As we look at the economy stumble, let us consider a single example of what is likely. So you delay getting that bicycle until next spring. Very few bicycles are made in the USA; most of the Wal-Mart bikes are made in China. Because the value of the dollar is dropping, every thing we import will cost more, perhaps as much as 10x more in the number of dollars. Yet, the demand for bicycles goes up because gasoline does the same thing, because we buy most of our petroleum abroad, too. So you'll be fighting more buyers to get the same over-priced junk bicycle, and more likely to have it stolen before you get home with it.
Hey, maybe you should get used to good old walking. I wonder how many people can be ready, and simply step out the door Monday morning to stroll 5 miles or so. How about getting there in less than two hours? Do you even have appropriate shoes for such a thing?
I acknowledge we have built our nation around the private automobile, and we lack anything like a decent mass transit system in most of the country. The high population centers on the Eastern Seaboard, a handful of places in the South, and some on the West Coast have something working now. It wasn't that long ago we got a decent city-wide bus system here in OKC. When I lived in Europe, even the most remote village had a bus line which stopped within a couple of kilometers. People there are much more likely to walk, and far less likely to own a car. Their standard of living is just bit below ours -- for now -- but almost everyone there who physically can do so will probably have no trouble taking a hike which lasts half the day. Indeed, it's a rare individual who doesn't stroll at least an hour each day. We could learn something from them on that item, as our own standard of living falls.
At any rate, more of us will be simply forced by circumstances to walk a lot more places than we do now. Christians paying attention will make plans ahead of time. Take a long walk tomorrow, lasting at least an hour. Not shopping, but take a serious stroll at least three miles without a rest. Now consider your shoes: Do you have appropriate footwear to do that every day year-round, for all the places you really might need to go? Consider what you wear everyday. Can you walk comfortably in those clothes?
It's not a bad idea to have decent fitness shoes for most urban walking. However, they are notoriously short-lived for serious sustained daily use. Light weight hiking boots are better, but still not for year-round use with most people. That is, our feet need a little more stability and protection, especially in places where the weather can be rough. If off-pavement walking in your part of the world is sandy beaches, barefoot makes sense. If you live where there is broken pavement, gravel, grassy fields and such which you might have reason to cross, you need shoes which will keep your feet from moving around too much, or you'll get blisters. You need real hiking shoes or work boots.
Work up to them. Wear what you have and start walking now, at least two miles every day. Five would be better, but start with what you can handle. Walk as fast as you can force your body to move. You may even need some help and advice for your stride. Most people I see walking are shockingly inefficient in their stride. As the weather gets nastier, keep doing it. Go look at the best solid hiking shoes you can afford. Top of the line can easily start at $150, and worth every penny, trust me. I've taken 35-mile hikes across the Ardennes and such boots make life a lot better. If you really need boots but can't afford that much, consider military surplus. I am particularly fond of the older style "jungle boots" for their lightness, foot control and extreme durability. However, I have no use for high-tops unless it's for snow and such, because my ankles are like steel. You may not be so blessed. Consider your needs, and learn for yourself what a good fit feels like when you try them. Pray God leads you to someone with experience who can advise you if you know nothing about proper fit for hiking.
There are other advantages to walking. If alone, it's a great way to clear your mind and have a conversation with God. It's a great way to examine alternate routes through nice neighborhoods; try using Google Maps to see what's possible, and get off the main streets. Carry a water bottle unless it's cold enough to freeze the water. Learn to carry water for your needs in the weather you face. In Central Oklahoma summertime, I try to have not less than a quart for each 5-6 miles. I'm still looking for a decent two-quart canteen which isn't made of plastic. Learn how to carry stuff, such as a shoulder bag, or various incarnations of backpacks. If you must carry a lot of stuff, invest in a good one with a frame.
As always, no one can predict reliably how far the dollar will fall, how high prices will rise, how many businesses will be forced to close, how bad unemployment will be, etc. Being ready and able to walk is a good thing in its own right, but in a depression, it may be all you have. Might as well get used to the idea now.
Friday, November 30, 2007
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Daniel 7 (Updated)
Daniel published his book with the narratives in the first half, and the prophecies in the second. Thus, for chapter 7 we drop back in time a bit to that first year when Belshazzar sat on the throne of Babylon. Daniel recounts the experience as a dream vision. Daniel's vision here is not as murky as many would make it out to be, provided we adopt the 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 as representing 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 representing spirit. These four spirits are stirring the Great Sea, symbolic of fallen humanity as a whole. 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 sequence shows this as a powerful and noble empire, with a very human intellect at the helm in the guise of Nebuchadnezzar. The next is Medo-Persia, seen as a bear with a paw raise to strike. With an insatiable appetite, they were marked by greed in devouring other nations. Third comes the Greek Empire, swift as a winged predator already too fast. The Macedonian conquest was swifter than any would have imagined possible. The four heads represented the four generals who inherited the empire at Alexander's death. Each of these three beasts maintained something recognizable to humans.
The final empire is Rome. It was an indescribable beast of massive power. However, Rome itself is a symbol of all governments following her. From the biblical perspective, Rome started something evil, something which made it completely foreign to nature, particularly human 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 yield 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, we 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 far 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 Babylon 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. Thus, the Lord built on top of that a spiritual understanding for Daniel and those of his nation who would have spiritual wisdom.
It becomes painfully clear to Daniel Israel would never be free again, but would find herself under each of these. The brief independence in the period of the Maccabees was of no real significance viewed from this angle. What independence Judea held then was not a blessing from God, but merely a setting for turmoil in which the temptation to seek Rome's support would be the final trap. Under Rome, Israel would end as a nation among men, forever. It would be displaced by a purely spiritual kingdom. The joy of that latter revelation could not comfort him from the sorrow of his nation's demise.
We begin with the Four Winds, described as servants of God, the standard image of wind or breath representing spirit. These four spirits are stirring the Great Sea, symbolic of fallen humanity as a whole. 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 sequence shows this as a powerful and noble empire, with a very human intellect at the helm in the guise of Nebuchadnezzar. The next is Medo-Persia, seen as a bear with a paw raise to strike. With an insatiable appetite, they were marked by greed in devouring other nations. Third comes the Greek Empire, swift as a winged predator already too fast. The Macedonian conquest was swifter than any would have imagined possible. The four heads represented the four generals who inherited the empire at Alexander's death. Each of these three beasts maintained something recognizable to humans.
The final empire is Rome. It was an indescribable beast of massive power. However, Rome itself is a symbol of all governments following her. From the biblical perspective, Rome started something evil, something which made it completely foreign to nature, particularly human 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 yield 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, we 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 far 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 Babylon 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. Thus, the Lord built on top of that a spiritual understanding for Daniel and those of his nation who would have spiritual wisdom.
It becomes painfully clear to Daniel Israel would never be free again, but would find herself under each of these. The brief independence in the period of the Maccabees was of no real significance viewed from this angle. What independence Judea held then was not a blessing from God, but merely a setting for turmoil in which the temptation to seek Rome's support would be the final trap. Under Rome, Israel would end as a nation among men, forever. It would be displaced by a purely spiritual kingdom. The joy of that latter revelation could not comfort him from the sorrow of his nation's demise.
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
New Feature: The Grammar Curmudgeon
This will always be a short, single item to help writers with their grammar errors. I see at least one each week, sometimes different people repeating the same mistake within a day or two of each other. To me, these are glaring errors, very annoying. Most people don't notice them, I realize, but let's do this right.
Okay, for today the phrase is: toeing the line. It is a reference drawn from forcing large numbers of people to all do the same thing, at the same time, in the same place. It's about conformity and uniformity. In this case, it means standing in proper formation, with everyone putting the toes of their feet in perfect alignment on the same line. In the military, that means lining up the toes of your boots visually. People who refuse to conform won't "toe the line."
If you use the word "tow" you imply something about pulling on a rope or cable, attached to I know not what, and neither do those who put this wrong word in the hackneyed phrase. If you are going to use a figure of speech, the least you can do is get it right: toe the line, folks.
Okay, for today the phrase is: toeing the line. It is a reference drawn from forcing large numbers of people to all do the same thing, at the same time, in the same place. It's about conformity and uniformity. In this case, it means standing in proper formation, with everyone putting the toes of their feet in perfect alignment on the same line. In the military, that means lining up the toes of your boots visually. People who refuse to conform won't "toe the line."
If you use the word "tow" you imply something about pulling on a rope or cable, attached to I know not what, and neither do those who put this wrong word in the hackneyed phrase. If you are going to use a figure of speech, the least you can do is get it right: toe the line, folks.
Blood on Their Hands
Charles Marsh asks the question few would dare:
The answer is rather simple: American Evangelicals are first and foremost a subcultural group within the US, and their identity as Christians is almost incidental. They operate not from Scripture, but an unreasoned assumption for which Scripture is twisted to match. Or, as Marsh notes later in the article:
There has been precious little self-examination in this path. In the past few years, before I left the institutional church setting, I would attempt to speak with my fellow evangelicals about issues beyond the mere political rhetoric. I am still amazed at how few could even approach the question, "What if I am wrong?" That is, in their rush to maintain the fortress of their beliefs, they refused to discuss whether the foundation was sand. As soon as I mentioned anything approaching a respect for human life outside the abortion and euthanasia debate, I was pegged as a "liberal." The categories were precise, simple, and beyond question. I too,
I admit Marsh makes a serious error, in that he also calls up ghosts of the past I can't snuggle up to, like ML King. Linkage such as this paints a target on his chest in the eyes of most every conservative Christian, simply because those most loudly parading King's visage before us today are generally buffoons and hucksters, unwilling to acknowledge King might have been anything less than an Apostle. If his ideas are so important, why can't they stand free of his baggage? Real men of God prefer to keep their names out of the spotlight because the name of Jesus belongs there.
Herein we expose the greatest flaw of most every "big name" in evangelical circles today: The marketing of their names. Sales of books are driven by association with some famous human. Read their stuff and precious little new comes to light, because the same stuff was sold under some other name a generation ago, when that previous name was famous. Apostle Paul himself (1 Corinthians 1) pleaded with people to forget his name but remember his teachings, because they were the teachings of the one name worthy: Jesus Christ. Not in the smart-alecky sense of so many groups paste His name over their lies, but His Name as reliably demonstrated by the net result of their behavior and teachings.
