is based on the former. Together, they form the underlying basis for the primary failures of Western Christian faith. To believe man's mind is somehow ready to grasp ultimate truth by the mechanism of logic is sheer tragedy. I do not shrink from rebuking my brothers and sisters who willfully choose this; all the more so those who know the Bible arose from some other frame of reference.
All your centuries of Church History and Theology based on the logic of Aristotle will come crumbling down when Western civilization collapses. That should be rather soon. Should you survive it, you'll stand before God with precious little of the white garments He so generously offers. Human rational structures are raised up in defiance of a God Who revealed Himself emphatically in a different way. Ultimate truth comes down, and we grasp it only in its own frame of reference. All else is compared to Him, not the other way around.
Stop it. Put it away before it's too late.
I make no secret of my love for computers, and the high-level mathematics and physics involved. It takes a particular kind of logic to reason that way, and to make these things work. That same frame of reason can not ever reach into Heaven. It is utterly incompetent to measure the spirit. So why does the vast majority of modern Christendom struggle under the false assumption they can use the tools of rational human reason to wrestle with God?
For those of you who understand, or are willing to research things, I direct your attention to the terms "Aristotelianism" and "Thomism." The latter is based on the former. Together, they form the underlying basis for the primary failures of Western Christian faith. To believe man's mind is somehow ready to grasp ultimate truth by the mechanism of logic is sheer tragedy. I do not shrink from rebuking my brothers and sisters who willfully choose this; all the more so those who know the Bible arose from some other frame of reference.
All your centuries of Church History and Theology based on the logic of Aristotle will come crumbling down when Western civilization collapses. That should be rather soon. Should you survive it, you'll stand before God with precious little of the white garments He so generously offers. Human rational structures are raised up in defiance of a God Who revealed Himself emphatically in a different way. Ultimate truth comes down, and we grasp it only in its own frame of reference. All else is compared to Him, not the other way around.
Stop it. Put it away before it's too late.
Friday, August 24, 2007
Revelation 6
It becomes necessary at this point to comment on the structure of the following chapters of John's Revelation, and some basic concepts. Please note the Seven Seals, the Seven Trumpets and Seven Bowls are parallels. That is, rather than a sequence of different events, it remains a description of what is from the eternal viewpoint. Thus, the three sevens overlap a great deal in meaning, and repeat some ideas. To the degree there is a sequence, it is a logical one, not chronological. In a broad general sense, they reflect God's judgment against sin. Judging sin means people on the earth will suffer, both saved and lost. John describes something of the nature of sin and judgment in these sequences.
Why would Christians desire to see suffering and judgment? This is hardly some spite for having been persecuted, since such suffering afflicts all equally. Rather, they ignore the suffering as they grasp the greater importance of truth revealed. Regardless of what it costs our flesh, we should pray more than any thing else to see God's revelation. Such revelation cannot come without destruction of a fallen world. Sin has so deeply stained the universe, all Creation cries out for such a cataclysm (Romans 8:18-23). That which sin has brought must be removed, and it cannot but be painful. Still, we rightly cry out for the justified suffering of sin's removal. Bear in mind all which falls upon the earth from the Judge of Creation falls equally on sinners and saints.
So it is we cry, "Maranatha -- come Lord Jesus!" All the while, we know it will mean immense suffering for all flesh. What John describes in the three sevens is a blessing on us. We don't wish to see the bulk of humanity descend into eternal punishment, but we did not choose for them to remain outside grace. Those who understand God's viewpoint on things look forward to the end of things.
Further, we cry out for The End even knowing it will only get worse before it gets better. John makes it clear as these Last Days draw to a close, Satan will be loosed to deceive the nations as he did in Eden. The curse against him in the Garden was a binding, which John describes in crytpic symbols, but that binding will be lifted at the very End. We don't look forward to that, but to what follows. Let us understand what we look forward to as John's vision continues.
The famous Four Horsemen echoes Zechariah's vision (ch. 6). These represent spirits which serve the purpose of God in judgment. They tend to appear together, as easily shown in human history. John describes the symbols clearly. The white horse and rider is political domination, specifically in the form of conquest. This spirit is sent into the world to drive men to endless jockeying for power. It is altogether natural such activity brings war, symbolized by the red horse and rider. When war's work is done, we typically expect economic collapse. War is the fast means to transferring wealth from the many to the few. In this case, the prices symbolize a standard day's ration of food for one adult jumping to the cost of a whole day's labor -- just barely surviving. The price of everything else no longer matters. With such turmoil, no one is surprised at widespread death from warfare itself, starvation, disease, and resurgent natural predators. It's all part of the same package, and John's comment regarding a quarter of the population is actually typical.
The Altar of God in Heaven has already seen the sacrifice of His Son. Often in ancient religions, the altar would contain sacred ashes stored for future use. Here, we see those who joined Christ on the Cross, and became a sacrifice with Him. In the normal process of human political wrangling, oppression and widespread suffering, true believers are frequently targeted, as they cannot ever give full allegiance to any earthly master. When these martyrs ask how much longer before the thing for which they died comes -- the full revelation of God's judgment and full reign on earth -- the answer indicates God's patience and purpose. The inclusive sacrifice of Christ's followers is not complete; the store of ashen souls is not yet large enough for the final ritual.
If the results of opening the sixth seal are taken literally, then several events in following chapters could not happen. Stars do not literaly fall to earth, and the phrase as used today meant the same thing in John's day. Throughout human history, having the visible luminary bodies move, darken, change colors, or fall down was a standard symbol of grave events on earth. John's paints the symbol lavishly, adding the whole thing rolled up, and the earth disturbed, to boot. Sewing it up, John mentions seven classes of men showing no part of humanity can escape the judgment of the first four seals. Much as they strive to have peace, it will never happen. Peace can only come from peace with God, and they cannot face Him with the consciousness of their sins. So they beg the earth to bury them, but it could never do any good. There is no place so far, no barrier so solid, God cannot touch you.
Thus, the first round of revealing God's wrath.
Why would Christians desire to see suffering and judgment? This is hardly some spite for having been persecuted, since such suffering afflicts all equally. Rather, they ignore the suffering as they grasp the greater importance of truth revealed. Regardless of what it costs our flesh, we should pray more than any thing else to see God's revelation. Such revelation cannot come without destruction of a fallen world. Sin has so deeply stained the universe, all Creation cries out for such a cataclysm (Romans 8:18-23). That which sin has brought must be removed, and it cannot but be painful. Still, we rightly cry out for the justified suffering of sin's removal. Bear in mind all which falls upon the earth from the Judge of Creation falls equally on sinners and saints.
So it is we cry, "Maranatha -- come Lord Jesus!" All the while, we know it will mean immense suffering for all flesh. What John describes in the three sevens is a blessing on us. We don't wish to see the bulk of humanity descend into eternal punishment, but we did not choose for them to remain outside grace. Those who understand God's viewpoint on things look forward to the end of things.
Further, we cry out for The End even knowing it will only get worse before it gets better. John makes it clear as these Last Days draw to a close, Satan will be loosed to deceive the nations as he did in Eden. The curse against him in the Garden was a binding, which John describes in crytpic symbols, but that binding will be lifted at the very End. We don't look forward to that, but to what follows. Let us understand what we look forward to as John's vision continues.
The famous Four Horsemen echoes Zechariah's vision (ch. 6). These represent spirits which serve the purpose of God in judgment. They tend to appear together, as easily shown in human history. John describes the symbols clearly. The white horse and rider is political domination, specifically in the form of conquest. This spirit is sent into the world to drive men to endless jockeying for power. It is altogether natural such activity brings war, symbolized by the red horse and rider. When war's work is done, we typically expect economic collapse. War is the fast means to transferring wealth from the many to the few. In this case, the prices symbolize a standard day's ration of food for one adult jumping to the cost of a whole day's labor -- just barely surviving. The price of everything else no longer matters. With such turmoil, no one is surprised at widespread death from warfare itself, starvation, disease, and resurgent natural predators. It's all part of the same package, and John's comment regarding a quarter of the population is actually typical.
The Altar of God in Heaven has already seen the sacrifice of His Son. Often in ancient religions, the altar would contain sacred ashes stored for future use. Here, we see those who joined Christ on the Cross, and became a sacrifice with Him. In the normal process of human political wrangling, oppression and widespread suffering, true believers are frequently targeted, as they cannot ever give full allegiance to any earthly master. When these martyrs ask how much longer before the thing for which they died comes -- the full revelation of God's judgment and full reign on earth -- the answer indicates God's patience and purpose. The inclusive sacrifice of Christ's followers is not complete; the store of ashen souls is not yet large enough for the final ritual.
If the results of opening the sixth seal are taken literally, then several events in following chapters could not happen. Stars do not literaly fall to earth, and the phrase as used today meant the same thing in John's day. Throughout human history, having the visible luminary bodies move, darken, change colors, or fall down was a standard symbol of grave events on earth. John's paints the symbol lavishly, adding the whole thing rolled up, and the earth disturbed, to boot. Sewing it up, John mentions seven classes of men showing no part of humanity can escape the judgment of the first four seals. Much as they strive to have peace, it will never happen. Peace can only come from peace with God, and they cannot face Him with the consciousness of their sins. So they beg the earth to bury them, but it could never do any good. There is no place so far, no barrier so solid, God cannot touch you.
Thus, the first round of revealing God's wrath.
Thursday, August 23, 2007
Getting Close?
Though I reject Dispensationalism, I still look for a final, literal Anti-christ. He will appear in the "temple of God" (2 Thessalonians 2) -- within the active, visible Church.
Dr. Riddlebarger is right on the money, as far as the actual exegesis goes. Naturally I reject his vociferous adherence to the institutional church. He doesn't mention it isn't necessary to paint all RC members as evil for there to be a resurgent persecution of Protestants, and I find the whole thing unlikely, too. That battle has been fought and won, and only fools will go back under that umbrella without major reforms from within.
However, with a multi-faceted preparation for crushing the true faith, I could easily see a government doing this. We have syncretist conferences under the UN, making very ugly noises about those they won't invite -- anyone with the Evangelical bent. Further, the net result of many rights removals aim at the heart of a free conscience, and aim at destroying the one and only institution ordained by God: the family. At the same time, the passion and effort of churches are being subverted to purely partisan politics.
In this we can best predict something about the nature of the next persecution, if not the final one. The spirit of anti-christ is building a home in the institutional churches. At some point, those who can see clearly the nature of the attack will find themselves deeply compromised by the likes of tax-free status and registration. In this, every institutional church will some day have to make a decision whether they will cling to their alliance with the Beast -- fallen human government -- or to their covenant with Christ. You cannot have both. While this doesn't make the institutional churches evil, it does expose them to high risk.
Further, while I do adhere to the Apostle's Creed, it is hardly a test of faith on par with the Word of God. This is simply because it is not itself the Word of God, but a response against Gnosticism, which ran rampant in the Early Church. Our rejection of the Rome's claim to authority is based on the plain meaning of Scripture, which Rome rejects. Are we now going to substitute for Scripture any portion of the same mixed legacy of "superseding" documents by which Rome presses her claim? Had such a creed been published by the Apostles, it would have been mentioned somewhere in the Bible. The silence on this is thunderous. It is therefore of no greater significance than any other devotional recitation anyone pens today for use in worship, aside from mere historical value.
At any rate, the Beast is now ascendant again, an anti-christ is very close, and we should look first within the Church visible for the threat. To all who see through clear spiritual eyes, his presence will be obvious.
That being said, if the "composite photograph" I discuss in my book is a faithful summary of biblical teaching, this final apostasy could involve a resurgent Roman Catholic persecution of Protestants (but this is not likely), or some form of apostasy wherein professing believers bow the knee to a political leader (the false prophet, who directs the world to worship the beast, which is the God-hating civil government), bent on wiping out the church, having been empowered by the dragon (Satan) to do that very thing. This could be a secular state, trying to wipe out all religion. It could be an Islamic state trying to wipe out Christianity ... who knows? I sure don't. But if I'm alive when it happens, I am sure that I (as well as all other believers) will know what is going on!
Dr. Riddlebarger is right on the money, as far as the actual exegesis goes. Naturally I reject his vociferous adherence to the institutional church. He doesn't mention it isn't necessary to paint all RC members as evil for there to be a resurgent persecution of Protestants, and I find the whole thing unlikely, too. That battle has been fought and won, and only fools will go back under that umbrella without major reforms from within.
However, with a multi-faceted preparation for crushing the true faith, I could easily see a government doing this. We have syncretist conferences under the UN, making very ugly noises about those they won't invite -- anyone with the Evangelical bent. Further, the net result of many rights removals aim at the heart of a free conscience, and aim at destroying the one and only institution ordained by God: the family. At the same time, the passion and effort of churches are being subverted to purely partisan politics.
In this we can best predict something about the nature of the next persecution, if not the final one. The spirit of anti-christ is building a home in the institutional churches. At some point, those who can see clearly the nature of the attack will find themselves deeply compromised by the likes of tax-free status and registration. In this, every institutional church will some day have to make a decision whether they will cling to their alliance with the Beast -- fallen human government -- or to their covenant with Christ. You cannot have both. While this doesn't make the institutional churches evil, it does expose them to high risk.
Further, while I do adhere to the Apostle's Creed, it is hardly a test of faith on par with the Word of God. This is simply because it is not itself the Word of God, but a response against Gnosticism, which ran rampant in the Early Church. Our rejection of the Rome's claim to authority is based on the plain meaning of Scripture, which Rome rejects. Are we now going to substitute for Scripture any portion of the same mixed legacy of "superseding" documents by which Rome presses her claim? Had such a creed been published by the Apostles, it would have been mentioned somewhere in the Bible. The silence on this is thunderous. It is therefore of no greater significance than any other devotional recitation anyone pens today for use in worship, aside from mere historical value.
At any rate, the Beast is now ascendant again, an anti-christ is very close, and we should look first within the Church visible for the threat. To all who see through clear spiritual eyes, his presence will be obvious.
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
Anything but That!
Lazy. I'm sure you've noticed it in your own way, but we Westerners tend to be fat and lazy, at least metaphorically, if not literally. In a very general sense, laziness is adopting a passive posture, accepting what comes. The more energetic will stir themselves for a benefit they perceive, but even a serious runner could be accused of laziness if they live in a pigsty. Or a very busy servant type may actually be avoiding having to think and create, because it's easier to adopt a routine and simply respond. Maybe you know someone who manages to make you feel awful while they wash your feet. How about the genius who can't be bothered to actually apply some of his rarefied and arcane knowledge to his own mundane existence?
Love and truth are hard work. Not because they require action; they do, but that's not the point. Facing God is the hardest thing you'll ever do. At the Radically Christian Cafe, a house church forum, Laurie Ann expressed it best:
As long as we get to choose, everything is easy in that sense. The busy hands might be avoiding resting in His Spirit. He recluse may be avoiding the work of relational give and take. The sports fanatic avoids a world where there are no game rules. And so on; you know them. You see them in the mirror, at times. I know I do. The path to which God calls us, walking in His footprints, leads always to the Cross (Galatians 2:20). What part of you needs to die in order to be raised to new life defined by Him?
But let's go a little farther down that path. Let's apply this Word in concrete ways. Can you walk away from the one thing in your life which has consumed the biggest investment in time, effort and resources? Can you drop that at the foot of the Cross? Farther: Are you letting the routines of life so wrap you up, you can't imagine confronting social disorder, economic collapse, persecution and oppression? We've had it easy for a very long time, and we've let slip away the most basic foundation of civilization -- the ability to live without it. That's one of those mystical paradoxes, like we find running throughout Scripture.
The survival of civilization requires one thing: You carry civilization within you. Nobody's going to put civilization on you and make it stick. If you aren't civilized inside, it peels off quickly. Civilization as a human condition reflects the presence of God's Law in the hearts of men. Civilization is not a circumstance, but an internal frame of reference: Life is precious, and human life is most precious of all. Thus, the standard definition of civilization is the collection of rules, customs and habits necessary for humans to live together in close quarters without killing each other. It requires a bit of self-sacrifice on the front end, knowing it all pays off in the long run.
Cultural factors across the whole of Western civilization have undercut this. The foundation is crumbling. The core is rotten. Collapse is imminent. It seems everything around us contributes to the process. If you don't see it, you are blind. What can you do? What does God require of you? Start with 1 Corinthians 13:4-7 and Galatians 5:22-26. Those lay the foundation for civility.
Then, strengthen your commitment to Him by including a commitment to civilization. Be within yourself more civilized, regardless whether it makes you stand alone, and people take unfair advantage of you. Be just a little more militant about protecting it, about demanding it from others. You may not get it, but the demand is a message from God. Surely you won't mistake prissy Victorian culture for civilization; that's a bad application of the concept. Know the difference. Know that civility itself includes the concept of how to respond to the uncivilized, and includes the concept of knowing when you have the leverage and mandate from God to enforce, and when you don't. Hold forth the standard that people should be civil, and most certainly observe it yourself. More than anywhere else, apply it to your household, your family.
Next, prepare yourself to live by it in circumstances where it is universally ignored. What could you have done better this past week in being civil? Compare civility with all the situations you can recall, and imagine a better outcome. Come to the place where you understand a civilized man knows how to wield a spear against wild beasts, whether they have four legs or two, and teaches his wife and kids something about it. Civilized people know there are no perfect answers in bad situations, and make the most of it by doing what they must.
Yes, it means work, hard work and lots of it. It means seeing the face of God, and stripping away all those things which don't matter.
Love and truth are hard work. Not because they require action; they do, but that's not the point. Facing God is the hardest thing you'll ever do. At the Radically Christian Cafe, a house church forum, Laurie Ann expressed it best:
The story of the people of Israel saying, "Don't make us see God! You, Moses, go for us! We don't want to see holiness, because we don't want to be holy ourselves -- we want the benefit without giving up anything!" is an archetype of "religion" and exactly what Jesus came to deliver us from. The book of Hebrews is completely devoted to this -- we can see God for ourselves -- but most people really don't want to. We have to fight our sinful hearts' desire to "be our own god" daily.
As long as we get to choose, everything is easy in that sense. The busy hands might be avoiding resting in His Spirit. He recluse may be avoiding the work of relational give and take. The sports fanatic avoids a world where there are no game rules. And so on; you know them. You see them in the mirror, at times. I know I do. The path to which God calls us, walking in His footprints, leads always to the Cross (Galatians 2:20). What part of you needs to die in order to be raised to new life defined by Him?
But let's go a little farther down that path. Let's apply this Word in concrete ways. Can you walk away from the one thing in your life which has consumed the biggest investment in time, effort and resources? Can you drop that at the foot of the Cross? Farther: Are you letting the routines of life so wrap you up, you can't imagine confronting social disorder, economic collapse, persecution and oppression? We've had it easy for a very long time, and we've let slip away the most basic foundation of civilization -- the ability to live without it. That's one of those mystical paradoxes, like we find running throughout Scripture.
The survival of civilization requires one thing: You carry civilization within you. Nobody's going to put civilization on you and make it stick. If you aren't civilized inside, it peels off quickly. Civilization as a human condition reflects the presence of God's Law in the hearts of men. Civilization is not a circumstance, but an internal frame of reference: Life is precious, and human life is most precious of all. Thus, the standard definition of civilization is the collection of rules, customs and habits necessary for humans to live together in close quarters without killing each other. It requires a bit of self-sacrifice on the front end, knowing it all pays off in the long run.
Cultural factors across the whole of Western civilization have undercut this. The foundation is crumbling. The core is rotten. Collapse is imminent. It seems everything around us contributes to the process. If you don't see it, you are blind. What can you do? What does God require of you? Start with 1 Corinthians 13:4-7 and Galatians 5:22-26. Those lay the foundation for civility.
Then, strengthen your commitment to Him by including a commitment to civilization. Be within yourself more civilized, regardless whether it makes you stand alone, and people take unfair advantage of you. Be just a little more militant about protecting it, about demanding it from others. You may not get it, but the demand is a message from God. Surely you won't mistake prissy Victorian culture for civilization; that's a bad application of the concept. Know the difference. Know that civility itself includes the concept of how to respond to the uncivilized, and includes the concept of knowing when you have the leverage and mandate from God to enforce, and when you don't. Hold forth the standard that people should be civil, and most certainly observe it yourself. More than anywhere else, apply it to your household, your family.
Next, prepare yourself to live by it in circumstances where it is universally ignored. What could you have done better this past week in being civil? Compare civility with all the situations you can recall, and imagine a better outcome. Come to the place where you understand a civilized man knows how to wield a spear against wild beasts, whether they have four legs or two, and teaches his wife and kids something about it. Civilized people know there are no perfect answers in bad situations, and make the most of it by doing what they must.
Yes, it means work, hard work and lots of it. It means seeing the face of God, and stripping away all those things which don't matter.
Tuesday, August 21, 2007
Revelation 5
It is all too easy for us to lose sight of the context. We have seen the Lord of Glory, described to us in terms unmistakable to those familiar with the Bible and it's symbolic frame of reference. We have noted a central element of the revelation at hand is His Covenant of Noah, the divine Law of Civil Government, because the symbol of that covenant figures prominently in the vision. From this, we would rightly assume much of what follows applies to that covenant. The key to this Apocalypse is more than simply noting it is a revelation of Jesus Christ; it reveals what He wants us to know about our dealings with human governments, particularly in the persecutions we can expect from such institutions. This is the message to John's flock, and to the Church at large throughout history.
Having seen the Creator of all things in His Courts Above, what does this require of us? What does He demand from those of us allowed to perceive the fullness of Who He is? This chapter is a tight continuation of the previous. The vision of Jehovah on His Throne in Heaven flows further, as John brings the focus to what God Almighty holds in His right hand. From his exile at the hands of the Roman government, John is granted a vision in the Spirit, a look into the spirit realm, a different plane than our mundane existence. What John sees are symbols of eternal truth, themselves invisible to human eyes, generally incomprehensible to the human mind, but revealed by God in a form His Holy Spirit brings to life in His children. For His children, he holds forth a revelation in His right hand. The right hand of a ruler and judge is the hand of power and authority.
It resembles a typical Roman legal document, because it is written on both sides. This scroll also represents a last will and testament, the final act and explanation of what shall be the disposition of all one accumulated during the years of life. It can only be opened upon the death of the one who composes its contents. The authority to open it must be equal to that which made the seals. Thus, we see seven seals, a symbol of things sacred, of a divine nature. It must be opened by One who commands the Seven Spirits, and no other.
As an officer of the Court, a mighty angel calls for anyone worthy, anyone possessing legal authority to break the seals. There is no one. At this, John wept bitterly. The obvious reason is the final instructions God offers to His Church are to be denied her. Without proper authority, John must not pass on this revelation (Daniel 12:4, 8-9). He knew he was the last living apostle, and this last portion of truth would die with him.
Then one of the elders, one of the faithful servants of the Lord, tells John to restrain his tears. There is indeed One worthy, after all. The elder uses unambiguous terms: The victorious Messiah, the One who has conquered all things, has come forward to open the scroll. This One is further described as the Final Passover Lamb, slain by the hands of sin, yet alive again by His own authority over Death. Horns represent power; seven makes it divine power. Eyes see clearly the truth of things; seven makes it divine clarity of vision. Together, this represents His authority to send forth the Seven Spirits of Almighty God throughout all Creation. He stands before the High King, the Lawgiver and Judge of all things, as a faithful Son. Having been sent on a quest, a mission of testing and unspeakable sorrow, He brings to His Father the proof of victory. He has won the right to bask in the glow of His Father's approving gaze. He also shows Himself worthy to break the seals and open the Scroll.
As recognition of this, the Elders and Four Living Creatures offer Him praise as to the Father. He now holds the authority to receive and answer the prayers of all the saints -- past, present and future -- to grant understanding and instruction in the matter at hand. His Blood is the last and final offering for redemption, paying for all the sins for all time. There is now no meaning at all, no validity to national boundaries, to ethnic identity, nor any other category of human understanding. That includes the divide between Jew and Gentile, for those slow of understanding. We who share in His Blood receive His power and authority to serve on the earth. God help us if we do not grasp this point: In His name, no authority on earth can demand anything contrary to His commands. It may well mean we join Him in death, but we cannot capitulate to any other authority. There is recognition of no other loyalty in the soul He saves.
The chapter ends in a climax which won't let this rest. This is no single act of worship, but continuous. Indeed, the whole scene takes place outside of time and space constraints. It is truth eternal, from before Creation, continuing after The End, and unmistakably manifested in Creation during its brief span. This is Ultimate Reality, Truth which cannot be found by any level of human intelligence nor effort. It is out of reach. We do not arrive at such an understanding; it is granted from Above, the only way anyone gets it here below. Once revealed, once granted from God, it is most certainly within reach, and we are bound by its requirements. By His help, we apply this divine perspective to all we experience, letting revelation provide the necessary order and meaning to all other things.
We take our places, hearts and souls open, ready to receive the revelation of the Scroll.
Having seen the Creator of all things in His Courts Above, what does this require of us? What does He demand from those of us allowed to perceive the fullness of Who He is? This chapter is a tight continuation of the previous. The vision of Jehovah on His Throne in Heaven flows further, as John brings the focus to what God Almighty holds in His right hand. From his exile at the hands of the Roman government, John is granted a vision in the Spirit, a look into the spirit realm, a different plane than our mundane existence. What John sees are symbols of eternal truth, themselves invisible to human eyes, generally incomprehensible to the human mind, but revealed by God in a form His Holy Spirit brings to life in His children. For His children, he holds forth a revelation in His right hand. The right hand of a ruler and judge is the hand of power and authority.
It resembles a typical Roman legal document, because it is written on both sides. This scroll also represents a last will and testament, the final act and explanation of what shall be the disposition of all one accumulated during the years of life. It can only be opened upon the death of the one who composes its contents. The authority to open it must be equal to that which made the seals. Thus, we see seven seals, a symbol of things sacred, of a divine nature. It must be opened by One who commands the Seven Spirits, and no other.
As an officer of the Court, a mighty angel calls for anyone worthy, anyone possessing legal authority to break the seals. There is no one. At this, John wept bitterly. The obvious reason is the final instructions God offers to His Church are to be denied her. Without proper authority, John must not pass on this revelation (Daniel 12:4, 8-9). He knew he was the last living apostle, and this last portion of truth would die with him.
Then one of the elders, one of the faithful servants of the Lord, tells John to restrain his tears. There is indeed One worthy, after all. The elder uses unambiguous terms: The victorious Messiah, the One who has conquered all things, has come forward to open the scroll. This One is further described as the Final Passover Lamb, slain by the hands of sin, yet alive again by His own authority over Death. Horns represent power; seven makes it divine power. Eyes see clearly the truth of things; seven makes it divine clarity of vision. Together, this represents His authority to send forth the Seven Spirits of Almighty God throughout all Creation. He stands before the High King, the Lawgiver and Judge of all things, as a faithful Son. Having been sent on a quest, a mission of testing and unspeakable sorrow, He brings to His Father the proof of victory. He has won the right to bask in the glow of His Father's approving gaze. He also shows Himself worthy to break the seals and open the Scroll.
As recognition of this, the Elders and Four Living Creatures offer Him praise as to the Father. He now holds the authority to receive and answer the prayers of all the saints -- past, present and future -- to grant understanding and instruction in the matter at hand. His Blood is the last and final offering for redemption, paying for all the sins for all time. There is now no meaning at all, no validity to national boundaries, to ethnic identity, nor any other category of human understanding. That includes the divide between Jew and Gentile, for those slow of understanding. We who share in His Blood receive His power and authority to serve on the earth. God help us if we do not grasp this point: In His name, no authority on earth can demand anything contrary to His commands. It may well mean we join Him in death, but we cannot capitulate to any other authority. There is recognition of no other loyalty in the soul He saves.
The chapter ends in a climax which won't let this rest. This is no single act of worship, but continuous. Indeed, the whole scene takes place outside of time and space constraints. It is truth eternal, from before Creation, continuing after The End, and unmistakably manifested in Creation during its brief span. This is Ultimate Reality, Truth which cannot be found by any level of human intelligence nor effort. It is out of reach. We do not arrive at such an understanding; it is granted from Above, the only way anyone gets it here below. Once revealed, once granted from God, it is most certainly within reach, and we are bound by its requirements. By His help, we apply this divine perspective to all we experience, letting revelation provide the necessary order and meaning to all other things.
We take our places, hearts and souls open, ready to receive the revelation of the Scroll.
Monday, August 20, 2007
Junk Food for the Soul
Let's go to the supermarket. In the aisle where cereal boxes line both sides, I could point to some boxes which are more nutritious than what they contain. As you may know, these are the same boxes younger children beg for when you bring them with you to shop. It's the same boxes flashed across the screen between short snatches of Saturday morning cartoons.
Neither TV executives, marketers, nor most cereal makers care about you or your children. They love the dollars children often command by virtue of nagging their parents. Parents love the pacification of nagging children provided by popular foods and by television. Parents too often love their own televised pacifiers, too.
It's so easy to forget, even for Christians, the dangers of watching TV in concrete terms of how it acts as a hypnotic agent. I don't pretend to understand all the various reasons why it acts that way on the brain, only that I know it does. I've come to despise the whole system behind that noisy, one-eyed god in most homes across the U.S.
I won't be a hypocrite about it, though. Show me evidence something in my CRT or in the way computer GUIs have a similar effect and I'll change the way I use my computer. For now, best I understand, it is something tied to the effect of moving images which holds the greatest threat. So the part of Net use which includes YouTube is probably a bad thing. I haven't seen proof it is, but I know people act the same watching TV and Net videos, and the effects appear equivalent.
What I do understand is something in the human reaction in terms of clinical psychology. I don't exaggerate when I use the word "hypnotic" -- I mean that in the clinical sense. That is, human rational judgment is at least partially crippled when gazing at the moving images on the screen. That's too well established in clinical testing to dispute. For someone like me, with ADD, every moving image is a distraction. Because I'm aware of it, the moving images make me a bit angry, and I quickly move to block them in my web browser.
While I admit to carefully selecting what multimedia I allow myself to watch, I'm still pondering whether it's inherently bad for me. Is there a level of self-awareness and cognitive preparation which gives one power to resist the hypnosis? I do know some people exhibit a remarkable resistance to clinical hypnosis, even under the influence of hypnotic drugs. I don't think anybody really knows how or why they do that. A related question for you and I is: Will God protect us? Is there a point where we cross the line and fling a challenge in His face?
I ponder this. When I link it with other concerns, the question becomes a little more urgent. I'm not entirely smug about Linux and BSD resisting threats typical of Windows' vulnerabilities. Some threats to system integrity are inherent in the ability to play various multimedia from the Net, because the software required for viewing it has security holes. How the media player accesses the system resources may offer the bad guys a chance to slip in a video or sound clip which takes control of your computer away from you.
Such concerns together come under the heading of stewardship. That is, we are responsible to do all we can to protect from abuse those things God gave us, from access by the Enemy for his evil purposes. You are obliged by the Covenant of Christ to keep from offering your mind or your computer to Satan, even by ignorance. The question then is: Lord, how should we configure our systems to glorify You? I avoid TV like the plague, though I'm not yet to the point of demanding my family toss it out on the curb. I'm not sure that's fair, or worth the ensuing fuss, until the threat is more obvious to them. I feel I haven't proven my case, yet. I'm still jumping on teachable moments, though, and resistance is weakening.
The one thing which keeps me from dumping the computer GUI altogether is browsing the Net. Some pages are simply unreadable with current text-mode browsers. This includes pages I feel are important to my ministry, in maintaining an awareness of critical issues. I've already proven to my own satisfaction I can write on the console, and have even posted here on Google's Blogger using text-mode browsers. However, I note such things as paragraph spacing doesn't render correctly, so it's a bit hard to read from such a browser.
Such issues depend on whether text-mode browsers begin handling CSS, or whether the Net standards move more to the newly proposed HTML 5 versus XHTML. Then there's the ongoing question whether we can ever expect the Net as a whole, or even just the places we Linux-BSD geeks visit, will ever become compliant with established standards of any kind. The Microsoft Borg still flouts those standards, and quite a few users of MS products are downright militant about forcing us to put up with the violations of standards. It's all a big mess, and I'm frankly wondering if the whole thing won't collapse soon.
I don't have as many answers as I'd like. The few I have may not apply well to fellow believers. Christian, you'll have to make your own way, find your own calling from God and what it requires of you. However, I hope and pray you don't ignore the very real dangers of junk in your bodies (the Temple of Christ) and in your minds. A cluttered soul is not a good witness.
Neither TV executives, marketers, nor most cereal makers care about you or your children. They love the dollars children often command by virtue of nagging their parents. Parents love the pacification of nagging children provided by popular foods and by television. Parents too often love their own televised pacifiers, too.
It's so easy to forget, even for Christians, the dangers of watching TV in concrete terms of how it acts as a hypnotic agent. I don't pretend to understand all the various reasons why it acts that way on the brain, only that I know it does. I've come to despise the whole system behind that noisy, one-eyed god in most homes across the U.S.
I won't be a hypocrite about it, though. Show me evidence something in my CRT or in the way computer GUIs have a similar effect and I'll change the way I use my computer. For now, best I understand, it is something tied to the effect of moving images which holds the greatest threat. So the part of Net use which includes YouTube is probably a bad thing. I haven't seen proof it is, but I know people act the same watching TV and Net videos, and the effects appear equivalent.
What I do understand is something in the human reaction in terms of clinical psychology. I don't exaggerate when I use the word "hypnotic" -- I mean that in the clinical sense. That is, human rational judgment is at least partially crippled when gazing at the moving images on the screen. That's too well established in clinical testing to dispute. For someone like me, with ADD, every moving image is a distraction. Because I'm aware of it, the moving images make me a bit angry, and I quickly move to block them in my web browser.
While I admit to carefully selecting what multimedia I allow myself to watch, I'm still pondering whether it's inherently bad for me. Is there a level of self-awareness and cognitive preparation which gives one power to resist the hypnosis? I do know some people exhibit a remarkable resistance to clinical hypnosis, even under the influence of hypnotic drugs. I don't think anybody really knows how or why they do that. A related question for you and I is: Will God protect us? Is there a point where we cross the line and fling a challenge in His face?
I ponder this. When I link it with other concerns, the question becomes a little more urgent. I'm not entirely smug about Linux and BSD resisting threats typical of Windows' vulnerabilities. Some threats to system integrity are inherent in the ability to play various multimedia from the Net, because the software required for viewing it has security holes. How the media player accesses the system resources may offer the bad guys a chance to slip in a video or sound clip which takes control of your computer away from you.
Such concerns together come under the heading of stewardship. That is, we are responsible to do all we can to protect from abuse those things God gave us, from access by the Enemy for his evil purposes. You are obliged by the Covenant of Christ to keep from offering your mind or your computer to Satan, even by ignorance. The question then is: Lord, how should we configure our systems to glorify You? I avoid TV like the plague, though I'm not yet to the point of demanding my family toss it out on the curb. I'm not sure that's fair, or worth the ensuing fuss, until the threat is more obvious to them. I feel I haven't proven my case, yet. I'm still jumping on teachable moments, though, and resistance is weakening.
The one thing which keeps me from dumping the computer GUI altogether is browsing the Net. Some pages are simply unreadable with current text-mode browsers. This includes pages I feel are important to my ministry, in maintaining an awareness of critical issues. I've already proven to my own satisfaction I can write on the console, and have even posted here on Google's Blogger using text-mode browsers. However, I note such things as paragraph spacing doesn't render correctly, so it's a bit hard to read from such a browser.
Such issues depend on whether text-mode browsers begin handling CSS, or whether the Net standards move more to the newly proposed HTML 5 versus XHTML. Then there's the ongoing question whether we can ever expect the Net as a whole, or even just the places we Linux-BSD geeks visit, will ever become compliant with established standards of any kind. The Microsoft Borg still flouts those standards, and quite a few users of MS products are downright militant about forcing us to put up with the violations of standards. It's all a big mess, and I'm frankly wondering if the whole thing won't collapse soon.
I don't have as many answers as I'd like. The few I have may not apply well to fellow believers. Christian, you'll have to make your own way, find your own calling from God and what it requires of you. However, I hope and pray you don't ignore the very real dangers of junk in your bodies (the Temple of Christ) and in your minds. A cluttered soul is not a good witness.
Sunday, August 19, 2007
Net Savvy: Here We Go Again
Yet another "naughty ISP" article on Slashdot. It's not just about profit, but the politics of profit. It's typical corporate behavior: taking the path of least resistance, under the cover of a false image, as opposed to creating a genuine identity. It's the Net Geeks in revolt again. It's also an itch I need to scratch, and I won't pretend to have any real answers on the grand scale. What I hope to offer is a perspective which will allow Christians to make intelligent decisions in future.
Let me propose a metaphor: The big broadband operators are like wolves, tending to run in a pack. Each will take their own bite out of the herd of consumers, but they are all predatory. We are their food. We have allowed the marketers to condition us into being cows, all uniform in passivity and self-interest. Those of us who know what horns are for are a tiny minority; thus has it ever been, and ever will be. It's called "human nature." Pure market forces are just a nice theory. The interaction between the entertainment slaves and the providers dominates the market, and we are stuck with it. On occasion we can make enough noise to embarrass them, but that's increasingly rare, in my estimation. Meanwhile, there's governments to lobby. That's like letting the wolves design the terrain on which the herd ranges.
Some of us understand the nature of the Internet, and we like it that way. We resist efforts to make it something anyone can control and own, regardless of their motives. The government/corporate system views us as parasites. From their perspective, we don't offer enough easy, fat pickings. We tend to independence. We are tough and stringy, and turn to fight when we can't evade. We demand what was actually promised, but as long as the ISPs can keep us isolated, we aren't a real problem. Yes, we can fight back, but are effective only when united, something we will never be. Let us revel in our independence, and make the most of the situation.
There are some possible answers. For example, one might find a decent market for savvy Net users with an independent bent. In an ideal world, a new class of ISP would arise, catering to that independent culture. Picture a string of small operations, independently owned, connected more directly to the backbone, managing to offer a no-frills service at reasonable prices. Given the nature of the terrain -- regulation, finance, economy -- it would require some really strong-minded operators, with the combination of vision, technical competence, and some money. It would require somebody whose interest in profit is frankly secondary to other considerations. Any volunteers? All I've got is vision, based on having seen it work in a few places.
A similar answer might be secondary services. Bypass your ISP's filter using encryption and alternate ports. Yes, it will cost extra, but if you can afford it, get an account on a server with unfiltered access. Anyone who has ever used SSH on the terminal knows about this. A commercial shell account or similar service will allow you to run a bittorrent client on that machine, then copy the file to your own using something like
Another growing hope is municipal wireless, but I find even local governments horrifically unreliable in the long term. Use this when and where you find it, but don't expect any degree of permanence. Also, they tend to filter for political reasons just like commercial ISPs, based on lobbying. Besides, you either must have a good laptop, or strong wireless client hardware. In a few places, there are visionary communities doing something like this independently, and the technology exists, but these communities are rare. Still, this is one of the most viable options I see.
A great deal depends on how you use the Net. If all we really need is information, we could probably do quite well with gopher, Fido, or even plain old text pages by FTP. BBN, anyone? Just use your modem to dial directly to someone else's computer and swap pages. This all assumes, of course, we learn a whole different means of "networking" on the human level. Still, when the main herd is running heavy multimedia bandwidth, these geeky minimal traffic protocols will go largely unnoticed. For graphics, there's always the next new compressed file format. This sort of talk requires we start discussing just what the web browser itself is and ought to be, and what it ought to do. For typical herd browsing, we've just about hit the limit with the current browser model, say many who know a lot more than I do. I don't know where to go with that discussion, except to note I would be quite happy with a lot less.
Exploring further, I've seen a handful of alternate protocols, piggybacked on the regular Net traffic. Some swear by Virtual Private Networking (VPN). What if there's a serious attempt by governments to follow China's lead and really crack down? Sorry, I can't find my crystal ball. It may well be the coming economic crash will be severe enough computers will be nothing more than fancy door stops.
Let me propose a metaphor: The big broadband operators are like wolves, tending to run in a pack. Each will take their own bite out of the herd of consumers, but they are all predatory. We are their food. We have allowed the marketers to condition us into being cows, all uniform in passivity and self-interest. Those of us who know what horns are for are a tiny minority; thus has it ever been, and ever will be. It's called "human nature." Pure market forces are just a nice theory. The interaction between the entertainment slaves and the providers dominates the market, and we are stuck with it. On occasion we can make enough noise to embarrass them, but that's increasingly rare, in my estimation. Meanwhile, there's governments to lobby. That's like letting the wolves design the terrain on which the herd ranges.
Some of us understand the nature of the Internet, and we like it that way. We resist efforts to make it something anyone can control and own, regardless of their motives. The government/corporate system views us as parasites. From their perspective, we don't offer enough easy, fat pickings. We tend to independence. We are tough and stringy, and turn to fight when we can't evade. We demand what was actually promised, but as long as the ISPs can keep us isolated, we aren't a real problem. Yes, we can fight back, but are effective only when united, something we will never be. Let us revel in our independence, and make the most of the situation.
There are some possible answers. For example, one might find a decent market for savvy Net users with an independent bent. In an ideal world, a new class of ISP would arise, catering to that independent culture. Picture a string of small operations, independently owned, connected more directly to the backbone, managing to offer a no-frills service at reasonable prices. Given the nature of the terrain -- regulation, finance, economy -- it would require some really strong-minded operators, with the combination of vision, technical competence, and some money. It would require somebody whose interest in profit is frankly secondary to other considerations. Any volunteers? All I've got is vision, based on having seen it work in a few places.
A similar answer might be secondary services. Bypass your ISP's filter using encryption and alternate ports. Yes, it will cost extra, but if you can afford it, get an account on a server with unfiltered access. Anyone who has ever used SSH on the terminal knows about this. A commercial shell account or similar service will allow you to run a bittorrent client on that machine, then copy the file to your own using something like
scp, or even a good FTP client. I know of a few private clubs who have shared expenses for a shared account because they all lived under the same monopoly broadband provider.Another growing hope is municipal wireless, but I find even local governments horrifically unreliable in the long term. Use this when and where you find it, but don't expect any degree of permanence. Also, they tend to filter for political reasons just like commercial ISPs, based on lobbying. Besides, you either must have a good laptop, or strong wireless client hardware. In a few places, there are visionary communities doing something like this independently, and the technology exists, but these communities are rare. Still, this is one of the most viable options I see.
A great deal depends on how you use the Net. If all we really need is information, we could probably do quite well with gopher, Fido, or even plain old text pages by FTP. BBN, anyone? Just use your modem to dial directly to someone else's computer and swap pages. This all assumes, of course, we learn a whole different means of "networking" on the human level. Still, when the main herd is running heavy multimedia bandwidth, these geeky minimal traffic protocols will go largely unnoticed. For graphics, there's always the next new compressed file format. This sort of talk requires we start discussing just what the web browser itself is and ought to be, and what it ought to do. For typical herd browsing, we've just about hit the limit with the current browser model, say many who know a lot more than I do. I don't know where to go with that discussion, except to note I would be quite happy with a lot less.
Exploring further, I've seen a handful of alternate protocols, piggybacked on the regular Net traffic. Some swear by Virtual Private Networking (VPN). What if there's a serious attempt by governments to follow China's lead and really crack down? Sorry, I can't find my crystal ball. It may well be the coming economic crash will be severe enough computers will be nothing more than fancy door stops.
Life of Christ: Matthew 5
The crowds had come from all over. For every one healed and sent away whole, it seemed three more arrived to replace him. Was this all the Master came to teach? Was He going to make of His disciples healers? No, there was more teaching than healing, though perhaps only His close followers knew that. A few in the crowd, indeed, wanted only the healing. Many realized the healings were but signs for something different, a teaching which had brought such power, a power not before seen in Israel. The scrolls held stories of miracles of old, but not on this scale.
More than a teaching of power, it was powerful teaching. Like no one before Him, this rabbi taught a stirring message. It was not simply one more rehashing of the Talmudic lessons, nor a dry recitation from the Books. No, this teaching beckoned to a place far beyond, a standard which, if obeyed, would require a miracle itself. For many, it was too much, and they went away confused. Plenty went away ridiculing. Still, just a few seemed to get it, seemed to hear in all this something they needed more than mere healing of the body, but healing of the soul.
Most likely it was Mount Tabor, more of a rocky, rounded high hill nearby where Jesus climbed up above the crowds for a time of teaching. Matthew uses this moment in the story to launch into an explanation of all the various teachings Jesus gave in those days. Finding a prominent spot, Jesus followed rabbinic custom and took a seat to teach. It was a subtle signal for quiet listening. In such a setting, the teaching session was primarily for His disciples. From the text, we know of only the first four of the Twelve, and they would have sat closest. The crowd would have already seen by their behavior these were His servants. By now, He would surely have drawn several others hoping for similar honor. Perhaps it was a pretty large group. Thus, it is unlikely some of the other eight were not among the listeners. It was time to begin winnowing the group, to see who could weather the dramatic difference in style, and more so, the difference in content.
He preached about the Kingdom of Heaven right on top of them. What was it like? It would be so easy to get lost in the details of His message. There really is a great deal of material, but we must first discern the theme. That is, what is the underlying concept Jesus seeks to declare? In this first collection of sayings, we are exposed to the shortcomings of typical rabbinic teaching. The constant refrain, "you have heard it said" refers to that. In this first few verses, Jesus starts by redefining what it means to be favored by God, to be blessed and happy in this life. As we've already established, the mainstream teaching of that day was to use relative wealth and comfort as the measure of God's favor, and holiness as marked by adhering to the massive pile of Talmudic minutiae, something about which Pharisees and Scribes were quite pushy.
Jesus threw this all out. Not only did He ignore the rabbinical style of quoting revered experts, but seemed to poke fun at them. No doubt some felt this was tantamount to rejecting the Covenant itself, but clearly He did not. Indeed, all of this was reflected in obscure comments by some rabbis, but most of that day paid only lip-service to such things. Jesus seemed to offer a competing understanding of the Covenant and its requirements. It was not about rules, wealth and political power, but about the soul at rest in God, regardless of circumstances. God's favor fell on those who were humble, mourned more at sin than at physical injury, knew who held the reins of life, cared more about true righteousness, showed mercy to others, were transparent in their motives, and preferred shalom of the soul over that of the flesh. Most favored of all were those who faced contempt for these attitudes, for it put them in the company of the famous prophets of old. These would receive from God far more in spiritual blessings than any man could claim in earthly rewards.
Such persecution was unavoidable, because the truly righteous were radically different. They were driven from within. This was not about overturning the Law and Prophets, but of bringing them to life, fulfilling their message. Their message was precious, and any man who dared to raise anything above them -- as most rabbis did with the Talmud, claiming it was more binding than Moses -- would find no place in the Kingdom of Heaven. The Word would outlive every man. Those who lived by the Word did not simply observe the obvious requirements in conduct, but sought to live the higher meaning. Here Jesus clearly shows the Law was type and shadow, but He is the Light of Truth. One could obey the whole of Moses, yet fail God completely.
It was not enough to withhold your hand from murder; you must pull your heart from the pit of anger. The courts of earthly judgment were severe enough. Imagine the Court of Heaven, where God sees the hearts of men, and needs no prosecutor. You can't stand before Him with unclean hands, but even worse is an unclean heart. Go first and live according to pure motives, or your ritual offerings will have no meaning.
Treating wives as little more than good cattle is an abomination to God. The Law of Moses was weak on men of weak character. However, the true standard of God was to hold your wife as His sacred gift. The only just reason for sending her away was adultery. God takes marriage seriously, and your marriage covenant was made before Him. It's not just avoiding pagan wives, but avoiding trading them around like property. One man, one woman, for life.
Silly nit-picking over legal trifles will cost you more in the end. If it requires some sort of legally binding oath to get you to keep your promises, you don't know God. God demands you simply say "yes" and "no" and mean it. If you spend your whole life just trying to get even with those who attack you, you don't know God. It's better to absorb losses and attacks and trust Him for recompense. Don't cling to mere stuff! The greatest riches are His genuine approval. The greatest power over all your enemies is love. Return blessings for evil, so that evil does not own you. How can you hope to enter the Kingdom if you aren't and different from sinners?
More than a teaching of power, it was powerful teaching. Like no one before Him, this rabbi taught a stirring message. It was not simply one more rehashing of the Talmudic lessons, nor a dry recitation from the Books. No, this teaching beckoned to a place far beyond, a standard which, if obeyed, would require a miracle itself. For many, it was too much, and they went away confused. Plenty went away ridiculing. Still, just a few seemed to get it, seemed to hear in all this something they needed more than mere healing of the body, but healing of the soul.
Most likely it was Mount Tabor, more of a rocky, rounded high hill nearby where Jesus climbed up above the crowds for a time of teaching. Matthew uses this moment in the story to launch into an explanation of all the various teachings Jesus gave in those days. Finding a prominent spot, Jesus followed rabbinic custom and took a seat to teach. It was a subtle signal for quiet listening. In such a setting, the teaching session was primarily for His disciples. From the text, we know of only the first four of the Twelve, and they would have sat closest. The crowd would have already seen by their behavior these were His servants. By now, He would surely have drawn several others hoping for similar honor. Perhaps it was a pretty large group. Thus, it is unlikely some of the other eight were not among the listeners. It was time to begin winnowing the group, to see who could weather the dramatic difference in style, and more so, the difference in content.
He preached about the Kingdom of Heaven right on top of them. What was it like? It would be so easy to get lost in the details of His message. There really is a great deal of material, but we must first discern the theme. That is, what is the underlying concept Jesus seeks to declare? In this first collection of sayings, we are exposed to the shortcomings of typical rabbinic teaching. The constant refrain, "you have heard it said" refers to that. In this first few verses, Jesus starts by redefining what it means to be favored by God, to be blessed and happy in this life. As we've already established, the mainstream teaching of that day was to use relative wealth and comfort as the measure of God's favor, and holiness as marked by adhering to the massive pile of Talmudic minutiae, something about which Pharisees and Scribes were quite pushy.