Why did American evangelicals not pause for a moment in the rush to war to consider the near-unanimous disapproval of the global Christian community? The worldwide Christian opposition seems to me the most neglected story related to the religious debate about Iraq: Despite approval for the president's decision to go to war by 87 percent of white evangelicals in April 2003, according to a Pew Charitable Trusts poll, almost every Christian leader in the world (and almost every nonevangelical leader in the United States) voiced opposition to the war.
The answer is rather simple: American Evangelicals are first and foremost a subcultural group within the US, and their identity as Christians is almost incidental. They operate not from Scripture, but an unreasoned assumption for which Scripture is twisted to match. Or, as Marsh notes later in the article:
These past six years have been transformative in the religious history of the United States. It is arguably the passing of the evangelical moment -- if not the end of evangelicalism's cultural and political relevance, then certainly the loss of its theological credibility. Conservative evangelical elites, in exchange for political access and power, have ransacked the faith and trivialized its convictions. It is as though these Christians consider themselves to be recipients of a special revelation, as if God has whispered eternal secrets in their ears and summoned them to world-historic leadership in the present and future.
There has been precious little self-examination in this path. In the past few years, before I left the institutional church setting, I would attempt to speak with my fellow evangelicals about issues beyond the mere political rhetoric. I am still amazed at how few could even approach the question, "What if I am wrong?" That is, in their rush to maintain the fortress of their beliefs, they refused to discuss whether the foundation was sand. As soon as I mentioned anything approaching a respect for human life outside the abortion and euthanasia debate, I was pegged as a "liberal." The categories were precise, simple, and beyond question. I too,
watched with horror in recent years as the name of Jesus has been used to serve national ambitions and justify war. Forgetting the difference between discipleship and partisanship, and with complete indifference to the wisdom and insights of the Christian tradition, we have recast the faith according to our cultural preferences and baptized our prejudices, along with our will-to-power, in the shallow waters of civic piety.
I admit Marsh makes a serious error, in that he also calls up ghosts of the past I can't snuggle up to, like ML King. Linkage such as this paints a target on his chest in the eyes of most every conservative Christian, simply because those most loudly parading King's visage before us today are generally buffoons and hucksters, unwilling to acknowledge King might have been anything less than an Apostle. If his ideas are so important, why can't they stand free of his baggage? Real men of God prefer to keep their names out of the spotlight because the name of Jesus belongs there.
Herein we expose the greatest flaw of most every "big name" in evangelical circles today: The marketing of their names. Sales of books are driven by association with some famous human. Read their stuff and precious little new comes to light, because the same stuff was sold under some other name a generation ago, when that previous name was famous. Apostle Paul himself (1 Corinthians 1) pleaded with people to forget his name but remember his teachings, because they were the teachings of the one name worthy: Jesus Christ. Not in the smart-alecky sense of so many groups paste His name over their lies, but His Name as reliably demonstrated by the net result of their behavior and teachings.
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Tribulation Report #002: The Economy Isn't the Only Thing Failing
Standard disclaimer: This ain't about the End Times! See Report #000 for details.
Depending on where you live in these United States, particularly among the lower economic classes, the greatest threat to life, limb and property comes not from criminals, but from law enforcement officers. Said another way, for many Americans today who are honestly doing the right thing, they still are more likely to have an ugly encounter with police officers than with typical criminals, which includes juvenile delinquents. Further, every encounter is more likely to cause harm, and more severe harm. Statistics are impossible, because too many government agencies refuse to release the data, and what reports do come out are invariably skewed to prevent getting an accurate picture. However, it seems those who track such things best they can warn us this is only getting worse.
If you also keep track of changes in federal laws and legal practices, you may be aware most of the Bill or Rights is already shot so full of holes and exceptions in favor of the State, they essentially do not exist. Most government officials at all levels really have no clue about the US Constitution as it was seen by those who put it together. In a much broader sense, the necessary elements required for a representative republic to exist are now about gone. Prime example: Free and accurate information regarding government activities. No, forget about genuine national security issues; I refer to what appears on the news outlets most people check. Largely by what is not reported, those on a steady diet of mainstream media information are probably the most ignorant humans on earth. While it would be nice if those who did a better job of reporting the spiked news would also stop trying desperately to make an extra buck, thus appearing as pure hucksters themselves, there are plenty of good sources out there if you take the responsibility for trying to learn. But because we don't as a nation really know what's going on, we believe the lies of those who stand to gain so much by keeping us ignorant. We vote falsely based on false information. That's just one obvious flaw in the system by which we are governed.
So it's looking pretty bad. People who track these things see an endless stream of measures put in place, quietly, which lays the ground for martial law to be quickly put in place, and on the flimsiest of excuses. With the ever-thickening veil of government secrecy hiding even things as frivolous as how much the last case of toilet paper cost in tax dollars, we have no real idea what the targets are. We wonder if the current administration will create some false flag disaster to justify suspending the next election, or is this simply paving the way for the next party change, because they are all actually on the same team? Just who is destined to be the first faces peering out through the fences of those many detention camps being built quietly around the nation? The speculation from the underground liberty movement ranges far and wide. Perhaps there will be a nuclear event -- or several -- across the US to justify this martial law crackdown. It will allow instituting a military draft of both male and female, and keep our best and brightest outside the US while the screws are tightened here. Then when the North American regional union government which joins the US, Canada and Mexico is declared, resistance will be thinner, more isolated.
And on it goes. Let me assure you, while there will most likely be blood in the streets from armed resistance within a few years, the vast majority of Americans will just go along with it. Leading the way in pushing for conformity will be evangelical churches. Look for preachers of the largest churches to adopt a posture of defending the State, even encouraging their flocks to report non-conformist behavior. The institutional churches will remain the best friend of the State, because otherwise they will lose all their non-taxable benefits and have to surrender their huge facilities. Yes, the god Mammon will displace Jesus Christ, even if they still call him "Jesus."
Preparedness for tribulation might include having a proper stock of supplies and barter items. It will surely include being physically ready for sudden new stresses on the body and mind. More than anything else, it will center on a prepared heart. That is, you will realize your stuff, your health and safety, sanity, even your life and that of your loved ones, is in His hands. Do not be foolish enough to hold these things too tightly. Our victory is not in survival and prosperity, but in sacrificing all that for His service, a service which cannot but put us in the crosshairs of Satan's plans. If you think a nation can start quibbling over torture and somehow avoid playing into the Devil's hands, you just don't know Scripture. This nation is doomed, has crossed the line, and cannot return because far too many refuse to do what it takes. It cannot now be redeemed as a nation. The death throes may be long and painful, and surely we who serve Christ will be struck down in different ways, to different degrees, because we are here.
Depending on where you live in these United States, particularly among the lower economic classes, the greatest threat to life, limb and property comes not from criminals, but from law enforcement officers. Said another way, for many Americans today who are honestly doing the right thing, they still are more likely to have an ugly encounter with police officers than with typical criminals, which includes juvenile delinquents. Further, every encounter is more likely to cause harm, and more severe harm. Statistics are impossible, because too many government agencies refuse to release the data, and what reports do come out are invariably skewed to prevent getting an accurate picture. However, it seems those who track such things best they can warn us this is only getting worse.
If you also keep track of changes in federal laws and legal practices, you may be aware most of the Bill or Rights is already shot so full of holes and exceptions in favor of the State, they essentially do not exist. Most government officials at all levels really have no clue about the US Constitution as it was seen by those who put it together. In a much broader sense, the necessary elements required for a representative republic to exist are now about gone. Prime example: Free and accurate information regarding government activities. No, forget about genuine national security issues; I refer to what appears on the news outlets most people check. Largely by what is not reported, those on a steady diet of mainstream media information are probably the most ignorant humans on earth. While it would be nice if those who did a better job of reporting the spiked news would also stop trying desperately to make an extra buck, thus appearing as pure hucksters themselves, there are plenty of good sources out there if you take the responsibility for trying to learn. But because we don't as a nation really know what's going on, we believe the lies of those who stand to gain so much by keeping us ignorant. We vote falsely based on false information. That's just one obvious flaw in the system by which we are governed.
So it's looking pretty bad. People who track these things see an endless stream of measures put in place, quietly, which lays the ground for martial law to be quickly put in place, and on the flimsiest of excuses. With the ever-thickening veil of government secrecy hiding even things as frivolous as how much the last case of toilet paper cost in tax dollars, we have no real idea what the targets are. We wonder if the current administration will create some false flag disaster to justify suspending the next election, or is this simply paving the way for the next party change, because they are all actually on the same team? Just who is destined to be the first faces peering out through the fences of those many detention camps being built quietly around the nation? The speculation from the underground liberty movement ranges far and wide. Perhaps there will be a nuclear event -- or several -- across the US to justify this martial law crackdown. It will allow instituting a military draft of both male and female, and keep our best and brightest outside the US while the screws are tightened here. Then when the North American regional union government which joins the US, Canada and Mexico is declared, resistance will be thinner, more isolated.
And on it goes. Let me assure you, while there will most likely be blood in the streets from armed resistance within a few years, the vast majority of Americans will just go along with it. Leading the way in pushing for conformity will be evangelical churches. Look for preachers of the largest churches to adopt a posture of defending the State, even encouraging their flocks to report non-conformist behavior. The institutional churches will remain the best friend of the State, because otherwise they will lose all their non-taxable benefits and have to surrender their huge facilities. Yes, the god Mammon will displace Jesus Christ, even if they still call him "Jesus."
Preparedness for tribulation might include having a proper stock of supplies and barter items. It will surely include being physically ready for sudden new stresses on the body and mind. More than anything else, it will center on a prepared heart. That is, you will realize your stuff, your health and safety, sanity, even your life and that of your loved ones, is in His hands. Do not be foolish enough to hold these things too tightly. Our victory is not in survival and prosperity, but in sacrificing all that for His service, a service which cannot but put us in the crosshairs of Satan's plans. If you think a nation can start quibbling over torture and somehow avoid playing into the Devil's hands, you just don't know Scripture. This nation is doomed, has crossed the line, and cannot return because far too many refuse to do what it takes. It cannot now be redeemed as a nation. The death throes may be long and painful, and surely we who serve Christ will be struck down in different ways, to different degrees, because we are here.