Jesus threw this all out. Not only did He ignore the rabbinical style of quoting revered experts, but seemed to poke fun at them. No doubt some felt this was tantamount to rejecting the Covenant itself, but clearly He did not. Indeed, all of this was reflected in obscure comments by some rabbis, but most of that day paid only lip-service to such things. Jesus seemed to offer a competing understanding of the Covenant and its requirements. It was not about rules, wealth and political power, but about the soul at rest in God, regardless of circumstances. God's favor fell on those who were humble, mourned more at sin than at physical injury, knew who held the reins of life, cared more about true righteousness, showed mercy to others, were transparent in their motives, and preferred shalom of the soul over that of the flesh. Most favored of all were those who faced contempt for these attitudes, for it put them in the company of the famous prophets of old. These would receive from God far more in spiritual blessings than any man could claim in earthly rewards.
Such persecution was unavoidable, because the truly righteous were radically different. They were driven from within. This was not about overturning the Law and Prophets, but of bringing them to life, fulfilling their message. Their message was precious, and any man who dared to raise anything above them -- as most rabbis did with the Talmud, claiming it was more binding than Moses -- would find no place in the Kingdom of Heaven. The Word would outlive every man. Those who lived by the Word did not simply observe the obvious requirements in conduct, but sought to live the higher meaning. Here Jesus clearly shows the Law was type and shadow, but He is the Light of Truth. One could obey the whole of Moses, yet fail God completely.
It was not enough to withhold your hand from murder; you must pull your heart from the pit of anger. The courts of earthly judgment were severe enough. Imagine the Court of Heaven, where God sees the hearts of men, and needs no prosecutor. You can't stand before Him with unclean hands, but even worse is an unclean heart. Go first and live according to pure motives, or your ritual offerings will have no meaning.
Treating wives as little more than good cattle is an abomination to God. The Law of Moses was weak on men of weak character. However, the true standard of God was to hold your wife as His sacred gift. The only just reason for sending her away was adultery. God takes marriage seriously, and your marriage covenant was made before Him. It's not just avoiding pagan wives, but avoiding trading them around like property. One man, one woman, for life.
Silly nit-picking over legal trifles will cost you more in the end. If it requires some sort of legally binding oath to get you to keep your promises, you don't know God. God demands you simply say "yes" and "no" and mean it. If you spend your whole life just trying to get even with those who attack you, you don't know God. It's better to absorb losses and attacks and trust Him for recompense. Don't cling to mere stuff! The greatest riches are His genuine approval. The greatest power over all your enemies is love. Return blessings for evil, so that evil does not own you. How can you hope to enter the Kingdom if you aren't and different from sinners?
Saturday, August 18, 2007
This Is Why I Don't Debate
I don't debate. God did not call me to debate nor defend. From time to time, I may undertake a defense, but I'm not all that good at it. My primary response is the response I give to those who deny my basic faith: I'm simply clinging to what God put in me. No amount of rational argument or exchanging Bible verses like bullets at 20 paces can affect the confidence and commitment which is quite likely to one day see me face death for it. Meanwhile, my calling is to teach and preach the Word. If you are sure that requires I learn debate, I'll tell you show me the Scripture. This is not about convincing, but about sharing the Word of truth and the letting the Holy Spirit do the convincing. He reserves that task for Himself.
That's not to say debate is somehow wrong. There are plenty who do it well, far better than I ever will. Having waited sufficient interval to face the thing calmly, Kim Riddlebarger posts a mighty fine response to John MacArthur's attack on amillennarians. This attack came at a conference back in April. There are sufficient links in Riddlebarger's post to reference the context.
What drew my attention is how much of his post echoes independently my own teaching. That is, I see my feeble thoughts bolstered by his PhD-level comments saying pretty much the same thing. For example, MacArthur charges we don't have a proper perspective on the relationship between the OT and NT:
I can't count how often I've been charged with "spiritualizing" the text, as if that were some sort of put-down. I'm only following the Apostles and Jesus Christ in how they viewed the OT. I dare say I'd rather not be found disputing their assertions.
Another false charge is "replacement theology:"
And so it goes. I really hope you find time to read the whole post. You'll see MacArthur wanders far too close, almost into the impact zone of intellectual dishonesty on this one.
All too sadly, this stuff is common with eschatology debates. You have some really big names and popular voices demanding a fair and logical debate, but drifting below the belt with their punches. I expect to see a lot of very red faces standing before the King of Glory when these things are brought up on That Day.
That's not to say debate is somehow wrong. There are plenty who do it well, far better than I ever will. Having waited sufficient interval to face the thing calmly, Kim Riddlebarger posts a mighty fine response to John MacArthur's attack on amillennarians. This attack came at a conference back in April. There are sufficient links in Riddlebarger's post to reference the context.
[H]ere is John MacArthur telling confessional Calvinists that unless they give up their amillennialism, they cannot be consistently "Calvinists." The sheer audacity of that charge is striking.
What drew my attention is how much of his post echoes independently my own teaching. That is, I see my feeble thoughts bolstered by his PhD-level comments saying pretty much the same thing. For example, MacArthur charges we don't have a proper perspective on the relationship between the OT and NT:
Reformed amillennarians have never argued that the Old Testament is "amillennial" per se. Let’s be clear about that. We have argued that the promise of a land given to Israel is itself typological of a heavenly kingdom which was inconceivable in the days of the patriarchs and Moses. But we only know this because the author of Hebrews tells us as much. In other words, the New Testament tells us what the things promised in the Old Testament truly mean....
The point is that we could never possibly understand the promise in its fullness if we regarded the original promise in Genesis 12:1-3 as the hermeneutical key to determine how we understand such things even in the light of future (and greater) revelatory light.
Dispensationalists have this completely backwards. They say the Old Testament tells us what the promise is–a land in Palestine. Therefore, we must take this literally (even if the New Testament tells us otherwise) or else we undermine the authority of Scripture.
We say the New Testament clarifies and amplifies the Old Testament promises in light of Christ. It is not the amillennarian, but the apostle Paul who "spiritualizes" the land promise by extending the land promised to Abraham to the whole world after the coming of Christ (Romans 4:13). It is not the amillennarian, but the author of Hebrews who tells us that the promise of a land in Palestine was typological of the heavenly city which Abraham desired because he say that the land pointed him to something even greater. Now that Christ has come, we can see why redemptive history unfolds in the manner that it does. Promise gives way to fulfillment. Types and shadows give way to biblical reality. And while we are speaking of the Old Testament, didn't Joshua himself tell us that the typological promise of the land had already been fulfilled (Joshua 21:43), leading us to expect the New Testament to universalize the land promise in light of the coming of Christ?
I can't count how often I've been charged with "spiritualizing" the text, as if that were some sort of put-down. I'm only following the Apostles and Jesus Christ in how they viewed the OT. I dare say I'd rather not be found disputing their assertions.
Another false charge is "replacement theology:"
Given all the "replacement theology" charges made by popular dispensational writers like John Hagee, it is sad that this same charge now comes from Dr. MacArthur. Let me put it simply so as not to be misunderstood. Reformed amillenniarians do not believe that the church "replaces" Israel. Repeat, we do not believe that the church replaces Israel....
Israel is not "replaced" by the church. Rather, the people of God (believing Jews and Gentiles) in the Old Covenant era are vastly supplemented by believers from every nation tribe and tongue in the New Covenant. This is not "replacement theology." It should be called "expansion theology" since the people of God become so numerous after the coming of Christ that the multitude in heaven cannot be counted (Revelation 7:9-10). In fact, that multitude encompasses people from the ends of the earth, including many ethnic Jews who are among the elect and believe in Jesus, because Jesus Christ has been revealed to them by a gracious God.
And so it goes. I really hope you find time to read the whole post. You'll see MacArthur wanders far too close, almost into the impact zone of intellectual dishonesty on this one.
This is hard to say, but in his lecture Dr. MacArthur set up and repeatedly attacked a straw man. His was a pyrrhic victory over a phantom foe.
If you are a dispensationalist, my plea is that you don't repeat the arguments Dr. MacArthur used in this lecture. Disagree as you will, you do have the responsibility to accurately represent the Reformed amillennial position. Dr. MacArthur did not.
All too sadly, this stuff is common with eschatology debates. You have some really big names and popular voices demanding a fair and logical debate, but drifting below the belt with their punches. I expect to see a lot of very red faces standing before the King of Glory when these things are brought up on That Day.
Friday, August 17, 2007
Mark of the Beast
Much is made of the phrase "Mark of the Beast" in studying eschatology. Most of it misses the point. The warning is based on giving more than a reasonable level of allegiance to any human organization -- any human organization.
In recent news reports we have Chertoff warning states which do not suck up and accept the divine mandate from the federal rulers. They have spoken, and the federal ID program will go forward. Any state failing this will find its citizens having to obtain an alternate federal ID to do business with any federal operation. Thus, you'll need a passport to visit a federal park in your home state.
Commentators warn us reasonably we should expect it won't stop there. The breathless warnings about the implanted electronic chips may be exaggeration, but not much. You must bow the knee. Christians who see in this echoes of the Mark of the Beast are right, but wrong.
That is, the two are connected, but that's not what the biblical warning is indicating. Rather, the warning is about your ultimate allegiance. Each of us has decide within our calling from God, and within our best understanding of what He requires of us. Does it go too far to accept the implant? It would be for me. I find the idea of a national ID card oppressive, but not more than I could do. My convictions don't revolt on a card; I am willing to fight about a permanent electronic implant. However, the implant is not the Mark of the Beast. You are marked when you are unwilling to face discomfort for the sake of holiness.
The image of accepting the Mark in your head means you are a true believer, utterly convinced it's all good, right and godly. The Mark in your hand is a lower level of commitment, tolerating the imposition for the sake of your daily existence. You'll have to find your own path to resistance, if at all. You are the one who stands before God with your choices.
In recent news reports we have Chertoff warning states which do not suck up and accept the divine mandate from the federal rulers. They have spoken, and the federal ID program will go forward. Any state failing this will find its citizens having to obtain an alternate federal ID to do business with any federal operation. Thus, you'll need a passport to visit a federal park in your home state.
Commentators warn us reasonably we should expect it won't stop there. The breathless warnings about the implanted electronic chips may be exaggeration, but not much. You must bow the knee. Christians who see in this echoes of the Mark of the Beast are right, but wrong.
That is, the two are connected, but that's not what the biblical warning is indicating. Rather, the warning is about your ultimate allegiance. Each of us has decide within our calling from God, and within our best understanding of what He requires of us. Does it go too far to accept the implant? It would be for me. I find the idea of a national ID card oppressive, but not more than I could do. My convictions don't revolt on a card; I am willing to fight about a permanent electronic implant. However, the implant is not the Mark of the Beast. You are marked when you are unwilling to face discomfort for the sake of holiness.
The image of accepting the Mark in your head means you are a true believer, utterly convinced it's all good, right and godly. The Mark in your hand is a lower level of commitment, tolerating the imposition for the sake of your daily existence. You'll have to find your own path to resistance, if at all. You are the one who stands before God with your choices.
Thursday, August 16, 2007
Revelation 4
Who's in charge? This is the ultimate question John answers in Chapter 4. It is not enough to simply note in passing Jehovah is Creator and Lord. We have a dire need of taking upon ourselves the full impact of what that means, and we need it often.
Only a fool would see in this description by John anything to be taken literally. Indeed, I would suggest it requires a particular form of intellectual dishonesty, a rejection of truth. Far too often in Scripture we are warned no man can see God and live. To face the Creator of all things would require the fallen flesh to flee away in death. We are warned quite pointedly in other places things in Heaven, the place of Ultimate Reality, can only be modeled here on earth. Further, they can only be modeled conceptually, within a human context, not precisely as with a scale model. Thus, John describes his vision of God Almighty in terms of his own context, a context which is not so hard to understand if we but choose to grasp it.
We find John providing a certain amount of context by telling us we are about to see something of Ultimate Reality -- he is going to describe the way things are in Heaven. A symbolic door is opened, and he is commanded to come up and see, and as readers we follow him. To prevent dying, he is entered into a different mode of experience, he is "in the Spirit." We know immediately what follows cannot be a vision of human eyes, but a statement of impact on the soul from perception with spiritual eyes. The central basic assumption of the whole book -- indeed, of Christian faith -- is Jehovah is God, there is no other, and He is most certainly actively involved in His Creation. That we see here a very standard presentation of authority, and the implications of that claim, are often lost on those who profess to serve Him.
As surely as God is the Governor of all the universe, we know all other claims to authority depend on His. Any presumed authority must acknowledge His claim, or forfeit any respect from His servants. Indeed, all earthly allegiance by Christians is conditional. We seem to understand the concept of individual accountability, but generally miss the fuller context of why this element exists in the Kingdom. Today we speak of "human rights" in the context of discussing human government. The terminology itself is dangerous, because it leaves open a whole raft of false understanding. We assume "the consent of the governed" is somehow a reflection of biblical teaching, or at least biblical assumptions, but this is patently false. The whole of Scripture assumes no such thing; rather, the Bible assumes all living things are under the absolute authority of God, and to varying degrees under the authority of human rulers. The central issues is not a matter of human rights before human rulers, but of the limited sphere of authority God allows human rulers.
There are two primary schools of thought regarding human rights. The first is they are not static, not eternal, but derived from the broader context of human rational thought. They can thus only be granted by governments, not a possession inherent in the human condition. They call for a higher, global level of government to back such a grant of rights. The other school of thought declares they are given by God, and governments are required to honor them, or risk various forms of justified revolt from those subject to the power of those governments. Both are completely missing the point. God does not grant rights. God makes demands on all classes and types, as He originates the proper sphere of authority for each. You have no right to any demand on any human government, but you do have a command from God to put His Law above those of any human government. That such allegiance will inevitably lead to conflict with human governments is taken for granted. Your property, safety and life will most certainly remain subject to human governments, which are in substance nothing more than a monopoly on force. As such, we know the proper place of human government in God's plan. John knew it, as did all the Apostles. They would have considered our modern talk of "human rights" as arrogance.
Yet, we can most certainly point at the failures of human government as sin. Much of what follows this chapter in John's Revelation is pointing the finger at sin. John and his flock most assuredly suffered at the hand of oppressive human government. By no means would John countenance a "just revolt," as there was in his world no such thing. Perhaps in the Old Testament world a revolt against a godless ruler could be commanded by God (1 Kings 11:29-39). This ended at the Cross, where the context of the Law of Moses was ended, and God's dealings with humanity took a wholly different track. Rather, John takes the eternal viewpoint typical of regenerate Jews who truly understood the teachings of Christ. The ancient Semitic assumptions, clarified against the clear revelation of God in Christ, are the biblical viewpoint. The substance of the Apocalypse is revealing to Christians what we can from such a viewpoint see in the nature of tribulation. Specifically, the bulk of John's Revelation is an explanation of what we should expect from human government, and hints at how we should react, explained in the form of a symbolic narrative -- the quintessential biblical teaching method.
We speak today of "jurisdiction" when we want to know what conduct is required of us at any place and time. However, our basic assumption is such things are objective in nature, that law rules over men. This carries too far something inherent in the biblical view of justice, and results in standing things on their head. In the scriptural worldview, one of the first things you must ask is, "Who's in charge here?" In ancient times, that would be primarily a religious question, a query about territorial gods. A secondary question assumed there would also be tribal-national gods to which the locals adhered. While there was often some overlap between the two, the assumption was one needed to know what these people held sacred, what were their practices, what one could expect of them. Thus, the God of Abraham came to the patriarch as "your God," the same as He did for Israel in the Exodus. We can see from the biblical narrative they struggled with the rather revolutionary concept there were no other gods, despite blunt statements by Moses this was so. It took quite some time before scriptural narrative shifted the assumption from "Jehovah is superior" to "Jehovah is alone." That's not to say those who truly served God from the heart didn't get it. They did, but most of the people did not, as we can see from constant rejection of God's commands. Seeing an overlapping and/or competing "jurisdiction" between gods was the standard assumption of those days until rather late in Hebrew history, and remained universal to pagans.
In a parallel to that, the question of human authority was often one of who serves whom, rather than who rules what. Everyone was accountable to someone else, and few could claim imperial status. Those who did showed their status by not condescending to get involved in internal affairs of those who ruled on their behalf. Higher powers simply demanded the lesser powers carry out their wishes, assuming they would have what it took. This is reflected in rulers seeking to maintain a distance from their subjects. On the one hand, a king like David built loyalty by reaching out to people in need, showing he was aware of their plight and regarded such things worthy of his attention. Yet only a fool would assume thereby David was his buddy. Thus, David had a regal court built, a throne placed at the focal point, all of which followed more or less an ancient protocol depending on the rank of the person. Such was the customary behavior of ancient Eastern potentates. Yet, surely David knew Who ruled over him (2 Samuel 7:18ff). Status was everything, and thus we see John revealing God Almighty by pointing out not who, but what stands in His court, and how they act.
Ancient rulers sought to awe the visitor to their courts. Typically this would mean decorations of precious materials, and other symbolic means. God need not decorate His throne and Himself; He is inherently rare and precious. Thus, He appears as jewels Himself. That the rainbow, symbol of the Covenant of Noah, appears here gives it a central prominence as the context. We do not have room here to examine in detail the meaning and importance of that; see "Christians and Government" for a fuller explanation. Enough for now to note John portrays God as the Lord of that covenant, as if the whole book is mostly about that.
There are other prominent symbols. The "24 elders" clearly represent humans, as angels are never described this way elsewhere. However, the obvious meaning is they represent the faithful (judged already: white robes and victors' crowns) from the Old Testament (12 Tribes) and the New Testament (12 Apostles). Ancient rulers typically kept seven advisers in their presence at all times. Unlike the stormy seas of human sin and tumult, before God's throne all is decided eternally, making that sea into glass. The Four Creatures represent nature, all that is noblest, strongest, wisest and swiftest. When these virtues see clearly, they see God's holiness and celebrate it accordingly.
Countless songs in every language have already taken up the two hymns of praise John records here. Justly so. Music is first and foremost inherently a form of worship. Anything worthy of our best efforts of artistic expression is dear to us. Whether the tune be simple and easy to hum, or complex beyond the ability of even some better orchestras, regardless of what instruments are included, we could hardly produce anything worthy of The One on the Throne. By extension, there is nothing we produce with our lives, even by His power, worthy of Him. Any price we might pay in devotion to Him is too little. This is the ultimate message of John: All you experience in this Vale of Sorrow is really insignificant before the Throne of God. More to the point, all the human suffering, both the ordinary and extraordinary, in the daily life of His Servants is just background noise, mere circumstance. The loss of life itself is just a circumstance, much less the loss of any other thing we might hold in stewardship for Him.
From this basis, John proceeds to reveal how the Church must face, must understand, the tribulation which must surely follow.
Only a fool would see in this description by John anything to be taken literally. Indeed, I would suggest it requires a particular form of intellectual dishonesty, a rejection of truth. Far too often in Scripture we are warned no man can see God and live. To face the Creator of all things would require the fallen flesh to flee away in death. We are warned quite pointedly in other places things in Heaven, the place of Ultimate Reality, can only be modeled here on earth. Further, they can only be modeled conceptually, within a human context, not precisely as with a scale model. Thus, John describes his vision of God Almighty in terms of his own context, a context which is not so hard to understand if we but choose to grasp it.
We find John providing a certain amount of context by telling us we are about to see something of Ultimate Reality -- he is going to describe the way things are in Heaven. A symbolic door is opened, and he is commanded to come up and see, and as readers we follow him. To prevent dying, he is entered into a different mode of experience, he is "in the Spirit." We know immediately what follows cannot be a vision of human eyes, but a statement of impact on the soul from perception with spiritual eyes. The central basic assumption of the whole book -- indeed, of Christian faith -- is Jehovah is God, there is no other, and He is most certainly actively involved in His Creation. That we see here a very standard presentation of authority, and the implications of that claim, are often lost on those who profess to serve Him.
As surely as God is the Governor of all the universe, we know all other claims to authority depend on His. Any presumed authority must acknowledge His claim, or forfeit any respect from His servants. Indeed, all earthly allegiance by Christians is conditional. We seem to understand the concept of individual accountability, but generally miss the fuller context of why this element exists in the Kingdom. Today we speak of "human rights" in the context of discussing human government. The terminology itself is dangerous, because it leaves open a whole raft of false understanding. We assume "the consent of the governed" is somehow a reflection of biblical teaching, or at least biblical assumptions, but this is patently false. The whole of Scripture assumes no such thing; rather, the Bible assumes all living things are under the absolute authority of God, and to varying degrees under the authority of human rulers. The central issues is not a matter of human rights before human rulers, but of the limited sphere of authority God allows human rulers.
There are two primary schools of thought regarding human rights. The first is they are not static, not eternal, but derived from the broader context of human rational thought. They can thus only be granted by governments, not a possession inherent in the human condition. They call for a higher, global level of government to back such a grant of rights. The other school of thought declares they are given by God, and governments are required to honor them, or risk various forms of justified revolt from those subject to the power of those governments. Both are completely missing the point. God does not grant rights. God makes demands on all classes and types, as He originates the proper sphere of authority for each. You have no right to any demand on any human government, but you do have a command from God to put His Law above those of any human government. That such allegiance will inevitably lead to conflict with human governments is taken for granted. Your property, safety and life will most certainly remain subject to human governments, which are in substance nothing more than a monopoly on force. As such, we know the proper place of human government in God's plan. John knew it, as did all the Apostles. They would have considered our modern talk of "human rights" as arrogance.
Yet, we can most certainly point at the failures of human government as sin. Much of what follows this chapter in John's Revelation is pointing the finger at sin. John and his flock most assuredly suffered at the hand of oppressive human government. By no means would John countenance a "just revolt," as there was in his world no such thing. Perhaps in the Old Testament world a revolt against a godless ruler could be commanded by God (1 Kings 11:29-39). This ended at the Cross, where the context of the Law of Moses was ended, and God's dealings with humanity took a wholly different track. Rather, John takes the eternal viewpoint typical of regenerate Jews who truly understood the teachings of Christ. The ancient Semitic assumptions, clarified against the clear revelation of God in Christ, are the biblical viewpoint. The substance of the Apocalypse is revealing to Christians what we can from such a viewpoint see in the nature of tribulation. Specifically, the bulk of John's Revelation is an explanation of what we should expect from human government, and hints at how we should react, explained in the form of a symbolic narrative -- the quintessential biblical teaching method.
We speak today of "jurisdiction" when we want to know what conduct is required of us at any place and time. However, our basic assumption is such things are objective in nature, that law rules over men. This carries too far something inherent in the biblical view of justice, and results in standing things on their head. In the scriptural worldview, one of the first things you must ask is, "Who's in charge here?" In ancient times, that would be primarily a religious question, a query about territorial gods. A secondary question assumed there would also be tribal-national gods to which the locals adhered. While there was often some overlap between the two, the assumption was one needed to know what these people held sacred, what were their practices, what one could expect of them. Thus, the God of Abraham came to the patriarch as "your God," the same as He did for Israel in the Exodus. We can see from the biblical narrative they struggled with the rather revolutionary concept there were no other gods, despite blunt statements by Moses this was so. It took quite some time before scriptural narrative shifted the assumption from "Jehovah is superior" to "Jehovah is alone." That's not to say those who truly served God from the heart didn't get it. They did, but most of the people did not, as we can see from constant rejection of God's commands. Seeing an overlapping and/or competing "jurisdiction" between gods was the standard assumption of those days until rather late in Hebrew history, and remained universal to pagans.
In a parallel to that, the question of human authority was often one of who serves whom, rather than who rules what. Everyone was accountable to someone else, and few could claim imperial status. Those who did showed their status by not condescending to get involved in internal affairs of those who ruled on their behalf. Higher powers simply demanded the lesser powers carry out their wishes, assuming they would have what it took. This is reflected in rulers seeking to maintain a distance from their subjects. On the one hand, a king like David built loyalty by reaching out to people in need, showing he was aware of their plight and regarded such things worthy of his attention. Yet only a fool would assume thereby David was his buddy. Thus, David had a regal court built, a throne placed at the focal point, all of which followed more or less an ancient protocol depending on the rank of the person. Such was the customary behavior of ancient Eastern potentates. Yet, surely David knew Who ruled over him (2 Samuel 7:18ff). Status was everything, and thus we see John revealing God Almighty by pointing out not who, but what stands in His court, and how they act.
Ancient rulers sought to awe the visitor to their courts. Typically this would mean decorations of precious materials, and other symbolic means. God need not decorate His throne and Himself; He is inherently rare and precious. Thus, He appears as jewels Himself. That the rainbow, symbol of the Covenant of Noah, appears here gives it a central prominence as the context. We do not have room here to examine in detail the meaning and importance of that; see "Christians and Government" for a fuller explanation. Enough for now to note John portrays God as the Lord of that covenant, as if the whole book is mostly about that.
There are other prominent symbols. The "24 elders" clearly represent humans, as angels are never described this way elsewhere. However, the obvious meaning is they represent the faithful (judged already: white robes and victors' crowns) from the Old Testament (12 Tribes) and the New Testament (12 Apostles). Ancient rulers typically kept seven advisers in their presence at all times. Unlike the stormy seas of human sin and tumult, before God's throne all is decided eternally, making that sea into glass. The Four Creatures represent nature, all that is noblest, strongest, wisest and swiftest. When these virtues see clearly, they see God's holiness and celebrate it accordingly.
Countless songs in every language have already taken up the two hymns of praise John records here. Justly so. Music is first and foremost inherently a form of worship. Anything worthy of our best efforts of artistic expression is dear to us. Whether the tune be simple and easy to hum, or complex beyond the ability of even some better orchestras, regardless of what instruments are included, we could hardly produce anything worthy of The One on the Throne. By extension, there is nothing we produce with our lives, even by His power, worthy of Him. Any price we might pay in devotion to Him is too little. This is the ultimate message of John: All you experience in this Vale of Sorrow is really insignificant before the Throne of God. More to the point, all the human suffering, both the ordinary and extraordinary, in the daily life of His Servants is just background noise, mere circumstance. The loss of life itself is just a circumstance, much less the loss of any other thing we might hold in stewardship for Him.
From this basis, John proceeds to reveal how the Church must face, must understand, the tribulation which must surely follow.
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
SSRIs and Satan
In a rather long article, David Kupelian addresses those fancy-name drugs with high prices used to treat "mood disorders" -- AKA selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors or SSRIs.
He won't go so far as to say they are inherently wrong, but suggests they are terribly dangerous for lack of full tesing. I would go so far as to say most of them are not safe enough to use, and should be taken off the market. This won't happen because Big Pharma is part of the US government.
In the process, Kupelian also discusses a bit about demonic intrusion in the human soul. He does a fair job of not sounding too sensationalist, avoiding the spooky chatter I've seen in some cheap religious huckster books. That's not to say I agree with everything he says, but this is a good introduction to the topic. I recommend you take the time to read it.
He won't go so far as to say they are inherently wrong, but suggests they are terribly dangerous for lack of full tesing. I would go so far as to say most of them are not safe enough to use, and should be taken off the market. This won't happen because Big Pharma is part of the US government.
In the process, Kupelian also discusses a bit about demonic intrusion in the human soul. He does a fair job of not sounding too sensationalist, avoiding the spooky chatter I've seen in some cheap religious huckster books. That's not to say I agree with everything he says, but this is a good introduction to the topic. I recommend you take the time to read it.
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
Revelation 2-3
We turn now to the addresses to the Seven Churches. As before, we could easily bury ourselves in detail, but too easily lose the primary message that way. Thus, I summarize the high points.
A brief note about terms. The Nicolaitans: From whatever source the name of this group comes, the context and early church scholars offer a usable description of their heresy. It was a branch of Gnosticism. For now, it's enough to know that fancy word represented a Western style rationalist logical clarity. Either Jesus was divine, or He was human; he could not be both, they would insist. Two branches of Gnosticism arose chasing one or the other choice. In the case of the Nicolaitans, it seems they believed Christ was a phantom, divine and spiritual, but not flesh. Thus, there was a belief the flesh was so utterly fallen, one need not concern oneself with it's lusts and sins. There's nothing you can do about it, so enjoy yourself.
The phrase Throne of Satan seems tied to emperor worship, because John mentions it in places where major temples to the emperor were found. Synagogue of Satan describes the presence of a strong Jewish persecution of Christians. Finally, the twin symbols of eating food offered to idols and sexual impurity were far more than the mere actions described. Together they indicate any form of compromise, raising any thing to the level of devotion belonging to Christ alone. Paul made it clear an idol was nothing, and temples reselling food from the altars were simply adding to their income. While eating this food itself was no sin, Paul was careful to point out how sinners considered it a strong indication one supported the pagan worship. That was reason enough to avoid it. Adultery was of the spiritual sort, but could easily include the physical kind. The spiritual adultery might cause all sorts of sin.
We believe the Church at Ephesus was John's home church, the central office as it were, for John's ministry. There in the city was a major temple, a major port, and a regional seat of government. These people knew how to get things done. Jesus speaks to that body as the Light of Truth, who held the power of every church's witness in His might right hand. It would be typical of such a congregation to have built up a solid base of organization. Their message of truth was clear, as was their commitment, and the high standards which naturally resulted. But in their organization, they had lost contact with the spirit of agape. Their witness was no longer a light to the lost, because they had regulated the life out of their work. The promise of obedience to the Law of Love was living eternally in that love.
Smyrna had seen many sackings and looting over the centuries. This church had learned to hold quite loosely to the things of this world. They had so little material goods, and constant persecution took their earthly peace. Indeed, it was about to get worse, and some would lose their earthly lives. Jesus called to them as the Lord of Eternity, and stood ready to welcome them into that eternal existence, where nothing could ever harm them again.
As the sword represents authority to punish evil, the Church of Pergamos faces Jesus as ultimate Wielder of the Word in judgment against sin. They did have a testimony for Jesus' name, but failed to fulfill the meaning of serving Him. One, they had teachers acting as Balaam did, inciting the church to compromise on issues which seemed minor at first, but brought them to moral ruin. Two, this gave room for Nicolaitans to operate. In both cases, the claim of "free from the Law" was carried beyond scriptural boundaries, discarding every restraint. We note this city had an impressive wide array of temples to various pagan deities, so the temptation to stray from high moral standards faced them at every turn. They must distinguish themselves by feasting on the Bread of Life (manna), not by aping the Jews, but obeying the higher Law of God Jesus taught. We note the Jews perpetuated a legend the Ark of Covenant had been hidden before Babylon invaded around 600BC, with the manna and such still inside it. This image was taken by John to signify Jesus was the true manna, promised from the beginning, hidden until His birth. As for the "white stone," this would be any one of several tokens of some special status, showing one is favored by the powers. This token could be presented as proof one held a privileged place, and could demand special treatment. The ancient practice of giving high-ranking servants a new name or title is included.
The church at the great commercial center of Thyatira faced a Christ whose pure vision did not require outside illumination, but made their own, to see the heart of every matter. His feet, resembling bronze while still in the oven, which process produced a flame too bright to gaze upon directly, walked in that purity and truth, treading down evil like brazen feet in grass. This church had made a home for some cult, a demonic presence in the form of a self-appointed prophetess. As with Jezebel, queen of Ahab, she was the actual controlling authority who demanded all bow the knee to a idolatry. This woman served Satan directly, tempting the believers with her beauty and delightful presentation to compromise. Her refusal to be corrected would see her sicken and die, and those who clung to her teachings would join her. Aside from this the church had no major trouble, so anyone with sufficient self-discipline to escape this trap was qualified spiritually to rule far more under the authority of He who ruled all other power and authority absolutely. This was hardly a promise of political power, but the power to serve Christ regardless of puny human efforts to stop the gospel message. This pure testimony would give them a spiritual brightness second only to Christ Himself.
Sardis was once the capital of Croesus, the richest king of legend. Now the town was insignificant, but so was the church. Jesus spoke to them with symbols of greatness to show their lack of it. The church was dead. It had all the appearances of honor, but most of the congregation were not regenerate. They were converts of mere habit and custom. The image of citizenship rolls hearkens to the ancient practice of cities keeping a list of full citizens. Those who died had their names erased in the annual ceremony of roll call. Jesus was about to call the roll and correct the register. Those not His would have their names removed. Those who stood firm against this hypocrisy would find themselves in His robes of righteousness, recognized before the Father.
In the City of Brotherly Love, Philadelphia, the Jews had no love at all. They never understood their rejection of Christ left them outside the Kingdom of Heaven. Christ, having inherited the full authority of David, who could admit or deny anyone citizenship, had full authority to ignore custom and pass his throne to any of his sons, was asserting that authority to open the gates to Eternity in defiance of Jewish claims. Those who found a home for their souls in the gospel message preached by the church would be welcomed into the Kingdom. When the "hour of trial" came -- the test of citizenship through which all the world must pass -- they would be inside the gates already. The coming of such a test would be sudden, so Christians cannot rest, lest they lose the crowns by which they would honor His Name. Indeed, these would not only be inside, but would form the pillars of God's royal court, never to depart again. It did not rely on their strength, which was little, but God's. Yet, with His strength, it was sufficient to mark them as true priests of God, who in times past wore in the earthly Temple the words, "Holiness to the Lord" on their heads. Thus, theirs was the high privilege of serving as recruiters for the Lord's Kingdom.
Laodicea could afford to refuse Roman aid and rebuilt their city from private funds after an earthquake around 60AD. They produced black wool, and had a fine medical academy built around the hot springs issuing from the rocky hill above the city, and the Phrygian eye salve made there. This church apparently faced no threat from Jews or other persecutors. This made them morally fat and lazy, spiritually naked, blind and wretched. This would be a church which could afford anything they wanted to spice up church gatherings, which otherwise had no meaning. Their testimony before the throne was as unpalatable as the water running in open sluices from the hot springs, having cooled too much for bathing, but not yet cold enough to refresh in drinking. Wealth and comfort were not inherently sinful, but this church was not what Christ built on earth in the souls of men. This church was built by those hardly changed. They could afford criers to share the gospel for them, musicians to worship for them, refined and educated speakers to teach them, builders to make a beautiful and comfortable facility. Our Lord was outside trying to come in and change their lives, but they saw no reason for it. Thus, they could hardly expect to join Him when this world passed away.
A brief note about terms. The Nicolaitans: From whatever source the name of this group comes, the context and early church scholars offer a usable description of their heresy. It was a branch of Gnosticism. For now, it's enough to know that fancy word represented a Western style rationalist logical clarity. Either Jesus was divine, or He was human; he could not be both, they would insist. Two branches of Gnosticism arose chasing one or the other choice. In the case of the Nicolaitans, it seems they believed Christ was a phantom, divine and spiritual, but not flesh. Thus, there was a belief the flesh was so utterly fallen, one need not concern oneself with it's lusts and sins. There's nothing you can do about it, so enjoy yourself.
The phrase Throne of Satan seems tied to emperor worship, because John mentions it in places where major temples to the emperor were found. Synagogue of Satan describes the presence of a strong Jewish persecution of Christians. Finally, the twin symbols of eating food offered to idols and sexual impurity were far more than the mere actions described. Together they indicate any form of compromise, raising any thing to the level of devotion belonging to Christ alone. Paul made it clear an idol was nothing, and temples reselling food from the altars were simply adding to their income. While eating this food itself was no sin, Paul was careful to point out how sinners considered it a strong indication one supported the pagan worship. That was reason enough to avoid it. Adultery was of the spiritual sort, but could easily include the physical kind. The spiritual adultery might cause all sorts of sin.
We believe the Church at Ephesus was John's home church, the central office as it were, for John's ministry. There in the city was a major temple, a major port, and a regional seat of government. These people knew how to get things done. Jesus speaks to that body as the Light of Truth, who held the power of every church's witness in His might right hand. It would be typical of such a congregation to have built up a solid base of organization. Their message of truth was clear, as was their commitment, and the high standards which naturally resulted. But in their organization, they had lost contact with the spirit of agape. Their witness was no longer a light to the lost, because they had regulated the life out of their work. The promise of obedience to the Law of Love was living eternally in that love.
Smyrna had seen many sackings and looting over the centuries. This church had learned to hold quite loosely to the things of this world. They had so little material goods, and constant persecution took their earthly peace. Indeed, it was about to get worse, and some would lose their earthly lives. Jesus called to them as the Lord of Eternity, and stood ready to welcome them into that eternal existence, where nothing could ever harm them again.
As the sword represents authority to punish evil, the Church of Pergamos faces Jesus as ultimate Wielder of the Word in judgment against sin. They did have a testimony for Jesus' name, but failed to fulfill the meaning of serving Him. One, they had teachers acting as Balaam did, inciting the church to compromise on issues which seemed minor at first, but brought them to moral ruin. Two, this gave room for Nicolaitans to operate. In both cases, the claim of "free from the Law" was carried beyond scriptural boundaries, discarding every restraint. We note this city had an impressive wide array of temples to various pagan deities, so the temptation to stray from high moral standards faced them at every turn. They must distinguish themselves by feasting on the Bread of Life (manna), not by aping the Jews, but obeying the higher Law of God Jesus taught. We note the Jews perpetuated a legend the Ark of Covenant had been hidden before Babylon invaded around 600BC, with the manna and such still inside it. This image was taken by John to signify Jesus was the true manna, promised from the beginning, hidden until His birth. As for the "white stone," this would be any one of several tokens of some special status, showing one is favored by the powers. This token could be presented as proof one held a privileged place, and could demand special treatment. The ancient practice of giving high-ranking servants a new name or title is included.
The church at the great commercial center of Thyatira faced a Christ whose pure vision did not require outside illumination, but made their own, to see the heart of every matter. His feet, resembling bronze while still in the oven, which process produced a flame too bright to gaze upon directly, walked in that purity and truth, treading down evil like brazen feet in grass. This church had made a home for some cult, a demonic presence in the form of a self-appointed prophetess. As with Jezebel, queen of Ahab, she was the actual controlling authority who demanded all bow the knee to a idolatry. This woman served Satan directly, tempting the believers with her beauty and delightful presentation to compromise. Her refusal to be corrected would see her sicken and die, and those who clung to her teachings would join her. Aside from this the church had no major trouble, so anyone with sufficient self-discipline to escape this trap was qualified spiritually to rule far more under the authority of He who ruled all other power and authority absolutely. This was hardly a promise of political power, but the power to serve Christ regardless of puny human efforts to stop the gospel message. This pure testimony would give them a spiritual brightness second only to Christ Himself.
Sardis was once the capital of Croesus, the richest king of legend. Now the town was insignificant, but so was the church. Jesus spoke to them with symbols of greatness to show their lack of it. The church was dead. It had all the appearances of honor, but most of the congregation were not regenerate. They were converts of mere habit and custom. The image of citizenship rolls hearkens to the ancient practice of cities keeping a list of full citizens. Those who died had their names erased in the annual ceremony of roll call. Jesus was about to call the roll and correct the register. Those not His would have their names removed. Those who stood firm against this hypocrisy would find themselves in His robes of righteousness, recognized before the Father.
In the City of Brotherly Love, Philadelphia, the Jews had no love at all. They never understood their rejection of Christ left them outside the Kingdom of Heaven. Christ, having inherited the full authority of David, who could admit or deny anyone citizenship, had full authority to ignore custom and pass his throne to any of his sons, was asserting that authority to open the gates to Eternity in defiance of Jewish claims. Those who found a home for their souls in the gospel message preached by the church would be welcomed into the Kingdom. When the "hour of trial" came -- the test of citizenship through which all the world must pass -- they would be inside the gates already. The coming of such a test would be sudden, so Christians cannot rest, lest they lose the crowns by which they would honor His Name. Indeed, these would not only be inside, but would form the pillars of God's royal court, never to depart again. It did not rely on their strength, which was little, but God's. Yet, with His strength, it was sufficient to mark them as true priests of God, who in times past wore in the earthly Temple the words, "Holiness to the Lord" on their heads. Thus, theirs was the high privilege of serving as recruiters for the Lord's Kingdom.
Laodicea could afford to refuse Roman aid and rebuilt their city from private funds after an earthquake around 60AD. They produced black wool, and had a fine medical academy built around the hot springs issuing from the rocky hill above the city, and the Phrygian eye salve made there. This church apparently faced no threat from Jews or other persecutors. This made them morally fat and lazy, spiritually naked, blind and wretched. This would be a church which could afford anything they wanted to spice up church gatherings, which otherwise had no meaning. Their testimony before the throne was as unpalatable as the water running in open sluices from the hot springs, having cooled too much for bathing, but not yet cold enough to refresh in drinking. Wealth and comfort were not inherently sinful, but this church was not what Christ built on earth in the souls of men. This church was built by those hardly changed. They could afford criers to share the gospel for them, musicians to worship for them, refined and educated speakers to teach them, builders to make a beautiful and comfortable facility. Our Lord was outside trying to come in and change their lives, but they saw no reason for it. Thus, they could hardly expect to join Him when this world passed away.
Monday, August 13, 2007
Stirring Bad Memories
This matters only because I am so recently confirmed in my departure from Southern Baptist affiliation. Aside from the whole Institutional versus House Church issue, I made it clear I could no longer stomach the neocon idolatry of the State which had replaced a fairly biblical faith in Christ.
First, let's note in passing: The various decisions and pronouncements of the SBC have never been a perfect barometer of what Southern Baptists thought, but the convictions of those most active in denominational politics. You could have found in any year a endless supply of individual Baptists grousing over something objectionable coming out of the Convention. In this, it probably reflects the basic politics of the US; has policy at the top every really been the will of the people? The failure of revolt indicates a lack of true conviction, or at least a measure of ignorance.
Thus, insofar as the Convention reflects the will of Southern Baptists -- or lack thereof -- Vance does a great job of examining the long legacy of the Baptist preference for peace and a small military. Now, simply admitting you don't quiver at the sight of the Stars and Stripes is enough to draw condemnation. There were plenty of veterans in the churches all along, so that's not it. There's something of the chickenhawk war-mongers behind the current political atmosphere. It's all been hijacked by the neocons, the worst chickenhawks in the US.
Sure, there are some designated "heroes" promoting the war in SBC congregations, but the veterans who aren't true believers in the cause are the silent majority. Yet, they are drowned out, or driven out, by the heavy presence of chickenhawks.
Oh, how I thank the Lord above for delivering me from such madness.
First, let's note in passing: The various decisions and pronouncements of the SBC have never been a perfect barometer of what Southern Baptists thought, but the convictions of those most active in denominational politics. You could have found in any year a endless supply of individual Baptists grousing over something objectionable coming out of the Convention. In this, it probably reflects the basic politics of the US; has policy at the top every really been the will of the people? The failure of revolt indicates a lack of true conviction, or at least a measure of ignorance.
Thus, insofar as the Convention reflects the will of Southern Baptists -- or lack thereof -- Vance does a great job of examining the long legacy of the Baptist preference for peace and a small military. Now, simply admitting you don't quiver at the sight of the Stars and Stripes is enough to draw condemnation. There were plenty of veterans in the churches all along, so that's not it. There's something of the chickenhawk war-mongers behind the current political atmosphere. It's all been hijacked by the neocons, the worst chickenhawks in the US.
chickenhawk: a term of derision indicating the quality of rabid support for war, but personally unwilling to serve in the military, presumably out of cowardice; indicating a resolve to win in warfare no matter how many lives of other people are lost; "let's you and him fight"
Sure, there are some designated "heroes" promoting the war in SBC congregations, but the veterans who aren't true believers in the cause are the silent majority. Yet, they are drowned out, or driven out, by the heavy presence of chickenhawks.
Oh, how I thank the Lord above for delivering me from such madness.
Sunday, August 12, 2007
Life of Christ: Matthew 4:12-25
Let us remind ourselves here Matthew does not recount every detail of the Jesus' daily life. He relies on the knowledge his Jewish readers had of that story, instead focusing on how that story showed Jesus was the Messiah promised of old. Thus, we are not told of the first few days of ministry following the Temptation, nor how he became acquainted with several of His Disciples via their discipleship under John the Baptist. He only briefly mentions the arrest of John, leaving it to the reader to realize this made the political situation hot for everyone associated with him. Not only Jesus, but John's disciples probably went underground. Some of them returned to their homes in Galilee, as did Jesus.
Nor are we told of the incident at the synagogue in Nazareth. It was there they tried to push Him off a steep high bluff at the edge of town. This was His Father's signal to move to Capernaum, a much larger city, and not so politically dangerous as Jerusalem nor other cities in Judea. Recall Capernaum as a major hub of trade traffic, as well as a primary regional tax office. It was, therefore, a major hub of news which gave His message the widest distribution. This represents a permanent move for His base of operations.
Matthew indicates how this is a direct fulfillment of Isaiah 9:1-2. The context of Isaiah's prophecy notes the long, troubled history of this region. First, this region had been settled long before the central highlands of Canaan had seen any settlement. The sea was fresh-water, filled with edible fish ever in good supply, and a crossroads from ancient trade routes stretching back before recorded history. This was easily one of the nicest places to live in the whole land of Palestine.
It was also the center of some desperately wicked pagan religions. The economic power backing these religions made them equally repugnant and powerful as enemies when Israel began The Conquest. The tribes of Zebulun and Naphthali failed utterly to drive them out. Later, when a portion of Dan migrated to an area north of this district, their new City of Dan there became a center of paganizing influence among the tribes of Israel. When Jeroboam broke away with the Ten Tribes to form a separate kingdom, it was no accident he chose Dan as the northern center of his alternate worship to prevent his subjects dividing their loyalty. This was the ultimate sin, using pagan idolatry as a political weapon, rather than trusting in Jehovah who had promised to make things work for Jeroboam.
Isaiah remarks on this deep spiritual darkness, and how it resulted in their being first taken away by Assyria. Unlike the rest of the Northern Kingdom of Israel, the region around the sea did not long remain fallow. It was quickly repopulated by all manner of volunteers relocating within the Assyrian Empire. These also rekindled the gloom of pagan worship, but the Messiah would break the first light of the Kingdom of Heaven there as the new dawn of truth.
The message was the same as John's: "Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand." However, Jesus was no mere herald, but held that Kingdom in His hand. In preparation for this Kingdom, He began to gather it's first royal officers. We find Matthew mentions first Peter and Andrew. Peter is the elder of the Twelve, possibly older than Jesus. These two men were business partners with Zebedee, whose two sons, James and John, are also called. We have already noted these latter were almost certainly first cousins of Jesus, and the former pair may also have been. At the very least, they were all fairly well known to each other already. Jesus calls them to join Him full time, to became a part of His inner circle. Peter, James and John are later seen as the closest inner circle. Jesus remarks they would leave behind the fishing business, and begin capturing the souls of men for the Kingdom.
This region was considered a part of the Jewish homeland in the Roman Empire, and the Tetrarch Antipas had succeeded in making it quite the bustling crossroads. That made it rather prominent in the whole of Syria, the imperial administrative division which included Judea, Galilee, Samaria, Idumea, Perea, Decapolis, and much more farther north. It was from this greater region which the word of this healing prophet and rabbi drew crowds to His outdoor sessions.
For centuries, the Jews had blindly sought the mere shadow of God's grace and love. They were wrapped up on mere external "blessings" as the sole evidence of God's favor. They never understand the presence or absence of mere human comfort were no reflection of deeper spiritual truths. It was not the need of healing that brought the miracles to these people, but the need of the Kingdom to establish the authority of the message of Jesus. There was no affliction God could not heal, no spiritual authority He could not humble, no suffering He could not end. Had the Jews been faithful, these things would have been granted to them under the promises of Moses. It would have been theirs to pass to the whole world, but they failed even for themselves. Thus, it belonged to Jesus to fulfill that mission.
Such a demonstration of Kingdom authority naturally drew immense traffic, but most of it was the poor, the ill, the disabled, the demonized, the lost and listless. These people had nothing but needs, each seemingly a bottomless pit of sorrow. The central message of the gospel was such things were so easy to resolve because they weren't important in the Kingdom. The definition of "miracle" is an earthly demonstration of deep spiritual truth. Most of the rabble appear to have missed the greater truth, for they eventually desert Jesus. Their human needs symbolized their deep spiritual needs, so deep they were unable to find the light, mostly. It came, but they never saw it. Indeed, we might safely say the demonstration of power was more to teach His disciples than any other reason. These men would have begun their discipleship not asking questions, but by custom simply absorbing everything their Master said and did for awhile in this noisy, carnival atmosphere.
Eventually, the rest of the Twelve, and a sizable group of others gathered around Him. In their hearts and minds, they were fairly certain this was the promised Messiah. However, as with all Jews, their understanding of the matter was deeply corrupted by centuries of Talmudic teaching. Indeed, until the very day He died, Jesus continued to struggle against their density on this problem, and they continued to look for signs of the false Messianic Expectations. Matthew begins the next section of his Gospel recording the early teachings of Jesus. In this, Matthew shows how Jesus struggles mightily with the mountain of lies, showing the Kingdom of Heaven was of a nature far beyond their assumptions. The jarring conflict, though, made it stand out in their minds. Later, when the Holy Spirit descends, this is all awakened and clarified, and they are instantly transformed.
Nor are we told of the incident at the synagogue in Nazareth. It was there they tried to push Him off a steep high bluff at the edge of town. This was His Father's signal to move to Capernaum, a much larger city, and not so politically dangerous as Jerusalem nor other cities in Judea. Recall Capernaum as a major hub of trade traffic, as well as a primary regional tax office. It was, therefore, a major hub of news which gave His message the widest distribution. This represents a permanent move for His base of operations.
Matthew indicates how this is a direct fulfillment of Isaiah 9:1-2. The context of Isaiah's prophecy notes the long, troubled history of this region. First, this region had been settled long before the central highlands of Canaan had seen any settlement. The sea was fresh-water, filled with edible fish ever in good supply, and a crossroads from ancient trade routes stretching back before recorded history. This was easily one of the nicest places to live in the whole land of Palestine.