Monday, November 26, 2007
Daniel 6
The Medes and Persians were once servants of the Assyrians. Then, they were allies of Babylon in revolt led by Nabopolassar. During their period of independence, they became united under the vision of Cyrus. He was Pesian, and it serves best to think of his home kingdom as roughly equivalent to modern Iran, though mostly an area east of the Zagros Mountains, which mountains formed the eastern high wall of the Mesopotamian Valley. The vision of Cyrus was largely fired by his Zoroastrian religion. While possessed of a distinct collection of legends, this was a broadly syncretist faith; all other gods were associates of Ahuramazda, and most were his friends. However, the Persian rulers developed a taste for being treated as semi-divine, and the Medes picked up on it. The two kingdoms united by intermarriage, with various treaties to prevent unfair treatment, allow for a rotating throne, and so forth.
It seems to make better sense if we see the Darius in this chapter as the immediate ruler (the Hebrew word for "king" is quite elastic in meaning) of the Babylonian district, that large flat plain at the lower end of the valley, over which the twin rivers of the Tigris and Euphrates wandered slowly. Thus, Darius appointed 120 ministers over this rather large and wealthy district. That he would employ Daniel should surprise no one. This was the man who was originally chosen by Nebuchadnezzar, in part because as a foreigner he had no local political interest. As a major figure in Babylonian administration, his fame spread to Imperial allies, including the Medes and Persians. At least one Imperial edict named him specifically (ch. 4). It's quite likely they knew of his prophecy regarding their conquest of Babylon (Nebuchadnezzar's dream in ch. 2). How could they not want to use his wise counsel? In this case, the narrative mentions a concern for the royal treasury. We know from hints here and in Esther the Medo-Persians gave much concern to monetary profit, and the rulers were as much businessmen as warriors. Many decrees included considerations of expense and profit. Apparently Daniel was exceptionally suited for this position of trust, and any audits showed him utterly faithful in handling the King's money.
The nature of the minister's resentment is not stated, though the context hints they found it hard to embezzle with Daniel watching. It appears even Zoroastrian religious concerns included profit as a major consideration, based on assumptions the gods would reward them financially. When they brought their bogus petition to Darius, we must assume it included a profit motive. Darius was obviously a better man, not a gold-digger. His concerns would be more about enriching the throne as a part of enriching the Empire. Since almost every pagan ritual of prayer and petition meant bringing an offering, he was being asked to kick off his administration with a boost in income to the throne.
Such concerns were wasted on those who served Jehovah, and it wouldn't be hard for the ministers to find this out from the Chaldean records on religions, if they cared to research it. Daniel's prayer habits were in direct obedience to 2 Chronicles 6:36-39, where Solomon predicted such an exile, and asked Jehovah to regard the prayers of the faithful. Facing Jerusalem was not physically necessary, but a symbolic act. Daniel was neither hiding from nor mocking the edict. When the ministers brought this violation to the attention of Darius, he was visibly perturbed, but backed into the proverbial corner. Those who should have informed of the implications of such an edict instead hid it from him, because he had no intimate knowledge of Daniel's religion, yet. The legal customs of the Persians was a bit more fair than the Babylonian model of absolute monarchy without limits, but also hindered the rulers personally, because they couldn't unilaterally rescind edicts of this class. Something like this would require the consent and review of the nobles involved in supporting it. For all his efforts to negotiate a change, Darius failed to persuade them to rescind it.
For the Zoroastrians, fire was sacred, not to be used in torture or execution. Even today we know they expose their dead to carrion eaters, so it's no surprise animals figured large in execution. Lacking the rocky caves and pits of their homeland, they probably converted an old clay pit to the purpose. From what we can discern today, it would have been ringed with a wall, over which witnesses could see. At one end of such a pit would be a removable stone which opened onto a long, slimy clay slide. Neither lions nor humans could turn and scramble back up this slope very far, nor for very long. Perhaps the efforts of victims and predators would serve to entertain some watching. However, the final commitment of Daniel to this fate took place after dark, so no witnesses stayed. The stone was sealed in place so no rescue was possible by human hands. However, Darius was devout enough about religion to be certain whatever God Daniel served was more than able to rescue him. He offered in essence his blessing in that name of that God.
For Darius, this could easily have been the worst night of his life. He hurried out at dawn, and would have called out in a high-pitched, plaintive voice. Daniel answered, and his survival could only be seen as proof he was not guilty. Thus, he was falsely accused, and his accusers were required to pass the same test. While we grimace at the idea of tossing in family members, even Israel carried out similar punishments. Some crimes were such a threat, the man was held responsible for corrupting his own household in the process. There was also the practical consideration surviving children might feel obliged to seek revenge later. At any rate, these hardly reached the bottom before lions pounced, thus proving even more strongly Daniel's survival was a miracle of his God. To prevent any chance of a replay, Darius promptly issued an edict which officially placed Jehovah among the closest friends of Ahuramazda.
We would miss much if we ignored how this narrative is closely related to the next chapter. Nebuchadnezzar was the soul of the Babylonian Empire. Daniel indicates he was truly royal of character and intellect. His successors shared little of that, and Babylon fell to a less noble empire. In our Western minds we would be troubled by the absolute power held by Babylon's rulers, and would be slightly more comfortable with the shared power system in Medo-Persia. With that shared power comes bureaucracy, which is fundamentally the enemy of humanity -- humans are inherently individual in their concerns, whereas bureaucracy demands maximum dehumanizing conformity. In that sense, something truly great passed from the scene of humanity, for it ended with the most bureaucratic empire of all, Rome. All modern governments simply vary the flavor of crushing Roman-style bureaucracy, and precious few genuine monarchs since Nebuchadnezzar were truly great men. For the sake of the Nation of Israel, Rome was the end of the line.
Even though Cyrus was solicitous in returning the Jews to their home, few went. For one thing, far too many adopted the religion-wealth nexus of the Zoroastrians, and mixed it into their understanding of the Messianic Expectations. Hebrew culture, as a branch of Eastern Mysticism, with all it's use of paradox and symbolic logic, essentially died in Babylon, and never recovered. It opened the door to receiving the corrupting influence of Greek linear rationalism and abstract logic. While in one sense the Lord had relented and allowed the rebuilding of the Temple and worship, Israel never again understood properly what they were doing, as a nation. Surely a few prophets and leaders saw clearly, but their influence was eclipsed by the exotic elements Zoroastrianism, and visions of "paradise" (a Persian word) on earth. Thus, the Nation of Israel corrects one mistake: They never again allow themselves to slip into idolatry. However, they make a much greater mistake of never again understanding their God, but twist all His commands and warnings into a materialist mess, taking them ever farther from their original Old Testament faith. Much of what follows in Daniel's prophet visions will be horribly misleading if the reader fails to understand this.
It seems to make better sense if we see the Darius in this chapter as the immediate ruler (the Hebrew word for "king" is quite elastic in meaning) of the Babylonian district, that large flat plain at the lower end of the valley, over which the twin rivers of the Tigris and Euphrates wandered slowly. Thus, Darius appointed 120 ministers over this rather large and wealthy district. That he would employ Daniel should surprise no one. This was the man who was originally chosen by Nebuchadnezzar, in part because as a foreigner he had no local political interest. As a major figure in Babylonian administration, his fame spread to Imperial allies, including the Medes and Persians. At least one Imperial edict named him specifically (ch. 4). It's quite likely they knew of his prophecy regarding their conquest of Babylon (Nebuchadnezzar's dream in ch. 2). How could they not want to use his wise counsel? In this case, the narrative mentions a concern for the royal treasury. We know from hints here and in Esther the Medo-Persians gave much concern to monetary profit, and the rulers were as much businessmen as warriors. Many decrees included considerations of expense and profit. Apparently Daniel was exceptionally suited for this position of trust, and any audits showed him utterly faithful in handling the King's money.
The nature of the minister's resentment is not stated, though the context hints they found it hard to embezzle with Daniel watching. It appears even Zoroastrian religious concerns included profit as a major consideration, based on assumptions the gods would reward them financially. When they brought their bogus petition to Darius, we must assume it included a profit motive. Darius was obviously a better man, not a gold-digger. His concerns would be more about enriching the throne as a part of enriching the Empire. Since almost every pagan ritual of prayer and petition meant bringing an offering, he was being asked to kick off his administration with a boost in income to the throne.
Such concerns were wasted on those who served Jehovah, and it wouldn't be hard for the ministers to find this out from the Chaldean records on religions, if they cared to research it. Daniel's prayer habits were in direct obedience to 2 Chronicles 6:36-39, where Solomon predicted such an exile, and asked Jehovah to regard the prayers of the faithful. Facing Jerusalem was not physically necessary, but a symbolic act. Daniel was neither hiding from nor mocking the edict. When the ministers brought this violation to the attention of Darius, he was visibly perturbed, but backed into the proverbial corner. Those who should have informed of the implications of such an edict instead hid it from him, because he had no intimate knowledge of Daniel's religion, yet. The legal customs of the Persians was a bit more fair than the Babylonian model of absolute monarchy without limits, but also hindered the rulers personally, because they couldn't unilaterally rescind edicts of this class. Something like this would require the consent and review of the nobles involved in supporting it. For all his efforts to negotiate a change, Darius failed to persuade them to rescind it.
For the Zoroastrians, fire was sacred, not to be used in torture or execution. Even today we know they expose their dead to carrion eaters, so it's no surprise animals figured large in execution. Lacking the rocky caves and pits of their homeland, they probably converted an old clay pit to the purpose. From what we can discern today, it would have been ringed with a wall, over which witnesses could see. At one end of such a pit would be a removable stone which opened onto a long, slimy clay slide. Neither lions nor humans could turn and scramble back up this slope very far, nor for very long. Perhaps the efforts of victims and predators would serve to entertain some watching. However, the final commitment of Daniel to this fate took place after dark, so no witnesses stayed. The stone was sealed in place so no rescue was possible by human hands. However, Darius was devout enough about religion to be certain whatever God Daniel served was more than able to rescue him. He offered in essence his blessing in that name of that God.