It was also the center of some desperately wicked pagan religions. The economic power backing these religions made them equally repugnant and powerful as enemies when Israel began The Conquest. The tribes of Zebulun and Naphthali failed utterly to drive them out. Later, when a portion of Dan migrated to an area north of this district, their new City of Dan there became a center of paganizing influence among the tribes of Israel. When Jeroboam broke away with the Ten Tribes to form a separate kingdom, it was no accident he chose Dan as the northern center of his alternate worship to prevent his subjects dividing their loyalty. This was the ultimate sin, using pagan idolatry as a political weapon, rather than trusting in Jehovah who had promised to make things work for Jeroboam.
Isaiah remarks on this deep spiritual darkness, and how it resulted in their being first taken away by Assyria. Unlike the rest of the Northern Kingdom of Israel, the region around the sea did not long remain fallow. It was quickly repopulated by all manner of volunteers relocating within the Assyrian Empire. These also rekindled the gloom of pagan worship, but the Messiah would break the first light of the Kingdom of Heaven there as the new dawn of truth.
The message was the same as John's: "Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand." However, Jesus was no mere herald, but held that Kingdom in His hand. In preparation for this Kingdom, He began to gather it's first royal officers. We find Matthew mentions first Peter and Andrew. Peter is the elder of the Twelve, possibly older than Jesus. These two men were business partners with Zebedee, whose two sons, James and John, are also called. We have already noted these latter were almost certainly first cousins of Jesus, and the former pair may also have been. At the very least, they were all fairly well known to each other already. Jesus calls them to join Him full time, to became a part of His inner circle. Peter, James and John are later seen as the closest inner circle. Jesus remarks they would leave behind the fishing business, and begin capturing the souls of men for the Kingdom.
This region was considered a part of the Jewish homeland in the Roman Empire, and the Tetrarch Antipas had succeeded in making it quite the bustling crossroads. That made it rather prominent in the whole of Syria, the imperial administrative division which included Judea, Galilee, Samaria, Idumea, Perea, Decapolis, and much more farther north. It was from this greater region which the word of this healing prophet and rabbi drew crowds to His outdoor sessions.
For centuries, the Jews had blindly sought the mere shadow of God's grace and love. They were wrapped up on mere external "blessings" as the sole evidence of God's favor. They never understand the presence or absence of mere human comfort were no reflection of deeper spiritual truths. It was not the need of healing that brought the miracles to these people, but the need of the Kingdom to establish the authority of the message of Jesus. There was no affliction God could not heal, no spiritual authority He could not humble, no suffering He could not end. Had the Jews been faithful, these things would have been granted to them under the promises of Moses. It would have been theirs to pass to the whole world, but they failed even for themselves. Thus, it belonged to Jesus to fulfill that mission.
Such a demonstration of Kingdom authority naturally drew immense traffic, but most of it was the poor, the ill, the disabled, the demonized, the lost and listless. These people had nothing but needs, each seemingly a bottomless pit of sorrow. The central message of the gospel was such things were so easy to resolve because they weren't important in the Kingdom. The definition of "miracle" is an earthly demonstration of deep spiritual truth. Most of the rabble appear to have missed the greater truth, for they eventually desert Jesus. Their human needs symbolized their deep spiritual needs, so deep they were unable to find the light, mostly. It came, but they never saw it. Indeed, we might safely say the demonstration of power was more to teach His disciples than any other reason. These men would have begun their discipleship not asking questions, but by custom simply absorbing everything their Master said and did for awhile in this noisy, carnival atmosphere.
Eventually, the rest of the Twelve, and a sizable group of others gathered around Him. In their hearts and minds, they were fairly certain this was the promised Messiah. However, as with all Jews, their understanding of the matter was deeply corrupted by centuries of Talmudic teaching. Indeed, until the very day He died, Jesus continued to struggle against their density on this problem, and they continued to look for signs of the false Messianic Expectations. Matthew begins the next section of his Gospel recording the early teachings of Jesus. In this, Matthew shows how Jesus struggles mightily with the mountain of lies, showing the Kingdom of Heaven was of a nature far beyond their assumptions. The jarring conflict, though, made it stand out in their minds. Later, when the Holy Spirit descends, this is all awakened and clarified, and they are instantly transformed.
Saturday, August 11, 2007
Revelation 1
The Apostle John was probably near 90 years old, and the last living Disciple of Jesus. He had come a very long way from the teenage Jewish fisherman when Jesus called him into full time ministry. Now he was the senior pastor of Asia Minor. His knowledge of Greek was about that of a school boy, and he needed very much to pass an important pastoral message to his flock. He probably had some help translating the intense Hebrew imagery into Greek.
The help would have come from his fellow prisoners on the Isle of Patmos. Forget what you may have seen in the movies, the island was large enough to have a small city and farmland. There probably were no chains, but every ship's manifest would be checked by the Roman officials to insure people assigned to serve exile there didn't leave before their release. It was one of many exile locations Emperor Domitian used to isolate leaders of those who resisted his commands.
One of those commands was to acknowledge him as a god. For most Romans, it was hardly an issue. This would be but one more god in their pantheon, assuming they actually believed. It was the same old thing, where some ruler, along with his vast bureaucracy, demanded a show of loyalty. In practice, this was little more than standing before the carved image of the Emperor and tossing a pinch of incense on the small flame burning there, with a few words like, "Lord Caesar." For John, this was hardly meaningless. His Hebrew heritage would not let him treat this lightly. There was no god but Jehovah; had not his nation gotten at least that one thing right after the Babylonian Exile?
Not only could John not do this himself, but he was compelled by the Holy Spirit to insist his church members also refuse. Either Christ was Lord alone, or He was not Lord at all. A Christian could not compromise on this issue, even at the cost of his life. Some believers had died, indeed, but John was exiled. The whole thing was a symbol of the eternal fight between human governments and God Almighty.
Thus, while praying one Sunday on the island, a massive vision took him away. Such experiences are hardly to be described in human language. Yet he knew it was critical his flock see what he saw, and understood the wisdom conveyed. What should the church expect from human governments? What was typical, what was "normal"? And how could he explain to them the true evil nature of fallen rule without the letter being confiscated?
By this time, the churches had long been passing around not just copies of the Hebrew canon of Scripture, but letters and accounts of his Master's life. John himself had written his own recollections, giving an account from a wholly different perspective. Most of his flock was not Roman, per se, but from a more Eastern outlook. There would have been Jewish Christians to help explain the symbols. Having seen the Hebrew scriptures and it's vivid imagery, and having a fairly mystical outlook from their own culture, John knew they would understand this extended revelation in the same symbolic language. By expanding on this base, the material would read like typical mystical mad ramblings of no consequence to anyone outside the churches. To John, the Living Word of his Gospel was now going to incarnate Himself as the Living Word of His Church.
Time was short. John would not live much longer, and whether he ever left his exile on Patmos before death, it was important his flock understand the other half of the gospel message. The account of Jesus' life on earth was a critical foundation, but the account of His eternal work in the coming age must be revealed, as well. The Last Days had already begun with the empty tomb he visited that bright Sunday morning so long ago. There was a period of transition lasting some 40 days before Jesus finally ascended. Then another transition period of roughly 40 years for the judgment against the nation of Israel for their rejection of the Messiah. The final period of transition would pass with John's life, as he was the last living Apostle. The churches must grasp the one, most important message not yet delivered from the last of those who had touched Jesus, and whom He had touched.
We know there were other churches in that area beside the seven named. It doesn't matter, because the symbolism of seven was a part of the message -- seven meant holiness, a completion of revelation, fulfilled authority. This was not so much a prophecy of historical periods to come, because John still clung to the hope he might see His Lord return. No, this was seven different kinds of churches with their unique problems. These types would be visible throughout history, until that Return. What were their problems, and how would they face the ages without living Apostles?
The foundation of all things was a clear understanding of Jesus Christ, Risen Savior and Lord of all. The critical point beyond simply attaching the full range of symbols which belonged to Him under the Hebrew legacy was to note this is the Lord who reigns regardless of time and space. John had hoped he might see His Lord's return, but had begun to doubt it. Without knowing how long it might take, it was of the utmost importance the churches be properly equipped. This was John's message, John's intent, and at our spiritual peril we ignore what the book was for John.
The help would have come from his fellow prisoners on the Isle of Patmos. Forget what you may have seen in the movies, the island was large enough to have a small city and farmland. There probably were no chains, but every ship's manifest would be checked by the Roman officials to insure people assigned to serve exile there didn't leave before their release. It was one of many exile locations Emperor Domitian used to isolate leaders of those who resisted his commands.
One of those commands was to acknowledge him as a god. For most Romans, it was hardly an issue. This would be but one more god in their pantheon, assuming they actually believed. It was the same old thing, where some ruler, along with his vast bureaucracy, demanded a show of loyalty. In practice, this was little more than standing before the carved image of the Emperor and tossing a pinch of incense on the small flame burning there, with a few words like, "Lord Caesar." For John, this was hardly meaningless. His Hebrew heritage would not let him treat this lightly. There was no god but Jehovah; had not his nation gotten at least that one thing right after the Babylonian Exile?
Not only could John not do this himself, but he was compelled by the Holy Spirit to insist his church members also refuse. Either Christ was Lord alone, or He was not Lord at all. A Christian could not compromise on this issue, even at the cost of his life. Some believers had died, indeed, but John was exiled. The whole thing was a symbol of the eternal fight between human governments and God Almighty.
Thus, while praying one Sunday on the island, a massive vision took him away. Such experiences are hardly to be described in human language. Yet he knew it was critical his flock see what he saw, and understood the wisdom conveyed. What should the church expect from human governments? What was typical, what was "normal"? And how could he explain to them the true evil nature of fallen rule without the letter being confiscated?
By this time, the churches had long been passing around not just copies of the Hebrew canon of Scripture, but letters and accounts of his Master's life. John himself had written his own recollections, giving an account from a wholly different perspective. Most of his flock was not Roman, per se, but from a more Eastern outlook. There would have been Jewish Christians to help explain the symbols. Having seen the Hebrew scriptures and it's vivid imagery, and having a fairly mystical outlook from their own culture, John knew they would understand this extended revelation in the same symbolic language. By expanding on this base, the material would read like typical mystical mad ramblings of no consequence to anyone outside the churches. To John, the Living Word of his Gospel was now going to incarnate Himself as the Living Word of His Church.
Time was short. John would not live much longer, and whether he ever left his exile on Patmos before death, it was important his flock understand the other half of the gospel message. The account of Jesus' life on earth was a critical foundation, but the account of His eternal work in the coming age must be revealed, as well. The Last Days had already begun with the empty tomb he visited that bright Sunday morning so long ago. There was a period of transition lasting some 40 days before Jesus finally ascended. Then another transition period of roughly 40 years for the judgment against the nation of Israel for their rejection of the Messiah. The final period of transition would pass with John's life, as he was the last living Apostle. The churches must grasp the one, most important message not yet delivered from the last of those who had touched Jesus, and whom He had touched.
We know there were other churches in that area beside the seven named. It doesn't matter, because the symbolism of seven was a part of the message -- seven meant holiness, a completion of revelation, fulfilled authority. This was not so much a prophecy of historical periods to come, because John still clung to the hope he might see His Lord return. No, this was seven different kinds of churches with their unique problems. These types would be visible throughout history, until that Return. What were their problems, and how would they face the ages without living Apostles?
The foundation of all things was a clear understanding of Jesus Christ, Risen Savior and Lord of all. The critical point beyond simply attaching the full range of symbols which belonged to Him under the Hebrew legacy was to note this is the Lord who reigns regardless of time and space. John had hoped he might see His Lord's return, but had begun to doubt it. Without knowing how long it might take, it was of the utmost importance the churches be properly equipped. This was John's message, John's intent, and at our spiritual peril we ignore what the book was for John.
Friday, August 10, 2007
Yet Another Study of the Apocalypse
Yet another study of the Apocalypse, the Revelation of Jesus Christ given the John the Apostle. It seems everybody has their own idea what it's all about, and most of them contradictory. Like other preachers, I've taught it at least once. Sadly, most of them seem to be aimed at passing some unique intellectual view. It gets tiresome, because most of them aren't all that unique.
What makes my version different? Certainly not brilliance; mine is a pastoral purpose. That is, I'm not interested in distinguishing myself. If all I do is present this as intellectual understanding, then it's about me. This isn't some golden opportunity to distinguish myself, and I really don't care what you remember about me or my intellect. I want my readers to walk away with something they can use today, tomorrow, and for the rest of their lives on this earth. This will be an applied study of John's Revelation.
There is an abundance of material hashing over the academic details. So much is there I see no need to rehash it yet again. I've read more of it than I want to admit, and you can, too. Call that an excuse if you will, but the wealth of reference material means I don't have to plow that ground yet one more time. My interest is in passing to you, my readers, something you can use. I'm not going to footnote all my assumptions; scholars who need such things will figure it out for themselves. I would prefer to keep to the purpose John himself seemed to have -- to pastor his flock.
Thus, a primary element of what follows is holding forth the idea this was all written to the Church. That is, it is not about some far future events the Church will never see, but about events which began after John's death, rooted in events which he saw with his own eyes. He wrote this to the churches of Asia, to reveal to them something of Jesus Christ as He is, was and would be. That is, it's about the Eternal Christ, not some Christ which might show up later. This is to the Church and for the Church, and specifically for those churches John pastored at that time. It was not to increase their knowledge of things which would not affect them, but to improve their understanding of how things work from the eternal standpoint of Christ, as He views the fallen world.
By no means do I deny there can be a futuristic application to our reading of this Apocalypse, but to make that the whole of it's importance is to render it useless to the Body of Christ. This is a message to her, and includes instructions on how to face very difficult times. Those times have returned.
What makes my version different? Certainly not brilliance; mine is a pastoral purpose. That is, I'm not interested in distinguishing myself. If all I do is present this as intellectual understanding, then it's about me. This isn't some golden opportunity to distinguish myself, and I really don't care what you remember about me or my intellect. I want my readers to walk away with something they can use today, tomorrow, and for the rest of their lives on this earth. This will be an applied study of John's Revelation.
There is an abundance of material hashing over the academic details. So much is there I see no need to rehash it yet again. I've read more of it than I want to admit, and you can, too. Call that an excuse if you will, but the wealth of reference material means I don't have to plow that ground yet one more time. My interest is in passing to you, my readers, something you can use. I'm not going to footnote all my assumptions; scholars who need such things will figure it out for themselves. I would prefer to keep to the purpose John himself seemed to have -- to pastor his flock.
Thus, a primary element of what follows is holding forth the idea this was all written to the Church. That is, it is not about some far future events the Church will never see, but about events which began after John's death, rooted in events which he saw with his own eyes. He wrote this to the churches of Asia, to reveal to them something of Jesus Christ as He is, was and would be. That is, it's about the Eternal Christ, not some Christ which might show up later. This is to the Church and for the Church, and specifically for those churches John pastored at that time. It was not to increase their knowledge of things which would not affect them, but to improve their understanding of how things work from the eternal standpoint of Christ, as He views the fallen world.
By no means do I deny there can be a futuristic application to our reading of this Apocalypse, but to make that the whole of it's importance is to render it useless to the Body of Christ. This is a message to her, and includes instructions on how to face very difficult times. Those times have returned.
Thursday, August 9, 2007
The Holy Office of Confession
Most of the time, the word translated "confession" in the Bible appears in the context of owning up to sin. That's a good word for translating the concept. The Latin word from which we get the English "confess" means "to stand with" -- in this case, it means standing with God, as a public endorsement of His declaration we have sinned.
Such has a very long and distinguished history in the Bible. Who can forget Daniel's prayer of confession as he realized the time of the Exile was drawing to a close?
He goes on at length in confessing how surely Israel deserved the Exile, and all that went with it, and far more besides. That there were still Hebrew people alive was a tribute to God's vast mercy. Or how about Nehemiah's prayer over the same thing?
Isaiah, too (6:5), as well as others. Notice how they accept the burden of responsibility for things they personally did not do, but which was done in their name as a member of their nation. This is drawn from the fundamental nature of sin's propagation, and how it brought about the Fall in the first place. Sin spreads farther than the virulent infection, and passes more surely than DNA. It is more fundamental to our nature than any other thing you can name. It's hardly an insult for me to look any living, breathing human and say, "That one has sinned." It's only because I've already looked in the mirror and said the same thing.
Has our nation, the United States, not sinned as well? Worse, we have striven mightily to cover this sin, to prevent anyone thinking about it. Those who dared raise it in the past have almost uniformly been called "leftist kooks," and we still hear scolding about "blame America." Why must we engage in the most obvious, slimy justifying to insure we need not acknowledge this was a hideous act? While some use visceral guilt to push their political agenda, that does not excuse closing our eyes to the simple fact we did evil. Let me assure you a very integral part of the sacrificial system of Moses was to insure we look fully upon the gory mess as a reminder of the costs of sin.
So here, without any political agenda, let me call on my fellow believers to mourn the unspeakable suffering and death of those on whom we dropped nuclear bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Let us be hesitant to do so again, keeping a steady eye on the sure results, regardless what justification men may offer. We have sinned. Let us pray our nation be reluctant to sin more.
Such has a very long and distinguished history in the Bible. Who can forget Daniel's prayer of confession as he realized the time of the Exile was drawing to a close?
And I prayed to the LORD my God, and made my confession, and said, "O Lord, the great and awesome God, keeping the covenant and mercy to those who love Him, and to those who keep His commandments, we have sinned and have committed iniquity, and have done wickedly, and have rebelled, even by departing from Your commandments and from Your judgments." (Daniel 9:4-5)
He goes on at length in confessing how surely Israel deserved the Exile, and all that went with it, and far more besides. That there were still Hebrew people alive was a tribute to God's vast mercy. Or how about Nehemiah's prayer over the same thing?
And I said, "I pray You, O LORD God of Heaven, the great and awesome God who keeps covenant and mercy for those who love Him and keep His commandments; let Your ear now be open, and Your eyes open, so that You may hear the prayer of Your servant, which I pray before You now, day and night, for the sons of Israel Your servants, and confessing the sins of the sons of Israel which we have sinned against You. Both I and my father's house have sinned. We have acted very wickedly against You, and have not kept the commandments nor the statutes nor the judgments which You commanded Your servant Moses." (Nehemiah 1:5-7)
Isaiah, too (6:5), as well as others. Notice how they accept the burden of responsibility for things they personally did not do, but which was done in their name as a member of their nation. This is drawn from the fundamental nature of sin's propagation, and how it brought about the Fall in the first place. Sin spreads farther than the virulent infection, and passes more surely than DNA. It is more fundamental to our nature than any other thing you can name. It's hardly an insult for me to look any living, breathing human and say, "That one has sinned." It's only because I've already looked in the mirror and said the same thing.
Has our nation, the United States, not sinned as well? Worse, we have striven mightily to cover this sin, to prevent anyone thinking about it. Those who dared raise it in the past have almost uniformly been called "leftist kooks," and we still hear scolding about "blame America." Why must we engage in the most obvious, slimy justifying to insure we need not acknowledge this was a hideous act? While some use visceral guilt to push their political agenda, that does not excuse closing our eyes to the simple fact we did evil. Let me assure you a very integral part of the sacrificial system of Moses was to insure we look fully upon the gory mess as a reminder of the costs of sin.
So here, without any political agenda, let me call on my fellow believers to mourn the unspeakable suffering and death of those on whom we dropped nuclear bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Let us be hesitant to do so again, keeping a steady eye on the sure results, regardless what justification men may offer. We have sinned. Let us pray our nation be reluctant to sin more.
Wednesday, August 8, 2007
Expanded Explanation of the Olive Tree
The olive tree symbolizes many things in the Old Testament. At the minimum, it represents bounty, God's blessing, a good supply for human need. The oil was used to anoint men, to salve wounds, provide edible fats in food and food preparation, and as a primary item in offering to God. At times, the oil itself represented the presence of the God's Spirit. Those anointed as a ritual for service were set apart from others, dedicated to a holy God for His use alone.
The Menorah originally symbolized the presence of God's light of truth, a reminder of His holiness and glory. Eventually, it became the symbol of Israel, and what made Israel unique as a nation. While that should have been Israel's divine election to bring the light of revelation to the world, they failed utterly. In the eyes of the world, the Menorah represented Judaism as they saw it, with the peculiar rituals and Mosaic Law. In Zechariah 4, the prophet sees a vision of two olive trees feeding the Menorah directly. This would be boon to Temple servants, because the most time consuming task was keeping the Menorah lit. It required constant care to clean, trim the wicks, and filling the oil reservoirs. In this vision, the angel tells Zechariah the two olive trees represent two anointed ones (Hebrew expression: "sons of oil") standing ready for service to the Lord. It would seem rather plain their service was the oil which fed the light of glory. David expands on the meaning in Psalm 52:8, connecting it to the concept of utter dependence on God. Even when the main trunk of a very old olive tree is cut off, the roots left alive in the ground will sprout anew. Finally, John refers to the same two olive trees in Zechariah as the Two Witnesses of God (Revelation 11).
Olive trees grew everywhere in Palestine from ancient times. There were several species, but one in particular was domesticated for its high fruit production. On occasion, wild olive branches might be grafted in, so as to get a productive branch whose fruit possessed different characteristics than the native branches. The wild olive trees tended to be rather unproductive on their own.
The symbol of the olive tree is not cut and dried, but a broad idea with fuzzy borders. Depending on the context, it represents generally the revelation of God through His called servants. That we could in Romans 11 call the Olive Tree "Israel" places the emphasis on what Israel was meant to do, to be a kingdom of priests to the world, a witness to God's revelation. With Jews as the individual branches, most failed to bear fruit. We Gentiles are the wild olive branches grafted into what Israel should have been and done -- bear fruit. The olive tree as the symbol of God's rich provision gives us a feel for the fruit as blessings, the oil as His Spirit, the tree as the source of these by being a witness to His truth.
The term "Israel" itself has fuzzy borders, for it begins as the name of a man, AKA Jacob. The nation rising from his descendants were typically known as Children of Israel, or shortened to Israel. Paul says lots of people born with Israeli blood cannot claim to be Israel; that is, they cannot claim to be members of the nation. Why not? Because it was not about DNA, but about their purpose, why God chose them to bear His Covenant of Law. Thus, in typical Hebrew usage, Israel was as Israel ought to have done.
When Paul wrote his letter to the Christians at Rome, this church included a large number of Jewish Christians. Their "Bible" was the Old Testament, the books of Judaism. Jews would naturally have insured this legacy was understood and embraced. In that day and age, the broad collection of Eastern Mystical religions were familiar to most in the Roman Empire. In their cosmopolitan world, Judaism was just another of them. Their Christian faith arose out of that religion, thus requiring followers of Christ to learn the Hebrew legacy of Scripture and worldview, since Jesus taught from that. Paul wrote to a mixed church of Jewish and Gentile Roman Christians. The latter group likely included a mixture from all over the Mediterranean Basin, if not from farther beyond.
In Romans 9:1-5, Paul sadly notes the nation of people descended from Jacob were given God's revelation, but rejected that legacy. In verses 6-13, we are reminded God's promise never fails. While Jews might make much of "Abraham is our father," it missed the point. The promise was delivered by God's purpose to a much narrower group, not even Children of Isaac, but the Children of Jacob, AKA Israel. It was God who chose. Next, verses 14-24 Paul addresses the issue of predestination, and how it remains incomprehensible to us. Further, it does not let any of us off the hook. That original plan and predestination, in verses 25-29, included a plan to adopt those not of Hebrew blood as His People. The identity of Israel-to-come would leave only a small group of those with Jacob's DNA. The nature of being Israel would be about faith in verses 30-33, which was the original Israel's point of failure.
Chapter 10:1-11 demonstrates a big difference between a people zealously pursuing a mere earthly existence, and who missed the point entirely, versus a faith in Christ resulting from the miraculous binding of God's Word in the human soul. You can have a good life (v. 5) or you can step outside such a mundane existence and pursue eternal things. Verses 12-21 shows the one thing which brings all humanity level before God: They must truly turn to the Lord as fully their Lord. The chain of logic is this: No man can turn without the power of the Word. The Word comes by the mouth of witness speaking it; and these speak because they were sent. Did God not send His Word to Israel in times past? Of course He did. Not only that, but He bluntly warned them they could be replaced, and surely would be because they kept ignoring His offer.
Beginning in Chapter 11, Paul dispatches the assumption Gentiles might have that such ungrateful Children of the Promise had been completely accursed. Since Paul himself was one of them, it's obviously not like that. At all times, the Lord kept close to Him some small portion of Israelites. So in Paul's time, there was still a small slice called by divine election. But their calling was not about Jewishness, but about grace. The rest were hardened, and remained so up to that point. However, the Roman disgust for Jews was misplaced, for Jewish failure was the gain of all the world. And should some Jews then turn back in faith, they escape their fathers' failure. More, their unique Jewish heritage allows them to bring a legacy of spiritual understanding lacking in all the other nations of the world. Instead of Romans treating Jewish Christians as second class "Christ killers," they should be recognized as an asset to understanding the fullness of the Kingdom. Paul himself was a Christian Jew who carried a wealth of Hebraic biblical culture (verse 13), and his heritage was a prominent asset in his ministry.
The Olive Tree of God's witness has been partially denuded of "hardened" and unfruitful branches to make room for the wild branches God desired for a new crop, a different crop. God wanted to bring the Gentiles to salvation all along, but had commanded the Jews to play their role in that. They refused. Those few who found grace were retained on the Witness Tree, and more can be brought back any time they turn around. Meanwhile, since Jews blocked the witness of God, they were removed and Gentiles were grafted directly in, on a different basis than before. Thus, in repopulating the tree with wild branches, the meaning of "Israel" had changed. It is "in this way" (verse 26) a new, whole Israel can be brought into eternity. These new grafted branches must partake of the life giving sap, the Witness of God's revelation, to be fruitful. They have to be fed from a source previously foreign to them, a source of life in deep roots, going back to the beginning of time.
This is why I suggested it was reasonable to see the Olive Tree as the divine legacy of revelation cast in Hebraic culture. Do you want Paul's level of understanding the Kingdom, Paul's power to witness? Get some of his education, some of his heritage. Tap into the deep roots of ancient Semitic cultural legacy so the image of Christ is fuller, deeper, and your assumptions and expectations come closer to God's intentions. This is a particular need of our time and place to become branches on the Witness Tree. Our Western rationalist culture is devoid of all but a few thin threads of this biblical worldview. The idea "our modern civilization is a direct result of Christianity" ignores how thoroughly corrupted that "Christianity" had become via the Western Medieval Roman Church. Western Civilization is a Roman Catholic product, a culture which has fought mercilessly to deny the very fundamental elements of the Early Church frame of reference, built directly on top of Hebrew culture.
The Menorah originally symbolized the presence of God's light of truth, a reminder of His holiness and glory. Eventually, it became the symbol of Israel, and what made Israel unique as a nation. While that should have been Israel's divine election to bring the light of revelation to the world, they failed utterly. In the eyes of the world, the Menorah represented Judaism as they saw it, with the peculiar rituals and Mosaic Law. In Zechariah 4, the prophet sees a vision of two olive trees feeding the Menorah directly. This would be boon to Temple servants, because the most time consuming task was keeping the Menorah lit. It required constant care to clean, trim the wicks, and filling the oil reservoirs. In this vision, the angel tells Zechariah the two olive trees represent two anointed ones (Hebrew expression: "sons of oil") standing ready for service to the Lord. It would seem rather plain their service was the oil which fed the light of glory. David expands on the meaning in Psalm 52:8, connecting it to the concept of utter dependence on God. Even when the main trunk of a very old olive tree is cut off, the roots left alive in the ground will sprout anew. Finally, John refers to the same two olive trees in Zechariah as the Two Witnesses of God (Revelation 11).
Olive trees grew everywhere in Palestine from ancient times. There were several species, but one in particular was domesticated for its high fruit production. On occasion, wild olive branches might be grafted in, so as to get a productive branch whose fruit possessed different characteristics than the native branches. The wild olive trees tended to be rather unproductive on their own.
The symbol of the olive tree is not cut and dried, but a broad idea with fuzzy borders. Depending on the context, it represents generally the revelation of God through His called servants. That we could in Romans 11 call the Olive Tree "Israel" places the emphasis on what Israel was meant to do, to be a kingdom of priests to the world, a witness to God's revelation. With Jews as the individual branches, most failed to bear fruit. We Gentiles are the wild olive branches grafted into what Israel should have been and done -- bear fruit. The olive tree as the symbol of God's rich provision gives us a feel for the fruit as blessings, the oil as His Spirit, the tree as the source of these by being a witness to His truth.
The term "Israel" itself has fuzzy borders, for it begins as the name of a man, AKA Jacob. The nation rising from his descendants were typically known as Children of Israel, or shortened to Israel. Paul says lots of people born with Israeli blood cannot claim to be Israel; that is, they cannot claim to be members of the nation. Why not? Because it was not about DNA, but about their purpose, why God chose them to bear His Covenant of Law. Thus, in typical Hebrew usage, Israel was as Israel ought to have done.
When Paul wrote his letter to the Christians at Rome, this church included a large number of Jewish Christians. Their "Bible" was the Old Testament, the books of Judaism. Jews would naturally have insured this legacy was understood and embraced. In that day and age, the broad collection of Eastern Mystical religions were familiar to most in the Roman Empire. In their cosmopolitan world, Judaism was just another of them. Their Christian faith arose out of that religion, thus requiring followers of Christ to learn the Hebrew legacy of Scripture and worldview, since Jesus taught from that. Paul wrote to a mixed church of Jewish and Gentile Roman Christians. The latter group likely included a mixture from all over the Mediterranean Basin, if not from farther beyond.
In Romans 9:1-5, Paul sadly notes the nation of people descended from Jacob were given God's revelation, but rejected that legacy. In verses 6-13, we are reminded God's promise never fails. While Jews might make much of "Abraham is our father," it missed the point. The promise was delivered by God's purpose to a much narrower group, not even Children of Isaac, but the Children of Jacob, AKA Israel. It was God who chose. Next, verses 14-24 Paul addresses the issue of predestination, and how it remains incomprehensible to us. Further, it does not let any of us off the hook. That original plan and predestination, in verses 25-29, included a plan to adopt those not of Hebrew blood as His People. The identity of Israel-to-come would leave only a small group of those with Jacob's DNA. The nature of being Israel would be about faith in verses 30-33, which was the original Israel's point of failure.
Chapter 10:1-11 demonstrates a big difference between a people zealously pursuing a mere earthly existence, and who missed the point entirely, versus a faith in Christ resulting from the miraculous binding of God's Word in the human soul. You can have a good life (v. 5) or you can step outside such a mundane existence and pursue eternal things. Verses 12-21 shows the one thing which brings all humanity level before God: They must truly turn to the Lord as fully their Lord. The chain of logic is this: No man can turn without the power of the Word. The Word comes by the mouth of witness speaking it; and these speak because they were sent. Did God not send His Word to Israel in times past? Of course He did. Not only that, but He bluntly warned them they could be replaced, and surely would be because they kept ignoring His offer.
Beginning in Chapter 11, Paul dispatches the assumption Gentiles might have that such ungrateful Children of the Promise had been completely accursed. Since Paul himself was one of them, it's obviously not like that. At all times, the Lord kept close to Him some small portion of Israelites. So in Paul's time, there was still a small slice called by divine election. But their calling was not about Jewishness, but about grace. The rest were hardened, and remained so up to that point. However, the Roman disgust for Jews was misplaced, for Jewish failure was the gain of all the world. And should some Jews then turn back in faith, they escape their fathers' failure. More, their unique Jewish heritage allows them to bring a legacy of spiritual understanding lacking in all the other nations of the world. Instead of Romans treating Jewish Christians as second class "Christ killers," they should be recognized as an asset to understanding the fullness of the Kingdom. Paul himself was a Christian Jew who carried a wealth of Hebraic biblical culture (verse 13), and his heritage was a prominent asset in his ministry.
The Olive Tree of God's witness has been partially denuded of "hardened" and unfruitful branches to make room for the wild branches God desired for a new crop, a different crop. God wanted to bring the Gentiles to salvation all along, but had commanded the Jews to play their role in that. They refused. Those few who found grace were retained on the Witness Tree, and more can be brought back any time they turn around. Meanwhile, since Jews blocked the witness of God, they were removed and Gentiles were grafted directly in, on a different basis than before. Thus, in repopulating the tree with wild branches, the meaning of "Israel" had changed. It is "in this way" (verse 26) a new, whole Israel can be brought into eternity. These new grafted branches must partake of the life giving sap, the Witness of God's revelation, to be fruitful. They have to be fed from a source previously foreign to them, a source of life in deep roots, going back to the beginning of time.
This is why I suggested it was reasonable to see the Olive Tree as the divine legacy of revelation cast in Hebraic culture. Do you want Paul's level of understanding the Kingdom, Paul's power to witness? Get some of his education, some of his heritage. Tap into the deep roots of ancient Semitic cultural legacy so the image of Christ is fuller, deeper, and your assumptions and expectations come closer to God's intentions. This is a particular need of our time and place to become branches on the Witness Tree. Our Western rationalist culture is devoid of all but a few thin threads of this biblical worldview. The idea "our modern civilization is a direct result of Christianity" ignores how thoroughly corrupted that "Christianity" had become via the Western Medieval Roman Church. Western Civilization is a Roman Catholic product, a culture which has fought mercilessly to deny the very fundamental elements of the Early Church frame of reference, built directly on top of Hebrew culture.
Tuesday, August 7, 2007
Labels Belong to the Reader
I've addressed before in previous posts the question of scriptural infallibility. I still insist there are two basic questions:
Everything else misses the point. Of course they are inspired by God. His Holy Spirit moved in ways I'll probably never comprehend to get these men to write just what He wanted.
Getting all twisted around the empirical question about "word-for-word" is a concept foreign to the Bible itself, I contend. Empiricism turns the bread of heaven into rocks. That's a wrangling over words which approaches idolatry, commonly lambasted as "bibliolatry." Since Satan can quote Scripture to no effect, it's not as if the very words are magical the way some seem to suppose. Are you going to imply we have somehow found the original autographs? We can't know exactly what the precise words were from the pens of the original writers, or whomever they were using as scribes. Nor do we need them.
By faith we understand the Lord has preserved this collection of documents in a state of sufficient accuracy we can obey Him. We don't need anything more, or He would have provided it. So, was Jehoiachin 8 (2 Chronicles 36:9) or 18 (2 Kings 24:8) when he took the throne of Israel? Well, that was sometime around 600BC, and it would appear we are a few copies away from the original. Does it matter? Nope. It won't change a single thing either way in our understanding of Hebrew life and culture, nor the requirements God has for us in serving Him. There's no crisis of confidence, because I don't have to posit a word-for-word accuracy from it's author. The words are not the Word.
Indeed, we aren't reading that account in the original Hebrew. If we could, we would already know they didn't view it that way, either. The ink scratchings on whatever they used for paper in those days were not themselves sacred, but the message was. If you doubt we have the message with any degree of accuracy, you might as well start from scratch and create a new god or gods to suit you. Meanwhile, by faith I stand on the conviction the message is still there, and everything I need from that book to obey those convictions is preserved by the God who put them in my spirit. The Bible is the wholly trustworthy record of God's revelation. Ink on paper, even bound in expensive leather decorated with gold leaf, is not the revelation. It's just a nice copy of the record of it.
So, if you are a hard-core fundamentalist, you can now dismiss me as a liberal and be done with it. If you are a liberal, you dismiss me as a pious fool. I don't need your approval; my election is safe without it.
But let's go a little further. I'm notorious for pushing a Hebraic cultural and logical framework for reading this record of God's revelation. Yeah, that Eastern Mysticism stuff. Using what I allege is the peculiar Semitic logic, sometimes I'll come up with a different view than is obvious from the grammatical structure of a particular passage. Largely it's because I see a context many people do not, and I'm further trying to bring to life a spiritual principle in a particular context of our lives today. I believe there is an established body of symbols, and a corpus of examples within Scripture to justify such a departure from the more obvious meaning on the surface in some places. Maybe it's just my fevered imagination, too. It's not as if I find something wild in every line of Scripture. Even Hebrew writers tend to cite specific numbers with mathematical precision when necessary (Exodus 1:5; 15:27), instead of symbolic meanings. And plenty of times the Gospels record Jesus saying some fairly routine stuff which cannot be allegorized (Matthew 8:4; Luke 6:8-10).
However, sometimes the writer will say something which just isn't that easy to put in human language. John's Revelation, anyone? So thoroughly loaded with Old Testament symbols only pedantic fools ignore the symbolic language. There are plenty of other places where people have assumed they know the precise meanings of things, when I'm pretty sure they don't. Perhaps it's because they assume these men in ancient times, from a far different land and culture, would simply have to write like they do themselves. Each word has a clearly prescribed meaning, and you aren't permitted to make more of it than that. Reading between the lines is evil, a fanciful imagination, in their eyes. That's a flavor of empiricism, something which has no place in discussions of deep spiritual principles. Sure, "bring my cloak" means pretty much that, unless the context indicates otherwise. Why did God allow that sort of blunt, functional comment to survive within a powerful dissertations on spiritual questions? Maybe you can ask Him when He comes back for us.
Meanwhile, our task remains to answer that second question: What does this passage require of me? Lists of genealogies do have a meaning, but I'll need to do some preparatory teaching to bring my listeners up to speed on that. They don't make a good sermon text, though. That is, unless I do it the Hebrew way, which is to use the list of names to tell the story of promise and faith across many generations. So if I read the names and stop to bring the names to life by telling some narrative on them (Hebrews 11:4ff), then the I've delivered spiritual food. It's what I'm called to do. In other places, there's the obvious meaning of the text, but it touches on so many other things, I have to bring them into the picture. Otherwise, it becomes just another bit of factual data, just head knowledge. Sinners can do head knowledge. I need to offer something only spiritual people will grasp. Speaking the whole truth in His power and love is also the one best hope for touching the sinners, because if their fallen flesh isn't challenged, they won't look for anything else.
Apply to me whatever labels make you happy. I don't take myself that seriously. If you aren't called to work along side me, move on and don't hinder me. You can be sure I won't be coming after you in your ministry. We both have too much to do already. Discuss, share, probe -- if it's not a good match, let God worry about it.
- Are these ancient writings authoritative?
- What do they require of us?
Everything else misses the point. Of course they are inspired by God. His Holy Spirit moved in ways I'll probably never comprehend to get these men to write just what He wanted.
Getting all twisted around the empirical question about "word-for-word" is a concept foreign to the Bible itself, I contend. Empiricism turns the bread of heaven into rocks. That's a wrangling over words which approaches idolatry, commonly lambasted as "bibliolatry." Since Satan can quote Scripture to no effect, it's not as if the very words are magical the way some seem to suppose. Are you going to imply we have somehow found the original autographs? We can't know exactly what the precise words were from the pens of the original writers, or whomever they were using as scribes. Nor do we need them.
By faith we understand the Lord has preserved this collection of documents in a state of sufficient accuracy we can obey Him. We don't need anything more, or He would have provided it. So, was Jehoiachin 8 (2 Chronicles 36:9) or 18 (2 Kings 24:8) when he took the throne of Israel? Well, that was sometime around 600BC, and it would appear we are a few copies away from the original. Does it matter? Nope. It won't change a single thing either way in our understanding of Hebrew life and culture, nor the requirements God has for us in serving Him. There's no crisis of confidence, because I don't have to posit a word-for-word accuracy from it's author. The words are not the Word.
Indeed, we aren't reading that account in the original Hebrew. If we could, we would already know they didn't view it that way, either. The ink scratchings on whatever they used for paper in those days were not themselves sacred, but the message was. If you doubt we have the message with any degree of accuracy, you might as well start from scratch and create a new god or gods to suit you. Meanwhile, by faith I stand on the conviction the message is still there, and everything I need from that book to obey those convictions is preserved by the God who put them in my spirit. The Bible is the wholly trustworthy record of God's revelation. Ink on paper, even bound in expensive leather decorated with gold leaf, is not the revelation. It's just a nice copy of the record of it.
So, if you are a hard-core fundamentalist, you can now dismiss me as a liberal and be done with it. If you are a liberal, you dismiss me as a pious fool. I don't need your approval; my election is safe without it.
But let's go a little further. I'm notorious for pushing a Hebraic cultural and logical framework for reading this record of God's revelation. Yeah, that Eastern Mysticism stuff. Using what I allege is the peculiar Semitic logic, sometimes I'll come up with a different view than is obvious from the grammatical structure of a particular passage. Largely it's because I see a context many people do not, and I'm further trying to bring to life a spiritual principle in a particular context of our lives today. I believe there is an established body of symbols, and a corpus of examples within Scripture to justify such a departure from the more obvious meaning on the surface in some places. Maybe it's just my fevered imagination, too. It's not as if I find something wild in every line of Scripture. Even Hebrew writers tend to cite specific numbers with mathematical precision when necessary (Exodus 1:5; 15:27), instead of symbolic meanings. And plenty of times the Gospels record Jesus saying some fairly routine stuff which cannot be allegorized (Matthew 8:4; Luke 6:8-10).
However, sometimes the writer will say something which just isn't that easy to put in human language. John's Revelation, anyone? So thoroughly loaded with Old Testament symbols only pedantic fools ignore the symbolic language. There are plenty of other places where people have assumed they know the precise meanings of things, when I'm pretty sure they don't. Perhaps it's because they assume these men in ancient times, from a far different land and culture, would simply have to write like they do themselves. Each word has a clearly prescribed meaning, and you aren't permitted to make more of it than that. Reading between the lines is evil, a fanciful imagination, in their eyes. That's a flavor of empiricism, something which has no place in discussions of deep spiritual principles. Sure, "bring my cloak" means pretty much that, unless the context indicates otherwise. Why did God allow that sort of blunt, functional comment to survive within a powerful dissertations on spiritual questions? Maybe you can ask Him when He comes back for us.
Meanwhile, our task remains to answer that second question: What does this passage require of me? Lists of genealogies do have a meaning, but I'll need to do some preparatory teaching to bring my listeners up to speed on that. They don't make a good sermon text, though. That is, unless I do it the Hebrew way, which is to use the list of names to tell the story of promise and faith across many generations. So if I read the names and stop to bring the names to life by telling some narrative on them (Hebrews 11:4ff), then the I've delivered spiritual food. It's what I'm called to do. In other places, there's the obvious meaning of the text, but it touches on so many other things, I have to bring them into the picture. Otherwise, it becomes just another bit of factual data, just head knowledge. Sinners can do head knowledge. I need to offer something only spiritual people will grasp. Speaking the whole truth in His power and love is also the one best hope for touching the sinners, because if their fallen flesh isn't challenged, they won't look for anything else.
Apply to me whatever labels make you happy. I don't take myself that seriously. If you aren't called to work along side me, move on and don't hinder me. You can be sure I won't be coming after you in your ministry. We both have too much to do already. Discuss, share, probe -- if it's not a good match, let God worry about it.
Monday, August 6, 2007
Pastoral Imperative
I can teach math; I understand computers. History was a breeze, as were Economics, Geography and Political Science. Decades before I studied those things, I got a degree in ministry, where we did Bible languages and history, Church History, Philosophy and Logic, and so on. When I sit in the circle of worshipers in the house church, those things by themselves matter not at all. What matters is when I open my mouth to teach the Bible, they walk away sensing it has come to life for them. Those academic studies may help, may serve to equip me in some ways, but it was what I learned outside of such intellectual pursuits which matters most.
My education was quite deficient in many ways. I was prepared for all manner of intellectual tasks, but I did not really understand God. Oh, He had saved me quite early in my life, of this I am still certain. Yet, I did not really know Him. Funny, I later learned I could have gotten to know Him quite well without those things. That education in two colleges was fine for understanding things all men, saved and lost, can grasp. Plenty of my fellow preacher-boy students are still on their way to Hell, some who scored higher grades. But truly grasping spiritual truths requires something more, something mere humans cannot grasp.
Surely my fellow Christians realize that something extra is the presence of the Holy Spirit. Without Him, nothing spiritual will have meaning. With Him, nothing else is required. Whatever else you need will come from His leadership. That means the crippled boy who can't read can still be called to salvation, can still receive through the Spirit enough to obey the calling for which the Lord redeemed him. As his pastor, it falls to me to prepare to teach in such a way he still gets the Word.
I don't get that preparation from Western education, with its sole foundation in this world. Oh, it works fine for understanding how to build computers, but it won't bring the Word of God to life. You can read and understand the Bible in fifteen languages, but if you don't have the right approach, you still won't have the Word. That approach is not rational; it often defies human logic. In our Western educational system, we call that approach Eastern Mysticism, but that's not exactly what I mean. You can be an Eastern Mystic Muslim or Hindu, completely without the Bible. But some elements of a true biblical understanding do appear to be Eastern Mystical to Western scholars. By definition, Abraham, Israel, Moses, David, and all the prophets were Eastern Mystics. Jesus, too. The Apostles, of course. The whole of Christian faith is rooted in a branch of Eastern Culture we call Hebrew or Semitic.
God chose to reveal Himself in that culture. You decide why, but I should think it is obvious I won't get a full understanding of the Bible, the full impact of its demands on my life, until I get some Hebrew/Semitic culture, and the logical framework on which it is built. Had the Western Church preserved this more carefully over the past 2000 years, I would not have needed so much of that other stuff to understand. It's not completely lost; some of it survives here and there, in little patches. All my Western education is pretty much focused on helping me recover this logical framework. Maybe I'll never quite get there; maybe I'm too deeply tainted. That's not the point.
The point is, I'm driven in this direction by the Holy Spirit. The farther I go, the more I realize anyone can get this, because the result is spiritual understanding, not intellectual. So that crippled boy can get a full dose of spiritual truth without really being able to verbalize it. He can still live righteously and participate in the divine harvest of souls. When I preach in that spirit, the Word comes to life for him. And if for him, then surely everyone else who shows up, unless they remain dead in their sins. There's hope for them, too. By seizing upon the Semitic pattern of understanding things, I can call on the Holy Spirit to witness the truth of my speaking and acting. Regardless of my failures -- which are many -- He gets it done, because that understanding shows me how to put the focus on Jesus, not on me.
That's the pastoral imperative: Know the Word the way God revealed it; teach from that ground.
My education was quite deficient in many ways. I was prepared for all manner of intellectual tasks, but I did not really understand God. Oh, He had saved me quite early in my life, of this I am still certain. Yet, I did not really know Him. Funny, I later learned I could have gotten to know Him quite well without those things. That education in two colleges was fine for understanding things all men, saved and lost, can grasp. Plenty of my fellow preacher-boy students are still on their way to Hell, some who scored higher grades. But truly grasping spiritual truths requires something more, something mere humans cannot grasp.
Surely my fellow Christians realize that something extra is the presence of the Holy Spirit. Without Him, nothing spiritual will have meaning. With Him, nothing else is required. Whatever else you need will come from His leadership. That means the crippled boy who can't read can still be called to salvation, can still receive through the Spirit enough to obey the calling for which the Lord redeemed him. As his pastor, it falls to me to prepare to teach in such a way he still gets the Word.
I don't get that preparation from Western education, with its sole foundation in this world. Oh, it works fine for understanding how to build computers, but it won't bring the Word of God to life. You can read and understand the Bible in fifteen languages, but if you don't have the right approach, you still won't have the Word. That approach is not rational; it often defies human logic. In our Western educational system, we call that approach Eastern Mysticism, but that's not exactly what I mean. You can be an Eastern Mystic Muslim or Hindu, completely without the Bible. But some elements of a true biblical understanding do appear to be Eastern Mystical to Western scholars. By definition, Abraham, Israel, Moses, David, and all the prophets were Eastern Mystics. Jesus, too. The Apostles, of course. The whole of Christian faith is rooted in a branch of Eastern Culture we call Hebrew or Semitic.
God chose to reveal Himself in that culture. You decide why, but I should think it is obvious I won't get a full understanding of the Bible, the full impact of its demands on my life, until I get some Hebrew/Semitic culture, and the logical framework on which it is built. Had the Western Church preserved this more carefully over the past 2000 years, I would not have needed so much of that other stuff to understand. It's not completely lost; some of it survives here and there, in little patches. All my Western education is pretty much focused on helping me recover this logical framework. Maybe I'll never quite get there; maybe I'm too deeply tainted. That's not the point.
The point is, I'm driven in this direction by the Holy Spirit. The farther I go, the more I realize anyone can get this, because the result is spiritual understanding, not intellectual. So that crippled boy can get a full dose of spiritual truth without really being able to verbalize it. He can still live righteously and participate in the divine harvest of souls. When I preach in that spirit, the Word comes to life for him. And if for him, then surely everyone else who shows up, unless they remain dead in their sins. There's hope for them, too. By seizing upon the Semitic pattern of understanding things, I can call on the Holy Spirit to witness the truth of my speaking and acting. Regardless of my failures -- which are many -- He gets it done, because that understanding shows me how to put the focus on Jesus, not on me.
That's the pastoral imperative: Know the Word the way God revealed it; teach from that ground.
Clarify Your Calling
We complete the series on praying and spiritual warfare.
Spiritual warfare takes place not "out there" in the world around you, but inside your own soul. When the Promised Land of your life is occupied by Christ, you find the true purpose for every element of your personality, redeeming every facet of your character. Things about you which once harmed yourself and others are now renewed, and harnessed to blessing. Things like hard-headedness become commitment in the face of opposition. The act of praying is warfare to uproot Satan and his demons from their comfortable homes in your world, and making it a homeland for the Holy Spirit.
Cleaning up the confused mess of your being reveals a host of things our enemy would rather remain hidden. The spotlight of God's Word shining truth upon the trash of sin and idolatry serves to identify things not yet fully surrendered to Christ. As these things are revealed, the you God had in mind becomes clearly defined as lying beneath. This process is slow (Exodus 23:28-30). Otherwise, you would fail to faithfully engage some part of yourself gainfully for the Kingdom, and having it re-occupied by demons (Matthew 12:43-45). The foundation of what God intended will become once again obfuscated.