For Darius, this could easily have been the worst night of his life. He hurried out at dawn, and would have called out in a high-pitched, plaintive voice. Daniel answered, and his survival could only be seen as proof he was not guilty. Thus, he was falsely accused, and his accusers were required to pass the same test. While we grimace at the idea of tossing in family members, even Israel carried out similar punishments. Some crimes were such a threat, the man was held responsible for corrupting his own household in the process. There was also the practical consideration surviving children might feel obliged to seek revenge later. At any rate, these hardly reached the bottom before lions pounced, thus proving even more strongly Daniel's survival was a miracle of his God. To prevent any chance of a replay, Darius promptly issued an edict which officially placed Jehovah among the closest friends of Ahuramazda.
We would miss much if we ignored how this narrative is closely related to the next chapter. Nebuchadnezzar was the soul of the Babylonian Empire. Daniel indicates he was truly royal of character and intellect. His successors shared little of that, and Babylon fell to a less noble empire. In our Western minds we would be troubled by the absolute power held by Babylon's rulers, and would be slightly more comfortable with the shared power system in Medo-Persia. With that shared power comes bureaucracy, which is fundamentally the enemy of humanity -- humans are inherently individual in their concerns, whereas bureaucracy demands maximum dehumanizing conformity. In that sense, something truly great passed from the scene of humanity, for it ended with the most bureaucratic empire of all, Rome. All modern governments simply vary the flavor of crushing Roman-style bureaucracy, and precious few genuine monarchs since Nebuchadnezzar were truly great men. For the sake of the Nation of Israel, Rome was the end of the line.
Even though Cyrus was solicitous in returning the Jews to their home, few went. For one thing, far too many adopted the religion-wealth nexus of the Zoroastrians, and mixed it into their understanding of the Messianic Expectations. Hebrew culture, as a branch of Eastern Mysticism, with all it's use of paradox and symbolic logic, essentially died in Babylon, and never recovered. It opened the door to receiving the corrupting influence of Greek linear rationalism and abstract logic. While in one sense the Lord had relented and allowed the rebuilding of the Temple and worship, Israel never again understood properly what they were doing, as a nation. Surely a few prophets and leaders saw clearly, but their influence was eclipsed by the exotic elements Zoroastrianism, and visions of "paradise" (a Persian word) on earth. Thus, the Nation of Israel corrects one mistake: They never again allow themselves to slip into idolatry. However, they make a much greater mistake of never again understanding their God, but twist all His commands and warnings into a materialist mess, taking them ever farther from their original Old Testament faith. Much of what follows in Daniel's prophet visions will be horribly misleading if the reader fails to understand this.
Sunday, November 25, 2007
Praying for Peace?
Are praying for peace this year? Do yourself a favor, and bear in mind this world is fallen. Peace is available only in small measure, only briefly, and it comes at a very high price. So long as human nature remains unredeemed, peace is a mist which disappears with the dawn, or drifts out of reach on the wind. The only real peace in this world is enmity with the world, because it is peace with God in world which hates Him.
There is some small hope we can get fairly close to it, even in the sense of having some reasonable chance of living well and not having to fight too much too often. Take a walk through the Laws of Moses, examining them in the light of Jesus Christ. Note for a moment many of them establish a pattern of human behavior which is as consistent with the nature of Creation as any human, or group of humans, can come. You will find a fundamental element is honesty, being truthful with each other. The implication is bringing into the light the dark and hidden secrets of human souls. Since we cannot be righteous, we justly admit our failures and try to go on with living.
This is consistent with the aim of revelation in the first place. Let that which is hidden by known, never mind why it was hidden. Without such openness, there cannot be even a simulacrum of peace on earth. This year, I'm praying for revelation. Specifically, I'm praying God will grant that all the hidden crimes in our nation will be uncovered. I'll offer a short, representative list: JFK's assassination, 9/11, Vietnam POWs, Lincoln's crimes, the refusal to guard our borders, the real reason we are in Iraq and Afghanistan. Each of these represents a massive lie by those in our government. In many cases, I won't pretend to know the truth of what happened, only that the official story (or stories) are most emphatically false.
I propose for the most part each of them is tied to another massive lie: modern Israel. How is it no one wants to see the modern state known as Israel despises the Mosaic Covenant? For so long as this is true, nothing about that state has a claim on the Bible or prophecy. Further, it should be painfully obvious that tiny majority who seek to place Israel under the Law of Moses are steadily losing ground. It's not at all about fulfilling God's commands or promises, but about lying to all the world while committing unimaginable acts of cruelty to a pre-existing resident population. That population includes a huge number of born-again followers of Jesus.
I'm praying the Lord exposes this huge lie, and every lie attached to it. Naturally, I'd be giddy-happy with any little part of that. Christians, by their nature filled with the Holy Spirit, rejoice in truth. All truth is God's truth.
There is some small hope we can get fairly close to it, even in the sense of having some reasonable chance of living well and not having to fight too much too often. Take a walk through the Laws of Moses, examining them in the light of Jesus Christ. Note for a moment many of them establish a pattern of human behavior which is as consistent with the nature of Creation as any human, or group of humans, can come. You will find a fundamental element is honesty, being truthful with each other. The implication is bringing into the light the dark and hidden secrets of human souls. Since we cannot be righteous, we justly admit our failures and try to go on with living.
This is consistent with the aim of revelation in the first place. Let that which is hidden by known, never mind why it was hidden. Without such openness, there cannot be even a simulacrum of peace on earth. This year, I'm praying for revelation. Specifically, I'm praying God will grant that all the hidden crimes in our nation will be uncovered. I'll offer a short, representative list: JFK's assassination, 9/11, Vietnam POWs, Lincoln's crimes, the refusal to guard our borders, the real reason we are in Iraq and Afghanistan. Each of these represents a massive lie by those in our government. In many cases, I won't pretend to know the truth of what happened, only that the official story (or stories) are most emphatically false.
I propose for the most part each of them is tied to another massive lie: modern Israel. How is it no one wants to see the modern state known as Israel despises the Mosaic Covenant? For so long as this is true, nothing about that state has a claim on the Bible or prophecy. Further, it should be painfully obvious that tiny majority who seek to place Israel under the Law of Moses are steadily losing ground. It's not at all about fulfilling God's commands or promises, but about lying to all the world while committing unimaginable acts of cruelty to a pre-existing resident population. That population includes a huge number of born-again followers of Jesus.
I'm praying the Lord exposes this huge lie, and every lie attached to it. Naturally, I'd be giddy-happy with any little part of that. Christians, by their nature filled with the Holy Spirit, rejoice in truth. All truth is God's truth.
Saturday, November 24, 2007
Life of Christ: Matthew 19
In the Kingdom of Heaven, treasure is defined quite differently than it is in the world. The wealth of the Kingdom was the growth of souls, both in number and in quality. Material goods were simply tools, and often completely unneeded in Kingdom business. Instead of real estate, Jehovah sought to expand the human territory in redemption from sin. Nothing mattered more than people.
As Jesus set His face toward His final destiny of winning all the world by the price of His blood, He and His disciples traveled down the East Bank of Jordan to the district of Perea. Since Jews typically refused to tread upon Samaritan ground, travel between Galilee and Judea meant crossing the Jordan, which formed the eastern border of Samaria. The main routes then crossed back over into Judea at or near Jericho. Jesus and His Disciples remained in this area for some days.
As was customary for them over the past three years, He taught and healed in open areas. With the crowd were the ever-present agents of the Sanhedrin. They asked Him about divorce. Jesus was consistent on His teaching about divorce (ch. 5:31-32). The question about divorce was a matter of politics in Jesus' day. Would he favor the School of Hillel, dominated by the Sadducees who ruled the Sanhedrin, a rather liberal bunch? They were nonetheless the mainstream viewpoint, we are told. Or would he favor the Pharisees and the School of Shammai, which tended to be cranky and precise, with high conservative standards? The former saw Moses' word for "shameful" as practically anything that displeased a man. The latter school insisted on a more literal reading, a matter of genuine moral impurity.
Jesus answered neither, but recalled the original marriage in Eden. He explained the concept of one flesh, something neither school of thought had ever mentioned. Their question showed they misconstrued Moses' command as license (Deuteronomy 24:1-4), when in reality it was a radically new command for that day, and protected women from men's abuse. Again, Jesus points out the Law of Moses was a mere shadow of the much higher Law of Heaven. The sole legitimate cause of divorce is unfaithfulness. Once a woman has surrendered her body, and the man has taken it, the matter is settled in Heaven. If she presumes to offer it to another, she has defiled herself and he is permitted (not required) to divorce her. He may not punish her any other way. Any other complaint he may have about her is petty selfishness. Further, once divorced, she is the same as a harlot, not a piece of property traded among men. We note he says this while standing a single days' walk from the palace of the man who had John the Baptist beheaded for pointing this out. The emphasis clearly weighs heavily upon the men, as the root cause of the whole issue is lust.
The Disciples suggest this puts men at a disadvantage, and it might be better to avoid marriage. Being but a few miles from the enclave of the Essenes, who taught this very thing, it's no surprise they mention it. Jesus actually agrees with rabbinical teaching on this point, and lays out the three cases where it's proper to avoid marriage. Matthew chose the Greek term for "eunuch," which included men who simply did not marry. Some were born without the capacity for procreation, some were, indeed, literally made eunuchs by Oriental custom. Some simply had no room in their lives for a family, such as Jesus Himself, but these were rare. Only those divinely empowered specifically for the task should consider such an extreme measure. Jesus implies His followers would normally take up the burden of marrying and having a family as blessing from God, and would proceed in faith.
As proof of this, Jesus shows His utter delight in a group of toddlers and infants. He was putting His hands on their heads in a symbolic gesture of offering them to His Father. When the Twelve tried to shoo them all away, Jesus stopped them. He reminded them bluntly these were the symbols of innocence and receptiveness which characterize those acceptable in the Kingdom. Matthew places this so close to the discussion about divorce to remind us there are other parties in the matter, and Jesus was always concerned about victims of suffering. If children are a good thing, so are the marriages which produced them, and the homes where children properly belong -- stable households which form the anchors on earth of the Kingdom.