We are ill-equipped to deal with eternity. Being as yet in this world chained to a fallen body of flesh, we struggle to see clearly with spiritual eyes. The flesh keeps reasserting itself. Worse, our entire Western cultural legacy strives to define the spiritual realm out of existence. We are left too often at the mercy of our emotions and cannot discern the difference between them and the Holy Spirit. It is not a question of whether He has the power to overrule our feelings, but a question of whether that's how He operates. He would, but we have so very far to go. His rule is gentle, and few issues in our lives warrant forcing us. Look back at all the regrets you have in harming others after you came to faith in Christ. He could have stopped you, but it's not His way. Instead, you live on with the sorrow, and it serves to sharpen tomorrow's resolve. We of all souls in the universe are truly free to choose between following Christ or listening to Satan. The Elect alone can honestly choose to hear God's voice. Yet, our ears are so full of noise.
We must find a way more certain than the vagaries of impressions here and there. We cannot trust the fleeting impressions of the moment, for the moment passes all too quickly. We must find within us something so completely a work of the Holy Spirit, we find it trustworthy, even as it changes and grows within us. What are the decisions down deep in your inner being which you could not possibly change if you wished? We call them convictions. They are not subject to significant change with the winds of opinion and human logic. Rather, they often defy logic. This bedrock of who we are -- the things we cannot walk away from, the things we must fight and smother in order to do wrong. They are the things we absolutely must do, or we cease being ourselves. This is the primary place of the Spirit's work in us.
The convictions are the place where the Holy Spirit speaks loudest. In our as-yet fallen human minds, we may get impressions of what we should do, but we cannot take such impressions and whisperings as the voice of God. Rather, we must compare everything with the conscience, to see if it passes the test of satisfying our convictions. Again, do not mistake mere opinions, regardless how long held, as conviction. Opinions remain subject to logic of one form or another, but convictions are the bedrock of our beings. When a question arises over doing this or that, we must test them against our convictions. Doing so first requires a concerted effort to recognize them for what they are. For example, here you will see a recent examination of my own convictions. No power of man, including my own power, can overrule these things. That is because they were placed by God Almighty, not me or anyone else.
In your world, in your daily life, you will encounter any number of things. To each, you must answer the question: "What is it I must do here?" It's not a matter of what you were taught you should do, or should want to do. The "shoulds" are too often decided by mere men. While there may be any number of reasons to believe you can help this or that individual, if your convictions warn you off, do not try. A tremendous emotional pulling of heart-strings means nothing. Emotions are not for deciding, but for celebrating things decided God's way. It is this path which shows us how to pray for others. In the prayer closet, when anything weighs upon our minds, we ask His help bouncing it off our convictions. Unpleasant results from a right choice are part of suffering with Christ. The right choice is the one made the right way. While in a future day, your decision might come out differently, it does not mean you sinned by your earlier choice. Holiness in Scripture is defined by desire of the spiritual man, not by the failing performance of fallen flesh.
Pray for those around you, by seeking his revelation via the clear Word of Scripture, as understood in your convictions.
Spiritual warfare takes place not "out there" in the world around you, but inside your own soul. When the Promised Land of your life is occupied by Christ, you find the true purpose for every element of your personality, redeeming every facet of your character. Things about you which once harmed yourself and others are now renewed, and harnessed to blessing. Things like hard-headedness become commitment in the face of opposition. The act of praying is warfare to uproot Satan and his demons from their comfortable homes in your world, and making it a homeland for the Holy Spirit.
Cleaning up the confused mess of your being reveals a host of things our enemy would rather remain hidden. The spotlight of God's Word shining truth upon the trash of sin and idolatry serves to identify things not yet fully surrendered to Christ. As these things are revealed, the you God had in mind becomes clearly defined as lying beneath. This process is slow (Exodus 23:28-30). Otherwise, you would fail to faithfully engage some part of yourself gainfully for the Kingdom, and having it re-occupied by demons (Matthew 12:43-45). The foundation of what God intended will become once again obfuscated.
We are ill-equipped to deal with eternity. Being as yet in this world chained to a fallen body of flesh, we struggle to see clearly with spiritual eyes. The flesh keeps reasserting itself. Worse, our entire Western cultural legacy strives to define the spiritual realm out of existence. We are left too often at the mercy of our emotions and cannot discern the difference between them and the Holy Spirit. It is not a question of whether He has the power to overrule our feelings, but a question of whether that's how He operates. He would, but we have so very far to go. His rule is gentle, and few issues in our lives warrant forcing us. Look back at all the regrets you have in harming others after you came to faith in Christ. He could have stopped you, but it's not His way. Instead, you live on with the sorrow, and it serves to sharpen tomorrow's resolve. We of all souls in the universe are truly free to choose between following Christ or listening to Satan. The Elect alone can honestly choose to hear God's voice. Yet, our ears are so full of noise.
We must find a way more certain than the vagaries of impressions here and there. We cannot trust the fleeting impressions of the moment, for the moment passes all too quickly. We must find within us something so completely a work of the Holy Spirit, we find it trustworthy, even as it changes and grows within us. What are the decisions down deep in your inner being which you could not possibly change if you wished? We call them convictions. They are not subject to significant change with the winds of opinion and human logic. Rather, they often defy logic. This bedrock of who we are -- the things we cannot walk away from, the things we must fight and smother in order to do wrong. They are the things we absolutely must do, or we cease being ourselves. This is the primary place of the Spirit's work in us.
The convictions are the place where the Holy Spirit speaks loudest. In our as-yet fallen human minds, we may get impressions of what we should do, but we cannot take such impressions and whisperings as the voice of God. Rather, we must compare everything with the conscience, to see if it passes the test of satisfying our convictions. Again, do not mistake mere opinions, regardless how long held, as conviction. Opinions remain subject to logic of one form or another, but convictions are the bedrock of our beings. When a question arises over doing this or that, we must test them against our convictions. Doing so first requires a concerted effort to recognize them for what they are. For example, here you will see a recent examination of my own convictions. No power of man, including my own power, can overrule these things. That is because they were placed by God Almighty, not me or anyone else.
In your world, in your daily life, you will encounter any number of things. To each, you must answer the question: "What is it I must do here?" It's not a matter of what you were taught you should do, or should want to do. The "shoulds" are too often decided by mere men. While there may be any number of reasons to believe you can help this or that individual, if your convictions warn you off, do not try. A tremendous emotional pulling of heart-strings means nothing. Emotions are not for deciding, but for celebrating things decided God's way. It is this path which shows us how to pray for others. In the prayer closet, when anything weighs upon our minds, we ask His help bouncing it off our convictions. Unpleasant results from a right choice are part of suffering with Christ. The right choice is the one made the right way. While in a future day, your decision might come out differently, it does not mean you sinned by your earlier choice. Holiness in Scripture is defined by desire of the spiritual man, not by the failing performance of fallen flesh.
Pray for those around you, by seeking his revelation via the clear Word of Scripture, as understood in your convictions.
Sunday, August 5, 2007
Life of Christ: Matthew 3:13-4:11
Jesus did nothing publicly to announce His ministry before this scene. John was sent as His forerunner, to carry the message of true repentance. The public ministry of Jesus was the doorway to the Kingdom of Heaven, and in many ways was the start of it. This meant a passing of the old Davidic Kingdom, and a passing of the Law of Moses. John served under this older covenant, but his service was to herald the New.
For Jesus to become Israel required fulfilling every measure. Thus, to participate in John's baptism was a part of this. Not only did He lend credence to what John preached, but also that the Old Covenant was at an end. John was hardly a stranger to his cousin, Jesus, nor ignorant of the story of His birth and signs. He knew with some degree of conviction his cousin was the Messiah, though he obviously did not know all that was connected with that.
Thus, assuming Jesus was indeed "the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world," John was looking to Him as the ultimate expression of God's message and will. John knew he was merely the herald, clearly understood he deserved no place in Jesus' Kingdom of Heaven. Thus, when Jesus appeared to be baptized, John argued insistently and persistently against it. This was quite a scene. Finally, Jesus shut down the argument by noting He came to fulfill every jot and tittle of the Law of Moses so He could inaugurate better things.
The instant Jesus arose from beneath the surface of the water, the sky itself was changed. There are no words to describe the unfathomable yet noticeable shift in reality, but John felt the air change. This was no ripping of time and space, but an orderly opening in the wall of separation between fallen Creation and God's perfect Heaven. A visible manifestation of God's own Spirit appeared in this opening, and descended like a dove to rest on Jesus. With it came the authoritative announcement from Heaven's Throne itself this was the very Son of God, someone in Whom the Father of all, Jehovah, had full confidence from the beginning.
We note in passing it's no small matter we see here the unquestionable description of the Trinity. The three elements are plainly marked as separate, yet just as obviously One. Were this the only mention, it would be sufficient to close the door on any arguments against the concept of the Trinity.
Thus, John at this point had fulfilled his central role in history. It's not a matter of no longer having anything to do, for there would always be in this world fallen people in need of the message of repentance and redemption in God's Son. Rather, John's message was now fully formed, for its primary object was fully identified, and all his preaching now pointed to a clearly defined Person as Messiah, the Prince of Heaven. The claim had been declared, and John's life had reached it's climax.
This claim by, and on behalf of, Jesus as the Messiah was not to go unchallenged. Just whose Messiah would He be? Many different messiahs had already come, each with a different message, with differing and conflicting claims. So far, all had died, mostly ignominiously. Being the true Messiah, it was necessary to clarify at the least what He was not.
Led by the Spirit into the Judean Wilderness, the mountainous western rim of the Dead Sea, Jesus began a fast. It mirrored the time Moses spent on the Mountain of God receiving the Law. It must be noted here the mention of 40 days and nights is a common Hebrew phrase rather like our saying "a month or so." It's not meant to be a precise count, because such was not considered important. What was important was the length of time was sufficient to make a full and clean break with the past, to face every human self-doubt, to establish a clarity of purpose and understanding, and more importantly to fulfill the purpose lost on the Nation of Israel. Following their meeting with God at Sinai, they failed consistently and utterly to embrace the purpose God had for them. Thus, because of their rejection of Moses' 40 days with God, they had their 40 years of wandering -- also not to be taken with mathematical precision -- spiritually. Jesus did not wander, but was clearly led of the Spirit.
As this period of intense spiritual examination wound down, the final test must come. Would Jesus be the Messiah predicted in the Messianic Expectations common to the rabbinic traditions of His day? By no means. The Judaism of that day was bereft of spiritual depth, having become a shallow and narrow legalism, whose only concept of Heaven was material comfort. They had exchanged spiritual shalom for a poor shadow. They wanted gold instead of a legacy of revelation; they wanted a bulging dinner table rather than a fullness of the spirit; they wanted mere freedom from disease and pestilence, instead of God's divine power to resist every form of evil; they wanted political control and dominance to crush all others in the dirt, instead of reliance on God to grant power to fulfill His calling across all human political boundaries. While there must have been other temptations we could not name, three primary issues are raised to indicate Jesus rejected the Talmudic brand of Judaism.
Perhaps it was the cool of the morning, as Jesus looked out upon the rocky waste, the perfect time to eat a breakfast of warm bread fresh from the oven. In that day and time the image of "bread" was not a long, squarish loaf as we think of it in the West, but a flat circular disk, rather like a pancake made with yeast. Many of the rocks lying on the surface of the desert looked precisely like that, even in color, sometimes. What it represented was far more. The Talmudic expectations of the Messiah called for Him to supply by miraculous power just this very thing; a particular legend called for the stones of the wilderness to be turned into bread, as a way of representing an unimaginable plenitude of food.
There's nothing sinful about food, and a good appetite was created by God as part of good physical health. Rather, there is sin in taking a shortcut to godlike power, and to win over the Judean masses with the one thing which most worried them, and many other people in the world: plentiful food. Give them bread, and they'll eat out of your hands. Do it by miracle, and all the more will they flock to serve you. Conquering at the head of such a massive army would be a breeze. But Jesus was not a mere food supplier, for though it is necessary for life, it is the Law of God which feeds the soul that mattered most. Better one should starve until this life is extinguished than to betray His will.
Standing on the wall of the Temple Terrace in Jerusalem, there is one corner, the southeast, which jutted out into the Kidron Valley, forming a wall some seventy feet high, we believe. Whether in the flesh or in the spirit hardly mattered; Satan took Jesus there to claim one of those promises, part of "every word which proceeds from the mouth of God" -- the Messiah could not be harmed while engaged in the work of Jehovah (Psalm 91:11-12). Such a spectacular act as jumping off the pinnacle and landing safely on the valley floor below would force the Jews to accept Him. Not just the rabble, but the savvy urbanites, as well. This miracle would forestall any question whether He was the Messiah, and there's some evidence this very act was a part of the legends. It's true the servant of Jehovah can expect everything to work out according to His calling, to overcome every threat which arises as a necessary element of such service. But this would be flinging a challenge in the face of God -- "Bail me out or Your promise will fail." Jesus would not be that kind of Messiah, presenting spectacles simply to amaze. The miraculous power of God exists not merely to meet human need, nor to amaze, but to demonstrate spiritual principles and confirm His Word.
Neither do we need to know where was this "exceedingly high mountain," only that it was a place sufficient to display some extent of human habitation in the world. It represented the whole of humanity, under the various rulers and regimes appointed by God to fulfill the requirements of the Covenant of Noah (Genesis 9): Fallen man must live under civil order, lest God reduce the natural order. At any rate, all of human government outside the Law of Moses was a matter of sinners keeping other sinners under control, never mind how imperfectly; that was God's command for fallen men. It was this fallen nature of government which gave birth to the constant threat of dominating Israel. In their failure to see it was their own sins which always brought outside conquests of Israel, the false Talmudic expectations of the Messiah demanded He once and for all end this threat. He must become a ruler of all the world, and make them eternally subservient to Israel. Many extravagant promises of "10 Gentile slaves for every Jew" and other racist nonsense pervaded this idea. Rather than bring the light of God's revelation to all mankind, rabbis spoke dreamily of crushing all under their feet.
Jesus would not be that sort of Messiah, either. Rather, He would conquer the hearts of men, uniting them under His spiritual rule, a rule which ignored nation, race, government, and laws of men. It would be the true Kingdom of Heaven, not a mere "heavenly" kingdom. The laws and governing of fallen mankind in this world are of no concern to the the servants of the King. Those matters are the Father's alone; His servants are devoted to His rule and reign, and leave such matters in His care. Even Talmudic rabbis understood the Covenant of Noah, and had formulated seven basic commandments it required. Yet they lost their understanding of what it was all about.
That Jesus would have known the fullness of rabbinic teaching is hardly in doubt. With His auspicious birth and all the signs, it's hard to imagine His extended family would not do all they could to insure He had gotten a decent rabbinical education. There were numerous rabbinical colleges throughout the world, wherever Jews lived. While some were more prestigious than others, just about all of them would have the same basic curriculum. It would have been loaded with Talmudic teachings, and it was clear Jesus from age 12 knew the heart of the matter, already. Still, by the time He was around 30 years old, He would have studied the whole Old Testament rather intensively, along with the various documents making up the Talmud.
He would have understood well beforehand the root nature of all fallen human desire could be narrowed down to three things:
We see this understanding echoed in the Fall (Genesis 3:6) as the basis for tempting Eve, and declared later by the Apostle John (1 John 2:16). It was the same three elements of fallen nature tested in the Wilderness Temptation of Christ, the same three elements Talmudism had embraced by exchanging the abundant riches of Heaven for a poor shadow of worldly comfort. These means were the path Satan offered mankind to gain their loyalty, but that was not sufficient to back his claim over mankind. Jesus spoke with the authority of the Son, and remanded Satan to his rightful place under Him. Christ not only denied Satan's impudent claim, but would negate it in His choice to take the mystical path of Jehovah, through death to eternal power.
Finally, we note here Satan's name in the text comes from the term, "to pierce through." What could be fatal in the rough hands of a mere soldier can also be healing in the hands of the skilled surgeon. To cut through something is to see what it's made of, to explore its substance. Satan pierces all of us, but by clinging to Christ, we force our Enemy -- the Tempter, the Adversary, the Deceiver -- to do the work of God in clarifying our faith.
For Jesus to become Israel required fulfilling every measure. Thus, to participate in John's baptism was a part of this. Not only did He lend credence to what John preached, but also that the Old Covenant was at an end. John was hardly a stranger to his cousin, Jesus, nor ignorant of the story of His birth and signs. He knew with some degree of conviction his cousin was the Messiah, though he obviously did not know all that was connected with that.
Thus, assuming Jesus was indeed "the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world," John was looking to Him as the ultimate expression of God's message and will. John knew he was merely the herald, clearly understood he deserved no place in Jesus' Kingdom of Heaven. Thus, when Jesus appeared to be baptized, John argued insistently and persistently against it. This was quite a scene. Finally, Jesus shut down the argument by noting He came to fulfill every jot and tittle of the Law of Moses so He could inaugurate better things.
The instant Jesus arose from beneath the surface of the water, the sky itself was changed. There are no words to describe the unfathomable yet noticeable shift in reality, but John felt the air change. This was no ripping of time and space, but an orderly opening in the wall of separation between fallen Creation and God's perfect Heaven. A visible manifestation of God's own Spirit appeared in this opening, and descended like a dove to rest on Jesus. With it came the authoritative announcement from Heaven's Throne itself this was the very Son of God, someone in Whom the Father of all, Jehovah, had full confidence from the beginning.
We note in passing it's no small matter we see here the unquestionable description of the Trinity. The three elements are plainly marked as separate, yet just as obviously One. Were this the only mention, it would be sufficient to close the door on any arguments against the concept of the Trinity.
Thus, John at this point had fulfilled his central role in history. It's not a matter of no longer having anything to do, for there would always be in this world fallen people in need of the message of repentance and redemption in God's Son. Rather, John's message was now fully formed, for its primary object was fully identified, and all his preaching now pointed to a clearly defined Person as Messiah, the Prince of Heaven. The claim had been declared, and John's life had reached it's climax.
This claim by, and on behalf of, Jesus as the Messiah was not to go unchallenged. Just whose Messiah would He be? Many different messiahs had already come, each with a different message, with differing and conflicting claims. So far, all had died, mostly ignominiously. Being the true Messiah, it was necessary to clarify at the least what He was not.
Led by the Spirit into the Judean Wilderness, the mountainous western rim of the Dead Sea, Jesus began a fast. It mirrored the time Moses spent on the Mountain of God receiving the Law. It must be noted here the mention of 40 days and nights is a common Hebrew phrase rather like our saying "a month or so." It's not meant to be a precise count, because such was not considered important. What was important was the length of time was sufficient to make a full and clean break with the past, to face every human self-doubt, to establish a clarity of purpose and understanding, and more importantly to fulfill the purpose lost on the Nation of Israel. Following their meeting with God at Sinai, they failed consistently and utterly to embrace the purpose God had for them. Thus, because of their rejection of Moses' 40 days with God, they had their 40 years of wandering -- also not to be taken with mathematical precision -- spiritually. Jesus did not wander, but was clearly led of the Spirit.
As this period of intense spiritual examination wound down, the final test must come. Would Jesus be the Messiah predicted in the Messianic Expectations common to the rabbinic traditions of His day? By no means. The Judaism of that day was bereft of spiritual depth, having become a shallow and narrow legalism, whose only concept of Heaven was material comfort. They had exchanged spiritual shalom for a poor shadow. They wanted gold instead of a legacy of revelation; they wanted a bulging dinner table rather than a fullness of the spirit; they wanted mere freedom from disease and pestilence, instead of God's divine power to resist every form of evil; they wanted political control and dominance to crush all others in the dirt, instead of reliance on God to grant power to fulfill His calling across all human political boundaries. While there must have been other temptations we could not name, three primary issues are raised to indicate Jesus rejected the Talmudic brand of Judaism.
Perhaps it was the cool of the morning, as Jesus looked out upon the rocky waste, the perfect time to eat a breakfast of warm bread fresh from the oven. In that day and time the image of "bread" was not a long, squarish loaf as we think of it in the West, but a flat circular disk, rather like a pancake made with yeast. Many of the rocks lying on the surface of the desert looked precisely like that, even in color, sometimes. What it represented was far more. The Talmudic expectations of the Messiah called for Him to supply by miraculous power just this very thing; a particular legend called for the stones of the wilderness to be turned into bread, as a way of representing an unimaginable plenitude of food.
There's nothing sinful about food, and a good appetite was created by God as part of good physical health. Rather, there is sin in taking a shortcut to godlike power, and to win over the Judean masses with the one thing which most worried them, and many other people in the world: plentiful food. Give them bread, and they'll eat out of your hands. Do it by miracle, and all the more will they flock to serve you. Conquering at the head of such a massive army would be a breeze. But Jesus was not a mere food supplier, for though it is necessary for life, it is the Law of God which feeds the soul that mattered most. Better one should starve until this life is extinguished than to betray His will.
Standing on the wall of the Temple Terrace in Jerusalem, there is one corner, the southeast, which jutted out into the Kidron Valley, forming a wall some seventy feet high, we believe. Whether in the flesh or in the spirit hardly mattered; Satan took Jesus there to claim one of those promises, part of "every word which proceeds from the mouth of God" -- the Messiah could not be harmed while engaged in the work of Jehovah (Psalm 91:11-12). Such a spectacular act as jumping off the pinnacle and landing safely on the valley floor below would force the Jews to accept Him. Not just the rabble, but the savvy urbanites, as well. This miracle would forestall any question whether He was the Messiah, and there's some evidence this very act was a part of the legends. It's true the servant of Jehovah can expect everything to work out according to His calling, to overcome every threat which arises as a necessary element of such service. But this would be flinging a challenge in the face of God -- "Bail me out or Your promise will fail." Jesus would not be that kind of Messiah, presenting spectacles simply to amaze. The miraculous power of God exists not merely to meet human need, nor to amaze, but to demonstrate spiritual principles and confirm His Word.
Neither do we need to know where was this "exceedingly high mountain," only that it was a place sufficient to display some extent of human habitation in the world. It represented the whole of humanity, under the various rulers and regimes appointed by God to fulfill the requirements of the Covenant of Noah (Genesis 9): Fallen man must live under civil order, lest God reduce the natural order. At any rate, all of human government outside the Law of Moses was a matter of sinners keeping other sinners under control, never mind how imperfectly; that was God's command for fallen men. It was this fallen nature of government which gave birth to the constant threat of dominating Israel. In their failure to see it was their own sins which always brought outside conquests of Israel, the false Talmudic expectations of the Messiah demanded He once and for all end this threat. He must become a ruler of all the world, and make them eternally subservient to Israel. Many extravagant promises of "10 Gentile slaves for every Jew" and other racist nonsense pervaded this idea. Rather than bring the light of God's revelation to all mankind, rabbis spoke dreamily of crushing all under their feet.
Jesus would not be that sort of Messiah, either. Rather, He would conquer the hearts of men, uniting them under His spiritual rule, a rule which ignored nation, race, government, and laws of men. It would be the true Kingdom of Heaven, not a mere "heavenly" kingdom. The laws and governing of fallen mankind in this world are of no concern to the the servants of the King. Those matters are the Father's alone; His servants are devoted to His rule and reign, and leave such matters in His care. Even Talmudic rabbis understood the Covenant of Noah, and had formulated seven basic commandments it required. Yet they lost their understanding of what it was all about.
That Jesus would have known the fullness of rabbinic teaching is hardly in doubt. With His auspicious birth and all the signs, it's hard to imagine His extended family would not do all they could to insure He had gotten a decent rabbinical education. There were numerous rabbinical colleges throughout the world, wherever Jews lived. While some were more prestigious than others, just about all of them would have the same basic curriculum. It would have been loaded with Talmudic teachings, and it was clear Jesus from age 12 knew the heart of the matter, already. Still, by the time He was around 30 years old, He would have studied the whole Old Testament rather intensively, along with the various documents making up the Talmud.
He would have understood well beforehand the root nature of all fallen human desire could be narrowed down to three things:
- Lust of the Flesh -- All the insistent human appetites had been perverted, providing an excuse for ignoring God's provision to meet them.
- Lust of the Eyes -- There could never be enough discovery and spectacle to sate the human curiosity.
- Pride of Life -- Mankind's natural dominance over all other living things, over the very earth itself, could bring unspeakable pride, but could not keep away death.
We see this understanding echoed in the Fall (Genesis 3:6) as the basis for tempting Eve, and declared later by the Apostle John (1 John 2:16). It was the same three elements of fallen nature tested in the Wilderness Temptation of Christ, the same three elements Talmudism had embraced by exchanging the abundant riches of Heaven for a poor shadow of worldly comfort. These means were the path Satan offered mankind to gain their loyalty, but that was not sufficient to back his claim over mankind. Jesus spoke with the authority of the Son, and remanded Satan to his rightful place under Him. Christ not only denied Satan's impudent claim, but would negate it in His choice to take the mystical path of Jehovah, through death to eternal power.
Finally, we note here Satan's name in the text comes from the term, "to pierce through." What could be fatal in the rough hands of a mere soldier can also be healing in the hands of the skilled surgeon. To cut through something is to see what it's made of, to explore its substance. Satan pierces all of us, but by clinging to Christ, we force our Enemy -- the Tempter, the Adversary, the Deceiver -- to do the work of God in clarifying our faith.
Saturday, August 4, 2007
Elements of Spiritual Warfare: Ephesians 6
This is a continuation of my discussion from yesterday on praying.
You can't really understand prayer without understanding spiritual warfare. The foundation for most of this is found in Ephesians 6:10ff. You've probably seen this before, so I'll make it brief. Paul begins by stating clearly the concept of spiritual warfare:
We note the obvious: Our strength in this fallen world is in Christ. If we aren't using His power, we don't have any. This is a war, lasting our whole lives. It's His armor alone which protects us, so don't leave out any part of His provision. Our enemy is not flesh and blood, but spiritual entities. Translation: We aren't fighting people; they are merely the weapons of the enemy. People are not your problem. If we were fighting mere man, we would use manly weapons. This is spiritual warfare, a battle over who is Lord of Eternity. It requires spiritual weapons used in spiritual strength, weapons provided by the Victor (John 16:33) who enlisted us in His Army. We can't afford to leave out any detail, lest we risk falling in battle, which battle Paul lyrically refers to as "the evil day."
Paul draws the image of a warrior, an image drawn from mixed sources. Only in the Levant would one think of "girding up the loins." In the West, we speak of "rolling up our sleeves," because strong arms are the focus of manly imagery. In the East, it is the legs; all the more so when we consider God forbade Israel fighting mounted. He promised, and without fail delivered, victory in His power if His People would commit in faith to fighting on foot a mounted enemy. The image of manliness was powerful legs for walking all day into battle, for running down the enemy troops when they broke ranks and fled. It's a wholly different concept of battle, where standing your ground and holding ranks was the primary element in victory. Thus, "having done all" we should expect "to stand" our ground.
The phrase "girding your loins" meant tucking the ends of your robe up into your belt -- every man wore a cloth sash, or a leather belt, depending on the circumstances. This freeing of the legs for action requires truth. In this context, knowing the truth about spiritual realities will prevent you being tripped up by ignorance. Shedding the petty concerns of this life because we clearly understand what a hindrance they can be is the first step in preparing our souls for battle against evil.
The breastplate in Eastern lands would be leather, often with added pieces of metal. By the First Century, that meant a single iron or steel plate. It was sufficient to cover the center of the torso from most mortal wounds in typical battles using hand weapons. Most Roman troops had the slightly better armor of steel bands layered horizontally over the torso ("lamellar"), giving more protection. For the wealthier Greek and Roman officers, the whole torso might be covered with a single custom shaped bronze sheet, usually decorated in various ways. At any rate, the point of such coverage should be obvious: It hinders an attack from someone who manages to get too close. We call this "an inside attack" -- inside the range of most combat weapons and shields. By embracing the righteousness offered by Christ, by our assurance He has made us righteous, we can have confidence to face accusations and paralyzing guilt. It's not a question of whether you have sinned; it's a question of whether you are acceptable in God's sight. While not taking it for granted, we surely stand too far off if we forget we can call Him "Daddy" (Romans 8:15; Galatians 4:6). Our assurance of righteousness in Him blunts the inside attack of false guilt. Just as a rather slight torso wound can make one nearly powerless in a melee, guilt can sap your spiritual strength.
The Roman Army had long used steel studs in the soles of their army-issued sandals. More than a mere layer of leather to prevent ground clutter cutting the feet out from under a soldier, studded sandals gave powerful traction on all common surfaces of that day. Consider going barefoot outside. Are you not abundantly cautious about your feet? In our souls, having the profound sense of being at peace with God and His whole Creation makes it easy to ignore variations in the daily situation. Instead of worrying about circumstances, we can face all the typical misery of human life with aplomb. His peace prepares us for everything. Preparing to share the good news of that peace makes us see all things as opportunities for redemption.
The shield was half defensive, half offensive. That is, it was what warriors brought to bear against their enemies until the right moment to strike. In formation, a wall of steel with lances protruding was thoroughly intimidating. Even mere wooden shields would withstand several attempts to cut through with edged weapons. The most frightening weapon at that time was a mass launch of flaming arrows. They need not strike you directly to harm; just splashing burning oil on you would leave a nasty wound. Having them strike your baggage or flammable vegetation nearby can really distract you. Our commitment ("faith") to serving Christ blunts just about everything, and can put out the fires of Satanic schemes. If dying in His service doesn't matter, if suffering any loss at all is just par for the course, there's not much Darkness can do to you.
Even helmeted soldiers will dodge a thrust or missile they see coming at their heads. It's a reflex. Thus, helmets were worn for the blow not seen. That is, it protected soldiers from things they didn't know was about the hit them, usually from a blind spot. We all have blind spots, and our whole lives long we will be working to remove them. We'll die with plenty more left uncorrected. Still, the assurance it's all paid for, the certainty we were chosen by His grace alone, is enough to deflect surprise attacks from the enemy. We are fallen, and cannot possibly keep an eye on everything, or do every job well. There are plenty of things at which we'll always fail. He will not fail.
Finally, we come to the sword (Hebrews 4:11-13). While it's purpose and use are plain to all, it's not often understood as an image of the Living Word. That is, the character of Christ Himself in us, living and growing, is our primary offense. Cutting through the false dangers, the deceiving threat of the Kingdom of Darkness only comes from living His Holiness and Love. Those are two edges of the same sword, separated only in our fallen human minds. It's a sword you cannot use until you pull it from it's sheath in your own breast. Until your worldly, human pretensions are slain, you have no sword. Your self-death is your victory.
Thus, when Paul closes the discussion with talk of prayer, we realize the battle ground was never "out there" in the sinful world. It has always been inside our own souls. Your life is the land to be conquered and occupied by His redemptive force. It becomes productive only as, one square inch at a time if need be, your life is surrendered to His Lordship. To the degree He owns you is the degree to which you have defeated Satan. All the other things in your world which you touch, and which touch you, will be set in order only as that part of you comes under His rule.
Intercession for others is itself an issue of conquest in your soul. You cannot properly care for anyone or anything until you care the way God does. He cared enough to die in unspeakable agony; can we not embrace a little of that for ourselves each day? Doing good works may benefit others, and God will certainly use any vessel He chooses, but you will not reap any part of the blessings if your works are not His works. We are His hands and feet, His face and mouth in this world. We cannot defeat theft until we have nothing to lose. We cannot defeat lying until we stop living lies. We cannot defeat death until we are dead to the old self.
Now we are ready to talk about intercession.
You can't really understand prayer without understanding spiritual warfare. The foundation for most of this is found in Ephesians 6:10ff. You've probably seen this before, so I'll make it brief. Paul begins by stating clearly the concept of spiritual warfare:
Finally, my brothers, be strong in the Lord and in the power of His might. Put on the whole armor of God so that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the world's rulers, of the darkness of this age, against spiritual wickedness in high places. Therefore take to yourselves the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. (vv. 10-13)
We note the obvious: Our strength in this fallen world is in Christ. If we aren't using His power, we don't have any. This is a war, lasting our whole lives. It's His armor alone which protects us, so don't leave out any part of His provision. Our enemy is not flesh and blood, but spiritual entities. Translation: We aren't fighting people; they are merely the weapons of the enemy. People are not your problem. If we were fighting mere man, we would use manly weapons. This is spiritual warfare, a battle over who is Lord of Eternity. It requires spiritual weapons used in spiritual strength, weapons provided by the Victor (John 16:33) who enlisted us in His Army. We can't afford to leave out any detail, lest we risk falling in battle, which battle Paul lyrically refers to as "the evil day."
Paul draws the image of a warrior, an image drawn from mixed sources. Only in the Levant would one think of "girding up the loins." In the West, we speak of "rolling up our sleeves," because strong arms are the focus of manly imagery. In the East, it is the legs; all the more so when we consider God forbade Israel fighting mounted. He promised, and without fail delivered, victory in His power if His People would commit in faith to fighting on foot a mounted enemy. The image of manliness was powerful legs for walking all day into battle, for running down the enemy troops when they broke ranks and fled. It's a wholly different concept of battle, where standing your ground and holding ranks was the primary element in victory. Thus, "having done all" we should expect "to stand" our ground.
The phrase "girding your loins" meant tucking the ends of your robe up into your belt -- every man wore a cloth sash, or a leather belt, depending on the circumstances. This freeing of the legs for action requires truth. In this context, knowing the truth about spiritual realities will prevent you being tripped up by ignorance. Shedding the petty concerns of this life because we clearly understand what a hindrance they can be is the first step in preparing our souls for battle against evil.
The breastplate in Eastern lands would be leather, often with added pieces of metal. By the First Century, that meant a single iron or steel plate. It was sufficient to cover the center of the torso from most mortal wounds in typical battles using hand weapons. Most Roman troops had the slightly better armor of steel bands layered horizontally over the torso ("lamellar"), giving more protection. For the wealthier Greek and Roman officers, the whole torso might be covered with a single custom shaped bronze sheet, usually decorated in various ways. At any rate, the point of such coverage should be obvious: It hinders an attack from someone who manages to get too close. We call this "an inside attack" -- inside the range of most combat weapons and shields. By embracing the righteousness offered by Christ, by our assurance He has made us righteous, we can have confidence to face accusations and paralyzing guilt. It's not a question of whether you have sinned; it's a question of whether you are acceptable in God's sight. While not taking it for granted, we surely stand too far off if we forget we can call Him "Daddy" (Romans 8:15; Galatians 4:6). Our assurance of righteousness in Him blunts the inside attack of false guilt. Just as a rather slight torso wound can make one nearly powerless in a melee, guilt can sap your spiritual strength.
The Roman Army had long used steel studs in the soles of their army-issued sandals. More than a mere layer of leather to prevent ground clutter cutting the feet out from under a soldier, studded sandals gave powerful traction on all common surfaces of that day. Consider going barefoot outside. Are you not abundantly cautious about your feet? In our souls, having the profound sense of being at peace with God and His whole Creation makes it easy to ignore variations in the daily situation. Instead of worrying about circumstances, we can face all the typical misery of human life with aplomb. His peace prepares us for everything. Preparing to share the good news of that peace makes us see all things as opportunities for redemption.
The shield was half defensive, half offensive. That is, it was what warriors brought to bear against their enemies until the right moment to strike. In formation, a wall of steel with lances protruding was thoroughly intimidating. Even mere wooden shields would withstand several attempts to cut through with edged weapons. The most frightening weapon at that time was a mass launch of flaming arrows. They need not strike you directly to harm; just splashing burning oil on you would leave a nasty wound. Having them strike your baggage or flammable vegetation nearby can really distract you. Our commitment ("faith") to serving Christ blunts just about everything, and can put out the fires of Satanic schemes. If dying in His service doesn't matter, if suffering any loss at all is just par for the course, there's not much Darkness can do to you.
Even helmeted soldiers will dodge a thrust or missile they see coming at their heads. It's a reflex. Thus, helmets were worn for the blow not seen. That is, it protected soldiers from things they didn't know was about the hit them, usually from a blind spot. We all have blind spots, and our whole lives long we will be working to remove them. We'll die with plenty more left uncorrected. Still, the assurance it's all paid for, the certainty we were chosen by His grace alone, is enough to deflect surprise attacks from the enemy. We are fallen, and cannot possibly keep an eye on everything, or do every job well. There are plenty of things at which we'll always fail. He will not fail.
Finally, we come to the sword (Hebrews 4:11-13). While it's purpose and use are plain to all, it's not often understood as an image of the Living Word. That is, the character of Christ Himself in us, living and growing, is our primary offense. Cutting through the false dangers, the deceiving threat of the Kingdom of Darkness only comes from living His Holiness and Love. Those are two edges of the same sword, separated only in our fallen human minds. It's a sword you cannot use until you pull it from it's sheath in your own breast. Until your worldly, human pretensions are slain, you have no sword. Your self-death is your victory.
...praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching to this very thing with all perseverance and supplication for all saints. (v. 18)
Thus, when Paul closes the discussion with talk of prayer, we realize the battle ground was never "out there" in the sinful world. It has always been inside our own souls. Your life is the land to be conquered and occupied by His redemptive force. It becomes productive only as, one square inch at a time if need be, your life is surrendered to His Lordship. To the degree He owns you is the degree to which you have defeated Satan. All the other things in your world which you touch, and which touch you, will be set in order only as that part of you comes under His rule.
Intercession for others is itself an issue of conquest in your soul. You cannot properly care for anyone or anything until you care the way God does. He cared enough to die in unspeakable agony; can we not embrace a little of that for ourselves each day? Doing good works may benefit others, and God will certainly use any vessel He chooses, but you will not reap any part of the blessings if your works are not His works. We are His hands and feet, His face and mouth in this world. We cannot defeat theft until we have nothing to lose. We cannot defeat lying until we stop living lies. We cannot defeat death until we are dead to the old self.
Now we are ready to talk about intercession.
Friday, August 3, 2007
The Empty Form of Preaching
I've been asked to listen to some sermon recordings. Never mind who the preacher is; it's enough to know he serves the god of Church Growth. He says so himself, emphasizing its prominence in his pursuit of an advanced degree. Like everyone else in that movement, his message is loaded with moving admonitions to be holy and obey God.
No where does he really explain how to do holiness, nor even how to understand it, only the necessity of embracing it. In other words, he's not preaching, just pumping up the crowd, because they love it. They call it moving, hard-hitting messages. That's because they don't really understand holiness, but are dangerously sure they do.
These are the kind of people who are so certain they've had a touch from God when their emotions are stirred. They can't discern the difference between emotional enthusiasm versus deep conviction. They are familiar with guilt, and call it "conviction." They weep but are little changed because they mistake enthralling worship music with actual worship. The two are neither exclusionary nor synonymous. Nice music does what it always does, to saints and sinners alike -- provided it's to their tastes. Music contrary to their tastes is somehow "Devil's music" -- never mind how that music makes the folks down the road feel certain they've met Jesus in it, too. That there is even a debate about whether a collection of tonic sounds and rhythms can be inherently sacred or secular, or even evil, is proof it's not about the Holy Spirit moving in your life, but about what you like to hear.
Sure, we need the God of the familiar. We need the comfort of de-stressing so we can remember who we are. However, that's the place from which we move to face the world which denies we are, much less makes room for who we are. The Prayer Closet is not the mission field, but is built out from it. The problem with churches this kind of preacher pastors -- never mind which makes the other -- is they really don't know how to pray. They aim a raft of nice sounding words at God, appealing for things they've been led to believe matter. They want the world changed. They don't know what matters most in prayer is changing the one praying.
So here's a concise lesson on prayer which would shock them. I won't reference Bible verses, because if you don't recognize the Word of God behind what I type here, you haven't read the Bible enough. Here we go...
It doesn't really matter what posture you take. Indeed, sometimes it's best you go to an open place, walk around in solitude and pray out loud. Yep, just talk it over with God. Assume He's real, maybe even envision He's walking beside you. Whatever it takes, know He is listening. Indeed, He's the One who directed you come there to see Him, for the very purpose of talking through some things. Walking around has this odd effect on the modern Western psyche, making us more intent on our conversation with God. The biggest danger you'll face is worrying how it looks to another human being, how it looks compared to some TV-Movie image of doing prayer.
To start, acknowledge your unworthiness of anything less than a short, miserable life, lingering suffering, slow painful death, and eternity in Hell. That's justice. Stop and consider a moment the vast weight of your sins. You'll probably need to work on this for a while before it becomes natural, before you gain proper sensitivity to what sin is, and and how much you still do it every day, every moment. There is no good in any of us. So tell Him you know all that, and are utterly delighted beyond words to realize He chose to rescue you from that just fate. You need not be overly demonstrative in giving thanks; just be true to your own character and personality. Consider for a moment the awful price paid for your redemption. I'd be surprised if at least on some occasions you don't weep. Weeping is not the goal, because emotions exist to celebrate what's real, not define it.
Next, declare something substantial about His greatness. Yeah, it's called worship. Again, any language unnatural to your disposition will be meaningless. Praise Him the way you were made to praise. The point is to put your head in the place where you know beyond all shadow of a doubt He can and will. It doesn't matter what He can and will, only that He does. Sure, go ahead and sing if that's natural to you; it is to me.
We're getting there. Now combine the ideas: You know without His working in your life, you could do nothing that mattered. You couldn't put your own underwear on, couldn't get out of bed, couldn't draw that next breath. Thus, nothing taking place while you breathe matters a whit unless He thinks it matters. Discuss that with Him. Ask Him what matters; appeal to Him to show you what's on His agenda for you. Don't be afraid to yak away, as long as you pay attention. Your own mouth could teach you a thing or two in moments like this, because the Holy Spirit works most strongly in our subconscious.
Don't seize on anything which appeals to you. This is not about confirming your current preferences and plans in life. This is about nailing it all to the Cross of Christ. Implore Him to kill off the life your flesh planned so you can see the life He planned. Come back to this often, every time you pray, because this is the crux of the issue, literally -- "crux" is Latin for "cross." Until you are cleansed of all your pretensions to having some say in your life, you simply won't move forward.
It's painful. Embrace that, because it's Life -- not mere misery, but self-death. Sure, embrace common human misery, because if you dodge legitimate suffering, you'll build layers of neurosis. That will hinder your progress, and serves as an open gate for demonic access to your life. Learn to accept the unexpected splatter of sin on your flesh, on the material substance of your daily life. Consider it typical; don't be distracted by it. Clean up the mess with aplomb, but don't let it own you. Rather, seek to know what parts of your soul cleave to this world, to some utopian dream of peace, prosperity and homeostasis. Having those things serves to indicate you aren't resisting sin enough. Ditch the false dream; toss it out; give it up to God and ask what He wants done with it. Mediate on that as you depart the season of prayer. For the first few times, that's enough right there. Realize, again, most of what the Holy Spirit does will take place in the subconscious.
Eventually you'll be in a place to know how to pray for others. That's not a goal, but a marker on the way. At some point in your prayer life, you'll begin asking God how to die on the Cross with Jesus for someone you encounter, but that's a separate sermon. We need more sermons like this in the Body of Christ. I'm not selling anything, and I don't care what it pays. I also don't care much how big of a crowd it draws. Those things are not my department. Mine is to speak the truth as best I understand and can say it. I'm of no consequence; the message of Christ is everything.
No where does he really explain how to do holiness, nor even how to understand it, only the necessity of embracing it. In other words, he's not preaching, just pumping up the crowd, because they love it. They call it moving, hard-hitting messages. That's because they don't really understand holiness, but are dangerously sure they do.
These are the kind of people who are so certain they've had a touch from God when their emotions are stirred. They can't discern the difference between emotional enthusiasm versus deep conviction. They are familiar with guilt, and call it "conviction." They weep but are little changed because they mistake enthralling worship music with actual worship. The two are neither exclusionary nor synonymous. Nice music does what it always does, to saints and sinners alike -- provided it's to their tastes. Music contrary to their tastes is somehow "Devil's music" -- never mind how that music makes the folks down the road feel certain they've met Jesus in it, too. That there is even a debate about whether a collection of tonic sounds and rhythms can be inherently sacred or secular, or even evil, is proof it's not about the Holy Spirit moving in your life, but about what you like to hear.
Sure, we need the God of the familiar. We need the comfort of de-stressing so we can remember who we are. However, that's the place from which we move to face the world which denies we are, much less makes room for who we are. The Prayer Closet is not the mission field, but is built out from it. The problem with churches this kind of preacher pastors -- never mind which makes the other -- is they really don't know how to pray. They aim a raft of nice sounding words at God, appealing for things they've been led to believe matter. They want the world changed. They don't know what matters most in prayer is changing the one praying.
So here's a concise lesson on prayer which would shock them. I won't reference Bible verses, because if you don't recognize the Word of God behind what I type here, you haven't read the Bible enough. Here we go...
It doesn't really matter what posture you take. Indeed, sometimes it's best you go to an open place, walk around in solitude and pray out loud. Yep, just talk it over with God. Assume He's real, maybe even envision He's walking beside you. Whatever it takes, know He is listening. Indeed, He's the One who directed you come there to see Him, for the very purpose of talking through some things. Walking around has this odd effect on the modern Western psyche, making us more intent on our conversation with God. The biggest danger you'll face is worrying how it looks to another human being, how it looks compared to some TV-Movie image of doing prayer.
To start, acknowledge your unworthiness of anything less than a short, miserable life, lingering suffering, slow painful death, and eternity in Hell. That's justice. Stop and consider a moment the vast weight of your sins. You'll probably need to work on this for a while before it becomes natural, before you gain proper sensitivity to what sin is, and and how much you still do it every day, every moment. There is no good in any of us. So tell Him you know all that, and are utterly delighted beyond words to realize He chose to rescue you from that just fate. You need not be overly demonstrative in giving thanks; just be true to your own character and personality. Consider for a moment the awful price paid for your redemption. I'd be surprised if at least on some occasions you don't weep. Weeping is not the goal, because emotions exist to celebrate what's real, not define it.
Next, declare something substantial about His greatness. Yeah, it's called worship. Again, any language unnatural to your disposition will be meaningless. Praise Him the way you were made to praise. The point is to put your head in the place where you know beyond all shadow of a doubt He can and will. It doesn't matter what He can and will, only that He does. Sure, go ahead and sing if that's natural to you; it is to me.
We're getting there. Now combine the ideas: You know without His working in your life, you could do nothing that mattered. You couldn't put your own underwear on, couldn't get out of bed, couldn't draw that next breath. Thus, nothing taking place while you breathe matters a whit unless He thinks it matters. Discuss that with Him. Ask Him what matters; appeal to Him to show you what's on His agenda for you. Don't be afraid to yak away, as long as you pay attention. Your own mouth could teach you a thing or two in moments like this, because the Holy Spirit works most strongly in our subconscious.
Don't seize on anything which appeals to you. This is not about confirming your current preferences and plans in life. This is about nailing it all to the Cross of Christ. Implore Him to kill off the life your flesh planned so you can see the life He planned. Come back to this often, every time you pray, because this is the crux of the issue, literally -- "crux" is Latin for "cross." Until you are cleansed of all your pretensions to having some say in your life, you simply won't move forward.
It's painful. Embrace that, because it's Life -- not mere misery, but self-death. Sure, embrace common human misery, because if you dodge legitimate suffering, you'll build layers of neurosis. That will hinder your progress, and serves as an open gate for demonic access to your life. Learn to accept the unexpected splatter of sin on your flesh, on the material substance of your daily life. Consider it typical; don't be distracted by it. Clean up the mess with aplomb, but don't let it own you. Rather, seek to know what parts of your soul cleave to this world, to some utopian dream of peace, prosperity and homeostasis. Having those things serves to indicate you aren't resisting sin enough. Ditch the false dream; toss it out; give it up to God and ask what He wants done with it. Mediate on that as you depart the season of prayer. For the first few times, that's enough right there. Realize, again, most of what the Holy Spirit does will take place in the subconscious.
Eventually you'll be in a place to know how to pray for others. That's not a goal, but a marker on the way. At some point in your prayer life, you'll begin asking God how to die on the Cross with Jesus for someone you encounter, but that's a separate sermon. We need more sermons like this in the Body of Christ. I'm not selling anything, and I don't care what it pays. I also don't care much how big of a crowd it draws. Those things are not my department. Mine is to speak the truth as best I understand and can say it. I'm of no consequence; the message of Christ is everything.
Thursday, August 2, 2007
Finally Waking Up?
Part of the reason I walked away from any affiliation to the Christian Right is because they have become little different from the Christian Left, in that politics trumps the gospel message. Finally, somebody with clout is noticing:
Even more importantly, though, Cal Thomas broaches a topic about which I've seen almost nothing in the Christian Right:
God help us. When the big draw in any ministry is a human, when the whole budget and the attendance is based on their name, that ministry is not of Christ. It's a political show. Calling and talent matter a great deal, but they are merely tools in the Kingdom. If I ever become more than a mere living conduit, I'll be teaching me, not Christ.
Most of [Dr. D. James] Kennedy's televised messages in recent years have strayed from traditional preaching and focused primarily on politics and social issues.... Politics is about compromise. The message of the church is about Truth.... Nearly 30 years after religious conservatives decided to re-enter the political arena -- after abandoning it as "dirty" and leading to compromise -- what do they have to show for it?... Too many conservative Christians have focused on the "seen" rather than the "unseen," thinking appearances at the White House, or on "Meet the Press," is evidence that they are making a difference. And too much attention has been paid to individual personalities, rather than to the One these preachers had originally been called to exalt. Nothing in the Bible commands believers to reform or redeem society through government and politics alone, or even mainly.
Even more importantly, though, Cal Thomas broaches a topic about which I've seen almost nothing in the Christian Right:
Corwin Smidt, executive director of the Henry Institute for the Study of Christianity and Politics at Calvin College in Grand Rapids, Mich., told the Herald that evangelical groups that are built around a single charismatic leader often struggle when the leader is gone. "These televangelists are able to generate a fair amount of money," he said, "but in terms of their institutional longevity, it's really at risk."
God help us. When the big draw in any ministry is a human, when the whole budget and the attendance is based on their name, that ministry is not of Christ. It's a political show. Calling and talent matter a great deal, but they are merely tools in the Kingdom. If I ever become more than a mere living conduit, I'll be teaching me, not Christ.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)