Then came the dramatic comparison with the other sort of wealth. A young nobleman asked what he might do to obtain eternal life. So much of the exchange is lost if we ignore the subtle clues. He spoke deferentially to Jesus. Jesus responded that all goodness is defined by God, Whose ways had already been revealed. The man clearly worried he was missing something, bearing a sense of spiritual insecurity, but lacking spiritual insight. Jesus answered with a touch of sarcasm. We know from the other Gospels this man was president of his synagogue, by which we are to assume he was honorable in his conduct. Thus, Jesus rattled off the standard Ten Commandments, though summarizing a in manner common among rabbis. Naturally, the man assumed he has been obeying these all along, as best he understood it. Jesus then points out the flaw in his understanding. If he comes to Jesus for the ultimate answer, is he willing to follow Jesus literally to find it? He goes straight to the heart of the matter and asks if the man could renounce his material wealth in favor of eternal wealth.
The man departed with a broken heart. In his mind, the whole point of wealth was proof of God's favor. Throwing all that away was just beyond comprehension. Jesus turned and commented to the Twelve it was extremely hard for rich people to become like children and enter the Kingdom. He used an old Eastern expression, referring to the symbolic smallest passage known to mankind, the eye of a needle. It provided a metaphor of something virtually impossible. Yet, in typical Hebrew fashion, He also referred to the commerce gate Rome had built in Jerusalem. At various times, the commander of the Roman garrison in Jerusalem deemed it necessary to lock down the city, though not so tightly as to cut off food and other supplies. Thus, merchants had to line up at the "Eye of the Needle" gate which allowed camels to enter only after they were completely unloaded, made to kneel, and crawl through. While the merchants struggled getting balky camels to do this, the Roman soldiers could leisurely inspect the cargo for contraband. It is this image which provides the theological principle: A man must unburden himself of all things in this world to enter the Kingdom. It was thus not impossible for the wealthy to enter, but very demanding, and much more difficult than for the poor, who had nothing to lose.
Sadly, the Twelve were still operating under the same assumptions as the young nobleman regarding wealth as the manifestation of God's favor. This was why they were astonished, for if the rich weren't already bound for Heaven, who was? Jesus answered it was not a matter of something men could see with their eyes or do with their hands, but a miracle of God's grace. Peter noted they had passed through the Roman "Eye of the Needle" in that sense, having abandoned their worldly possessions. Would they have entrance to the Kingdom? Jesus answered with soaring imagery of His divine throne, with them sitting as a committee of judges over their Nation. Obviously this was not meant literally, as they later understood. Rather, it was their choice to follow Him which provided the standard by which souls were measured for fitness as citizens in His Kingdom.
Jesus went on to show, as sacred as families and households were in this life, they were only so valuable as they served the Kingdom purpose. It was quite possible a good and proper family setting would hinder following the Messiah. It was possible a legacy of wealth and good reputation would hold you back. The camel must be fully stripped down. Everything must be surrendered to the inspection of God Almighty. Only what He gives back to us can be brought into the Kingdom service. Everything that matters will be supplied in abundance. Regardless how blessed a life may seem before the Kingdom, whatever is lost in the process, everything inside the City of God is far more precious for having been renewed and redeemed by His grace. Indeed, man without grace cannot begin to comprehend what really matters. He typically puts first what God tosses aside. A man's very understanding of what matters is subject to redemption, as well.
As Jesus set His face toward His final destiny of winning all the world by the price of His blood, He and His disciples traveled down the East Bank of Jordan to the district of Perea. Since Jews typically refused to tread upon Samaritan ground, travel between Galilee and Judea meant crossing the Jordan, which formed the eastern border of Samaria. The main routes then crossed back over into Judea at or near Jericho. Jesus and His Disciples remained in this area for some days.
As was customary for them over the past three years, He taught and healed in open areas. With the crowd were the ever-present agents of the Sanhedrin. They asked Him about divorce. Jesus was consistent on His teaching about divorce (ch. 5:31-32). The question about divorce was a matter of politics in Jesus' day. Would he favor the School of Hillel, dominated by the Sadducees who ruled the Sanhedrin, a rather liberal bunch? They were nonetheless the mainstream viewpoint, we are told. Or would he favor the Pharisees and the School of Shammai, which tended to be cranky and precise, with high conservative standards? The former saw Moses' word for "shameful" as practically anything that displeased a man. The latter school insisted on a more literal reading, a matter of genuine moral impurity.
Jesus answered neither, but recalled the original marriage in Eden. He explained the concept of one flesh, something neither school of thought had ever mentioned. Their question showed they misconstrued Moses' command as license (Deuteronomy 24:1-4), when in reality it was a radically new command for that day, and protected women from men's abuse. Again, Jesus points out the Law of Moses was a mere shadow of the much higher Law of Heaven. The sole legitimate cause of divorce is unfaithfulness. Once a woman has surrendered her body, and the man has taken it, the matter is settled in Heaven. If she presumes to offer it to another, she has defiled herself and he is permitted (not required) to divorce her. He may not punish her any other way. Any other complaint he may have about her is petty selfishness. Further, once divorced, she is the same as a harlot, not a piece of property traded among men. We note he says this while standing a single days' walk from the palace of the man who had John the Baptist beheaded for pointing this out. The emphasis clearly weighs heavily upon the men, as the root cause of the whole issue is lust.
The Disciples suggest this puts men at a disadvantage, and it might be better to avoid marriage. Being but a few miles from the enclave of the Essenes, who taught this very thing, it's no surprise they mention it. Jesus actually agrees with rabbinical teaching on this point, and lays out the three cases where it's proper to avoid marriage. Matthew chose the Greek term for "eunuch," which included men who simply did not marry. Some were born without the capacity for procreation, some were, indeed, literally made eunuchs by Oriental custom. Some simply had no room in their lives for a family, such as Jesus Himself, but these were rare. Only those divinely empowered specifically for the task should consider such an extreme measure. Jesus implies His followers would normally take up the burden of marrying and having a family as blessing from God, and would proceed in faith.
As proof of this, Jesus shows His utter delight in a group of toddlers and infants. He was putting His hands on their heads in a symbolic gesture of offering them to His Father. When the Twelve tried to shoo them all away, Jesus stopped them. He reminded them bluntly these were the symbols of innocence and receptiveness which characterize those acceptable in the Kingdom. Matthew places this so close to the discussion about divorce to remind us there are other parties in the matter, and Jesus was always concerned about victims of suffering. If children are a good thing, so are the marriages which produced them, and the homes where children properly belong -- stable households which form the anchors on earth of the Kingdom.
Then came the dramatic comparison with the other sort of wealth. A young nobleman asked what he might do to obtain eternal life. So much of the exchange is lost if we ignore the subtle clues. He spoke deferentially to Jesus. Jesus responded that all goodness is defined by God, Whose ways had already been revealed. The man clearly worried he was missing something, bearing a sense of spiritual insecurity, but lacking spiritual insight. Jesus answered with a touch of sarcasm. We know from the other Gospels this man was president of his synagogue, by which we are to assume he was honorable in his conduct. Thus, Jesus rattled off the standard Ten Commandments, though summarizing a in manner common among rabbis. Naturally, the man assumed he has been obeying these all along, as best he understood it. Jesus then points out the flaw in his understanding. If he comes to Jesus for the ultimate answer, is he willing to follow Jesus literally to find it? He goes straight to the heart of the matter and asks if the man could renounce his material wealth in favor of eternal wealth.
The man departed with a broken heart. In his mind, the whole point of wealth was proof of God's favor. Throwing all that away was just beyond comprehension. Jesus turned and commented to the Twelve it was extremely hard for rich people to become like children and enter the Kingdom. He used an old Eastern expression, referring to the symbolic smallest passage known to mankind, the eye of a needle. It provided a metaphor of something virtually impossible. Yet, in typical Hebrew fashion, He also referred to the commerce gate Rome had built in Jerusalem. At various times, the commander of the Roman garrison in Jerusalem deemed it necessary to lock down the city, though not so tightly as to cut off food and other supplies. Thus, merchants had to line up at the "Eye of the Needle" gate which allowed camels to enter only after they were completely unloaded, made to kneel, and crawl through. While the merchants struggled getting balky camels to do this, the Roman soldiers could leisurely inspect the cargo for contraband. It is this image which provides the theological principle: A man must unburden himself of all things in this world to enter the Kingdom. It was thus not impossible for the wealthy to enter, but very demanding, and much more difficult than for the poor, who had nothing to lose.
Sadly, the Twelve were still operating under the same assumptions as the young nobleman regarding wealth as the manifestation of God's favor. This was why they were astonished, for if the rich weren't already bound for Heaven, who was? Jesus answered it was not a matter of something men could see with their eyes or do with their hands, but a miracle of God's grace. Peter noted they had passed through the Roman "Eye of the Needle" in that sense, having abandoned their worldly possessions. Would they have entrance to the Kingdom? Jesus answered with soaring imagery of His divine throne, with them sitting as a committee of judges over their Nation. Obviously this was not meant literally, as they later understood. Rather, it was their choice to follow Him which provided the standard by which souls were measured for fitness as citizens in His Kingdom.
Jesus went on to show, as sacred as families and households were in this life, they were only so valuable as they served the Kingdom purpose. It was quite possible a good and proper family setting would hinder following the Messiah. It was possible a legacy of wealth and good reputation would hold you back. The camel must be fully stripped down. Everything must be surrendered to the inspection of God Almighty. Only what He gives back to us can be brought into the Kingdom service. Everything that matters will be supplied in abundance. Regardless how blessed a life may seem before the Kingdom, whatever is lost in the process, everything inside the City of God is far more precious for having been renewed and redeemed by His grace. Indeed, man without grace cannot begin to comprehend what really matters. He typically puts first what God tosses aside. A man's very understanding of what matters is subject to redemption, as well.
Friday, November 23, 2007
Tribulation Report #001: Trib-fitness
Standard disclaimer: This ain't about the End Times! See Report #000 for details.
If you haven't already been engaged in some sort of fitness training, you may be a little too late. By no means am I about to launch into some diatribe about weight and diet. As a man roughly 5'10" (1.78m) and weighing 225 pounds (102kg), I'll be the last to recommend artificial height and weight charts. What I will press for is fitness within your physical parameters.
First, let's remind ourselves most of the baloney offered by the mainstream medical establishment is the result of negligible scientific research, and more about selling weight-loss remedies. The latest real research indicates a bit of chunkiness promotes longevity and a general well-being. Okay, let's get that down precisely: When controlling for all other factors, being a little bit heavy, having some midriff fat and so forth, by itself is hardly deleterious to health and longevity. Instead, it is statistically associated with a long and vigorous life, and fewer mental problems, as well. There are so many links pro and con, I'll let you study for yourself if you care. The real point is, the standard pablum regarding health taught in public schools and in public service announcements is actually dangerous.
Now, the real matter is: What can you do with that body, regardless of its size? Having prayed extensively about this over the years, I found my calling places before me the requirement to train for substituting as Superman on his vacation days. More literally, I was once pretty fit, but lost a lot of years trying to recover from bad knees. When the Lord gave me back my running ability, I celebrated by running as much as I could stand. I still do that, plus I engage in some upper body workout.
Having spent much time in my youth learning about lifting weights and other strength training matters, I found I can emulate some of that in my recovery program using playground equipment. I certainly can't afford a gym membership, nor weights, nor have any room for a weight set. So I do push-ups at various angles where my chest drops below my hands. I pull my weight up to a bar from various angles, too. Six days each week, I try to run between 2.5 and 3 miles (4-5km). Further, I ride a bicycle wherever I go, unless it's absolutely necessary to have the carrying capacity of a vehicle.
As a result, at my size and weight, my blood pressure runs about 118/58. Part of that is inherited, of course. For example, it matters not a whit what I eat, my cholesterol remains well below the danger limits. You may not be that fortunate, so adjust your eating accordingly. Indeed, the greatest danger is two things: High Fructose Corn Syrup and MSG. Both will greatly distort your natural hunger, plus interfere greatly with the standard body processes for using just about every nutrient. Both of them go by other names, because manufacturers know these are poisonous, and infamous, and want to hide from you the fact their products contain them. Just learning about avoiding these two will dramatically improve your health in a couple of months.
Then, of course there are natural vitamins, herbs, etc. The difference between natural vitamins and the chemical powder sold in most stores are the host of essential trace elements which make those vitamins work properly. So while "vitamin C" means simply "ascorbic acid," this substance cannot be found in nature without a host of other stuff required by the body to make use of it, such as bioflavinoids, etc. Get the real stuff.
As the economy drags downward, these things will get expensive. You may have to do without, but it will certainly help you to use them while you can. That's what fitness training is all about. You do things now while things are easy, so that when things get rough, you'll have some advantage. It really should be obvious couch potatoes will be far less ready to face a high-crime atmosphere than someone who can run a mile in 6 minutes or so. Suddenly fleeing chaos and destruction is easier if you can do a couple dozen push-ups.
God may not have given you an athletic body. You may be confined to a wheelchair, as I once was, or have other limits. Work to obtain the best level of fitness within the limits God placed on you. It's part of your calling in tribulation.
If you haven't already been engaged in some sort of fitness training, you may be a little too late. By no means am I about to launch into some diatribe about weight and diet. As a man roughly 5'10" (1.78m) and weighing 225 pounds (102kg), I'll be the last to recommend artificial height and weight charts. What I will press for is fitness within your physical parameters.
First, let's remind ourselves most of the baloney offered by the mainstream medical establishment is the result of negligible scientific research, and more about selling weight-loss remedies. The latest real research indicates a bit of chunkiness promotes longevity and a general well-being. Okay, let's get that down precisely: When controlling for all other factors, being a little bit heavy, having some midriff fat and so forth, by itself is hardly deleterious to health and longevity. Instead, it is statistically associated with a long and vigorous life, and fewer mental problems, as well. There are so many links pro and con, I'll let you study for yourself if you care. The real point is, the standard pablum regarding health taught in public schools and in public service announcements is actually dangerous.
Now, the real matter is: What can you do with that body, regardless of its size? Having prayed extensively about this over the years, I found my calling places before me the requirement to train for substituting as Superman on his vacation days. More literally, I was once pretty fit, but lost a lot of years trying to recover from bad knees. When the Lord gave me back my running ability, I celebrated by running as much as I could stand. I still do that, plus I engage in some upper body workout.
Having spent much time in my youth learning about lifting weights and other strength training matters, I found I can emulate some of that in my recovery program using playground equipment. I certainly can't afford a gym membership, nor weights, nor have any room for a weight set. So I do push-ups at various angles where my chest drops below my hands. I pull my weight up to a bar from various angles, too. Six days each week, I try to run between 2.5 and 3 miles (4-5km). Further, I ride a bicycle wherever I go, unless it's absolutely necessary to have the carrying capacity of a vehicle.
As a result, at my size and weight, my blood pressure runs about 118/58. Part of that is inherited, of course. For example, it matters not a whit what I eat, my cholesterol remains well below the danger limits. You may not be that fortunate, so adjust your eating accordingly. Indeed, the greatest danger is two things: High Fructose Corn Syrup and MSG. Both will greatly distort your natural hunger, plus interfere greatly with the standard body processes for using just about every nutrient. Both of them go by other names, because manufacturers know these are poisonous, and infamous, and want to hide from you the fact their products contain them. Just learning about avoiding these two will dramatically improve your health in a couple of months.
Then, of course there are natural vitamins, herbs, etc. The difference between natural vitamins and the chemical powder sold in most stores are the host of essential trace elements which make those vitamins work properly. So while "vitamin C" means simply "ascorbic acid," this substance cannot be found in nature without a host of other stuff required by the body to make use of it, such as bioflavinoids, etc. Get the real stuff.
As the economy drags downward, these things will get expensive. You may have to do without, but it will certainly help you to use them while you can. That's what fitness training is all about. You do things now while things are easy, so that when things get rough, you'll have some advantage. It really should be obvious couch potatoes will be far less ready to face a high-crime atmosphere than someone who can run a mile in 6 minutes or so. Suddenly fleeing chaos and destruction is easier if you can do a couple dozen push-ups.
God may not have given you an athletic body. You may be confined to a wheelchair, as I once was, or have other limits. Work to obtain the best level of fitness within the limits God placed on you. It's part of your calling in tribulation.
Thursday, November 22, 2007
Daniel 5
From the previous chapter, we allow several decades to slide past. It was a confused time following the death of Nebuchadnezzar, according to historical evidence gleaned from other sources. The great ruler's son is assassinated, a usurper holds power briefly, and passes it to a son who reigns but days. He is in turn killed by Nabonidus, whom we believe a brother-in-law of Nebuchadnezzar. This man in turn runs off to Arabia for a number of years, leaving things in the hands of his son and declared co-regent, Belshazzar. Thus, it appears the ruler at the time this chapter opens is legally the grandson of Nebuchadnezzar, the Crown Prince (second in power) serving as regent.
This man seems to possess nothing of his grandfather's greatness. He would surely have read the previous chapter in the form of Imperial Archives. Even his father, Nabonidus, holds valid honor for actual battle accomplishments, but Belshazzar has nothing of his own. Since he could not obtain real honor, perhaps it was in an attempt to endear himself to his satraps he put on an unspeakably lavish feast for them in the palace at Babylon. Further, he tossed aside all custom, bringing in wives and concubines, and allowing himself to be seen without the customary screen separating him from all but the closest advisers. As if this were not shocking enough, he ordered brought in the various vessels of worship from the temples of gods taken from the various nations conquered by Babylon. They were used to toast the pantheon of Babylonian deities.
Our best understanding indicates at this point in time, invaders were already inside the gates of the city. With the palace so very wrapped up in celebration, so completely insulated from the city below the lush Hanging Gardens, those in the banquet hall were oblivious. Even worse, they were utterly oblivious to the very God they were insulting in their ritual mockery. Let it not be forgotten, this act was patently illegal by Nebuchadnezzar's own proclamation, noted by Daniel at the end of chapter 3.
To insure the full meaning of God's wrath not be lost on the merrymakers, a hand appears and writes something on the wall. This would have been a brick wall covered with plaster, upon which any number of decorative images of Babylon's pagan gods and imperial symbols were painted in lavish colors. In the direct glow from the burning lampstand, perhaps the hand simply scratched away the bright color to reveal a glaring white script in the plaster. As was common then, the writing was right to left, using only the consonants of the words, and apparently adopting a style of lettering unfamiliar to those in Babylon. The mighty prince-regent wilts into panic like a small boy. The entire party switched from riotous celebration to raucous panic.
As with all omens, it was assumed the magi could explain what this was. We get the feeling they had reasserted themselves over Daniel and his friends. Indeed, the Hebrew men would be quite aged now, along with having fallen from favor over the past few decades of rapid and tumultuous change in Imperial administration. Belshazzar's bold offer of elevating to a position directly under him was not sufficient to overcome the magi's obvious lack of comprehension. Best we can tell, the magi had long held the descendants of Abraham in contempt. He had departed the great and marvelous Valley of Civilization when called by some mad god or another to become a filthy tent-dweller. When these tent-dwellers adopted the Canaanite language, which eventually matured into what we call Ancient Hebrew, though rather closely related to Chaldean, it was despised along with the God of whom that language spoke. Only a few rare individual magi in history knew much about the Hebrew God, or the language of His worshippers. The squarish script of Hebrew writing was foreign to them, contrasting to their rounded version. Even then, the words had no meaning to them.
As all in the banquet hall began to despair, the Queen Mother came to see what all the commotion was. She knew Daniel was highly respected for a good reason, and recommended he be called from retirement to handle this problem. She reminded Belshazzar it was his own predecessor, calling Nebuchadnezzar his "father" in typical court language, who had made this man the highest ranking of all magi. It might not be unfair to suggest she was gently chiding him for his foolish negligence regarding custom and history. Oddly, Daniel's appointed name was about the same as the prince-regent's.
Daniel was called in, and Belshazzar was rather solicitous in his request. He repeated his extravagant offer if Daniel could read and interpret the message. Daniel wasn't being rude in his answer, but direct. He had already read the message, knew what it meant, and had probably long ago discerned the wrath of God was on its way. He first gave the context of Nebuchadnezzar's greatness and the cause for it. He also recounted the episode of madness, how it ended, and reminded Belshazzar of the Imperial decree which resulted. The Most High God was not merely a national deity of the Hebrews, but the One True God. It was this God Belshazzar had blasphemed.
On the face of it, the writing was simply a list of Hebrew names for coins. However, those names were related to words for measurements of various kinds, and those words were the point of the message. The Hebrew mina was 50 shekels, and was related to the word meaning "counting, numbering, measuring." Using it twice gives makes it emphatic. The word tekel was simply an alternate spelling of shekel, related to the word for weighing something. The word peres (often printed as upharsin) was the name for a half-shekel, used in the Temple Tax (Exodus 30:11-16). It came from the word for "divide." Thus, Belshazzar was told God had examined Babylon under Belshazzar, weighing him against the standards of Nebuchadnezzar, and found him utterly lacking. Thus, his regency would end in conquest by the Medo-Persian forces already rampaging across the empire.
Though it was utterly pointless, Belshazzar kept his promise. For once in his life, he recognized the ultimate truth of things. The Medo-Persian forces, we are told, marched into Babylon under the water gates of the Euphrates, which they had diverted from its course previously. That very night, Belshazzar was executed, but we know Daniel was spared. As the battles continued, the control of the Imperial Palace district was given to someone Daniel calls Darius. While we find no other record of that name at that time, it hardly matters. The point is the name is clearly drawn from the royal family of the Medes, and may well have been a common name, or used simply as a title. This, in a day and age when changing a man's name was quite common, often for causes we find perplexing in our modern Western world. Belshazzar died, Daniel survived, and continued to play a vital role in God's plans.
This man seems to possess nothing of his grandfather's greatness. He would surely have read the previous chapter in the form of Imperial Archives. Even his father, Nabonidus, holds valid honor for actual battle accomplishments, but Belshazzar has nothing of his own. Since he could not obtain real honor, perhaps it was in an attempt to endear himself to his satraps he put on an unspeakably lavish feast for them in the palace at Babylon. Further, he tossed aside all custom, bringing in wives and concubines, and allowing himself to be seen without the customary screen separating him from all but the closest advisers. As if this were not shocking enough, he ordered brought in the various vessels of worship from the temples of gods taken from the various nations conquered by Babylon. They were used to toast the pantheon of Babylonian deities.
Our best understanding indicates at this point in time, invaders were already inside the gates of the city. With the palace so very wrapped up in celebration, so completely insulated from the city below the lush Hanging Gardens, those in the banquet hall were oblivious. Even worse, they were utterly oblivious to the very God they were insulting in their ritual mockery. Let it not be forgotten, this act was patently illegal by Nebuchadnezzar's own proclamation, noted by Daniel at the end of chapter 3.
To insure the full meaning of God's wrath not be lost on the merrymakers, a hand appears and writes something on the wall. This would have been a brick wall covered with plaster, upon which any number of decorative images of Babylon's pagan gods and imperial symbols were painted in lavish colors. In the direct glow from the burning lampstand, perhaps the hand simply scratched away the bright color to reveal a glaring white script in the plaster. As was common then, the writing was right to left, using only the consonants of the words, and apparently adopting a style of lettering unfamiliar to those in Babylon. The mighty prince-regent wilts into panic like a small boy. The entire party switched from riotous celebration to raucous panic.
As with all omens, it was assumed the magi could explain what this was. We get the feeling they had reasserted themselves over Daniel and his friends. Indeed, the Hebrew men would be quite aged now, along with having fallen from favor over the past few decades of rapid and tumultuous change in Imperial administration. Belshazzar's bold offer of elevating to a position directly under him was not sufficient to overcome the magi's obvious lack of comprehension. Best we can tell, the magi had long held the descendants of Abraham in contempt. He had departed the great and marvelous Valley of Civilization when called by some mad god or another to become a filthy tent-dweller. When these tent-dwellers adopted the Canaanite language, which eventually matured into what we call Ancient Hebrew, though rather closely related to Chaldean, it was despised along with the God of whom that language spoke. Only a few rare individual magi in history knew much about the Hebrew God, or the language of His worshippers. The squarish script of Hebrew writing was foreign to them, contrasting to their rounded version. Even then, the words had no meaning to them.
As all in the banquet hall began to despair, the Queen Mother came to see what all the commotion was. She knew Daniel was highly respected for a good reason, and recommended he be called from retirement to handle this problem. She reminded Belshazzar it was his own predecessor, calling Nebuchadnezzar his "father" in typical court language, who had made this man the highest ranking of all magi. It might not be unfair to suggest she was gently chiding him for his foolish negligence regarding custom and history. Oddly, Daniel's appointed name was about the same as the prince-regent's.
Daniel was called in, and Belshazzar was rather solicitous in his request. He repeated his extravagant offer if Daniel could read and interpret the message. Daniel wasn't being rude in his answer, but direct. He had already read the message, knew what it meant, and had probably long ago discerned the wrath of God was on its way. He first gave the context of Nebuchadnezzar's greatness and the cause for it. He also recounted the episode of madness, how it ended, and reminded Belshazzar of the Imperial decree which resulted. The Most High God was not merely a national deity of the Hebrews, but the One True God. It was this God Belshazzar had blasphemed.
On the face of it, the writing was simply a list of Hebrew names for coins. However, those names were related to words for measurements of various kinds, and those words were the point of the message. The Hebrew mina was 50 shekels, and was related to the word meaning "counting, numbering, measuring." Using it twice gives makes it emphatic. The word tekel was simply an alternate spelling of shekel, related to the word for weighing something. The word peres (often printed as upharsin) was the name for a half-shekel, used in the Temple Tax (Exodus 30:11-16). It came from the word for "divide." Thus, Belshazzar was told God had examined Babylon under Belshazzar, weighing him against the standards of Nebuchadnezzar, and found him utterly lacking. Thus, his regency would end in conquest by the Medo-Persian forces already rampaging across the empire.
Though it was utterly pointless, Belshazzar kept his promise. For once in his life, he recognized the ultimate truth of things. The Medo-Persian forces, we are told, marched into Babylon under the water gates of the Euphrates, which they had diverted from its course previously. That very night, Belshazzar was executed, but we know Daniel was spared. As the battles continued, the control of the Imperial Palace district was given to someone Daniel calls Darius. While we find no other record of that name at that time, it hardly matters. The point is the name is clearly drawn from the royal family of the Medes, and may well have been a common name, or used simply as a title. This, in a day and age when changing a man's name was quite common, often for causes we find perplexing in our modern Western world. Belshazzar died, Daniel survived, and continued to play a vital role in God's plans.
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
Tribulation Report #000: Economics of Fuel
Please note: This ain't about End Times! While we may very well be near the end of all things, I address the very real fact humans have lived with tribulation since the Fall. At various times in history, people have turned their hearts toward Heaven and tribulation was driven back into the shadows. At other times, people turn away from Him and tribulation rises again to the fore. We are in such a time as the latter. Tribulation has already begun its latest reign. Wise Christians have already begun preparing. Those less wise, but still smart and listening to the Holy Spirit, will prepare in whatever manner remains possible.
It is truly difficult to make precise recommendations. So very much of mass human response varies with conditions none can measure. Factors will include local culture, a local mass personality, particular accidents of propinquity (time and place), and so on, not to mention God's independent moves which often manifest as miracles. Still, we endeavor to understand the generalities, which understanding puts us in a position to react spiritually to a wide range of things, including surprises completely unimagined. In other words, this is an exciting time to serve the Lord!
Today's Report is about fuel. Most people realize our whole US economy rests on the foundation of petroleum, and specifically depends on petroleum pricing relative to aggregate income. On another blog a couple of years ago, I mentioned we were approaching the $50/barrel oil threshold, and it would cause trouble. However, the very real value of the dollar at that time was dropping. Various market manipulations by the Fed partially hid that, so it was hard to judge at the time, but the $50 mark was no longer significant. Today we are bumping against the $100/barrel mark, and it most obviously is significant.
As witness, a very real measure of economic suffering is the traffic at charity food distribution centers. While there are in every locale various extraneous factors which influence the level of demand, that so very many across the whole US are reporting a recent upsurge in requests, and some have exhausted supplies rather early in their cycle, indicates things are already tough. Here in the OKC Metro, we are up to around $3/gal. Our prices tend to be rather low, nationally. In most other places, it's well above that. As I had predicted last year, that mark was the first threshold of pain for the average Jones Family citizen.
Thus, it has begun. Do not be deceived by government lies indicating this is just a passing phase, a temporary hiccup in the economic stability of the nation. The US currency is very nearly in free fall against other currencies, even those with as little support as our own. We have walked for decades on the knife edge of collapse, by relying almost entirely on consumption, fired by borrowing, to maintain the value of the dollar.
How does that effect us? A part of the answer is realizing any element of our business which relies on supply of anything produced outside the US will become more expensive. That is, it will require a bigger portion of our income. The number one import item? Petroleum and related products. It's not just seeing the price of a gallon soaring up to $5 or higher, but everything you buy which required petroleum to make and bring it to your store will see a price increase. Yes, things like trucks, railroad, airline and ocean vessel shipping will go up by a similar margin, and you'll see it as part of the price in your loaf of bread, for example.
Is there anything you buy which doesn't require petroleum to produce and deliver to you? Precious little, and perhaps nothing. Transportation will become very expensive. Nimble business minds will quickly seek to obtain alternative supplies, which in turn may help create new internal markets, but we are a very long way from the old local farmer dragging his produce to market with a horse-drawn wagon.
This brings us to a broad principle: The economic collapse will follow two predictable stages, followed by the complete unknown. The two stages we can predict are:
Naturally, this paints a picture of businesses built on travel closing their doors. Given so very much of our economic activity is based on just-in-time delivery of something produced on the other side of the planet, the transition through initial shock will be extremely hard. However, I am predicting a rather soft landing. That is, our economy will most certainly go down, but it my sense is it will do so in small steps, giving the nimble time to readjust.
Recommendations: Prepare to find alternative means of transportation, or alternative destinations which are closer. Many will simply be forced to relocate. You should already be praying about that. Bicycles are cheap right now, but get the best one you can afford. Invest in a locking mechanism which wraps through both wheels. Purchase a spare tire or two, and twice as many inner tubes. Also consider spare brake pads if applicable, as everything made from rubber/butyl will be very high soon. Spend some time learning to ride well.
Food is very hard to predict. Anything which can be stored dry without significant loss of nutrition is a good idea for stocking up. Do you know how to cook from scratch? If not, you'll starve during the initial shock. You'll also starve if you can't get your hands on essential basic ingredients. Sugar is almost wholly imported, but flour may be available locally. Your diet may be curtailed to the narrow range of foods available locally, and in season. There is no good answer for dairy, unless you live near one.
A great many items you'd never use will become a substitute currency, such as the afore-mentioned cigarettes. Over the counter medicines, too. Did you know it wasn't that long ago a simple head-cold could be fatal? Decongestion agents weren't widely known, and a simple head cold could easily become a sinus infection. Sadly, the cheapest and most effective right now is highly restricted in sales: pseudoephedrine. Stocking up will look suspicious. And did you know it also could temporarily reduce the effects of poisons from the likes of snake-bite? Learn about self-care remedies, and wilderness survival. Guns and hunting knives will become extremely valuable, as will ammunition.
Finally, be aware government agencies will be totally without moral restraint when it comes to demanding priority for all available supplies of fuel. The fundamental nature of bureaucracy is rejecting adjustments when situations change. Rather, the reflex of government is to force all other agents to change, while it chugs merrily along using up resources as if nothing had happened. There will be confiscations at the point of a gun, and your carefully saved stocks of just about anything may be taken. Rather, expect that to happen.
It is truly difficult to make precise recommendations. So very much of mass human response varies with conditions none can measure. Factors will include local culture, a local mass personality, particular accidents of propinquity (time and place), and so on, not to mention God's independent moves which often manifest as miracles. Still, we endeavor to understand the generalities, which understanding puts us in a position to react spiritually to a wide range of things, including surprises completely unimagined. In other words, this is an exciting time to serve the Lord!
Today's Report is about fuel. Most people realize our whole US economy rests on the foundation of petroleum, and specifically depends on petroleum pricing relative to aggregate income. On another blog a couple of years ago, I mentioned we were approaching the $50/barrel oil threshold, and it would cause trouble. However, the very real value of the dollar at that time was dropping. Various market manipulations by the Fed partially hid that, so it was hard to judge at the time, but the $50 mark was no longer significant. Today we are bumping against the $100/barrel mark, and it most obviously is significant.
As witness, a very real measure of economic suffering is the traffic at charity food distribution centers. While there are in every locale various extraneous factors which influence the level of demand, that so very many across the whole US are reporting a recent upsurge in requests, and some have exhausted supplies rather early in their cycle, indicates things are already tough. Here in the OKC Metro, we are up to around $3/gal. Our prices tend to be rather low, nationally. In most other places, it's well above that. As I had predicted last year, that mark was the first threshold of pain for the average Jones Family citizen.
Thus, it has begun. Do not be deceived by government lies indicating this is just a passing phase, a temporary hiccup in the economic stability of the nation. The US currency is very nearly in free fall against other currencies, even those with as little support as our own. We have walked for decades on the knife edge of collapse, by relying almost entirely on consumption, fired by borrowing, to maintain the value of the dollar.
How does that effect us? A part of the answer is realizing any element of our business which relies on supply of anything produced outside the US will become more expensive. That is, it will require a bigger portion of our income. The number one import item? Petroleum and related products. It's not just seeing the price of a gallon soaring up to $5 or higher, but everything you buy which required petroleum to make and bring it to your store will see a price increase. Yes, things like trucks, railroad, airline and ocean vessel shipping will go up by a similar margin, and you'll see it as part of the price in your loaf of bread, for example.
Is there anything you buy which doesn't require petroleum to produce and deliver to you? Precious little, and perhaps nothing. Transportation will become very expensive. Nimble business minds will quickly seek to obtain alternative supplies, which in turn may help create new internal markets, but we are a very long way from the old local farmer dragging his produce to market with a horse-drawn wagon.
This brings us to a broad principle: The economic collapse will follow two predictable stages, followed by the complete unknown. The two stages we can predict are:
- Initial shock. People have a tendency to be utterly inflexible in their habits. A quintessential example is the cigarette smoker. At first, he'll shell out the extra bucks as cigarettes double, then quadruple in price. Then he just can't afford that any more, so he will buy fewer packs of his favorite brand, and seek cheaper, less satisfying brands. Then he'll start looking at the roll-your-own brands. Then he'll try his darnedest to cut back. However, most will hardly consider just quitting. We humans are like that about almost everything we do. As our technological underpinnings bring more convenience, the more difficult it is to do without those things. Think about that, and consider the sudden upsurge in crime as people refuse to cut back, and simply seek to take by stealth and/or force your supply of that convenience.
- Readjustment of lifestyle. At some point, folks face reality and do things differently. For the most part, this means people finding a new source of income producing and supplying something for which they have (or develop) a talent, something in which demand still outstrips supply. This means a rise in backyard garden plots and chicken coops, but it also means moving out of cities into places where basic living supplies are not so hard to get relative to the number of people trying to get them.
Naturally, this paints a picture of businesses built on travel closing their doors. Given so very much of our economic activity is based on just-in-time delivery of something produced on the other side of the planet, the transition through initial shock will be extremely hard. However, I am predicting a rather soft landing. That is, our economy will most certainly go down, but it my sense is it will do so in small steps, giving the nimble time to readjust.
Recommendations: Prepare to find alternative means of transportation, or alternative destinations which are closer. Many will simply be forced to relocate. You should already be praying about that. Bicycles are cheap right now, but get the best one you can afford. Invest in a locking mechanism which wraps through both wheels. Purchase a spare tire or two, and twice as many inner tubes. Also consider spare brake pads if applicable, as everything made from rubber/butyl will be very high soon. Spend some time learning to ride well.
Food is very hard to predict. Anything which can be stored dry without significant loss of nutrition is a good idea for stocking up. Do you know how to cook from scratch? If not, you'll starve during the initial shock. You'll also starve if you can't get your hands on essential basic ingredients. Sugar is almost wholly imported, but flour may be available locally. Your diet may be curtailed to the narrow range of foods available locally, and in season. There is no good answer for dairy, unless you live near one.
A great many items you'd never use will become a substitute currency, such as the afore-mentioned cigarettes. Over the counter medicines, too. Did you know it wasn't that long ago a simple head-cold could be fatal? Decongestion agents weren't widely known, and a simple head cold could easily become a sinus infection. Sadly, the cheapest and most effective right now is highly restricted in sales: pseudoephedrine. Stocking up will look suspicious. And did you know it also could temporarily reduce the effects of poisons from the likes of snake-bite? Learn about self-care remedies, and wilderness survival. Guns and hunting knives will become extremely valuable, as will ammunition.
Finally, be aware government agencies will be totally without moral restraint when it comes to demanding priority for all available supplies of fuel. The fundamental nature of bureaucracy is rejecting adjustments when situations change. Rather, the reflex of government is to force all other agents to change, while it chugs merrily along using up resources as if nothing had happened. There will be confiscations at the point of a gun, and your carefully saved stocks of just about anything may be taken. Rather, expect that to happen.
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
The Modern Christian Myth of "Defending Our Nation"
Here's a lesson in economics: Those with money and power always want more. As the scale climbs, so does their hatred for their fellow humans. There are two industries in the US which are by far the most lucrative in terms of return on investment. They are pharmaceuticals-medicine, and warfare. We aren't surprised Big Pharma has conspired with the medical establishment to deny both the knowledge of natural remedies, and the sale of them. Things which God built into His creation for solving health problems are a threat to Big Pharma profits. Thus, they lobby the government daily to crack down on the dissemination of natural health information, and try to force draconian regulation of natural foods and dietary supplements. Yes, Big Pharma has produced some truly amazing remedies, but you can be sure the people running the companies do not care a whit about public health.
But this is not about them. This is about the warfare industry. As much as Big Pharma makes off its products, war industries make far more. Those at the top of the wealth food chain, who really do make the decisions which can make or break whole nations by control of currencies and banking, there are the people who dearly love wars. They despise us plebians, because we dare to think and object to being used by them for profits. Information leaked from their secret councils indicates a widely spread opinion the world needs a lot fewer humans, anyway. They are indiscriminate in promoting death. They also control the information outlets to a high degree, so that those who seek to expose their work by publishing information about it, are made to look like madmen or worse.
So let me offer one link which cuts to the heart of the issue: These elite financiers have promoted endless war, including our current deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan. This has nothing at all to do with defending our nation, but is sold that way. That our government leaders include members, or servants, of these lying traitors to humanity is manifestly obvious. This link will provide one single example where we have an overwhelming effort to smother the truth. It's the truth regarding one single thread of this ugly story: depleted uranium munitions. As you will see if you dare to read the factual evidence presented in the linked document, you will understand these weapons are sold, and their use encouraged, with the full knowledge the troops firing them will suffer horrific, slow and agonizing deaths. That is, after they have sired children who will be horribly disfigured.
A decade from now, Americans will be utterly horrified at the awful price they paid for this "valorous defense of our nation." Christian, you who wave the flag and scream, "God commands you to support your leaders in war!" -- you are putting your hand to a sin so great there is no way to describe it. Do you think the thousands of veterans returning home each year with massive burns, lost and mangled limbs, and utterly shattered minds, are a high price to pay? The evidence suggests those with radiation poisoning will outnumber them. The blood, the unimaginable suffering of our troops and their families, not to mention millions of innocent victims who simply had the misfortune of living in Iraq and Afghanistan, is on your hands.
Oh, and need it be stated? This is an obvious and righteous justification for refusing to enlist or be drafted into military service. Christians, let no one deceive you.
But this is not about them. This is about the warfare industry. As much as Big Pharma makes off its products, war industries make far more. Those at the top of the wealth food chain, who really do make the decisions which can make or break whole nations by control of currencies and banking, there are the people who dearly love wars. They despise us plebians, because we dare to think and object to being used by them for profits. Information leaked from their secret councils indicates a widely spread opinion the world needs a lot fewer humans, anyway. They are indiscriminate in promoting death. They also control the information outlets to a high degree, so that those who seek to expose their work by publishing information about it, are made to look like madmen or worse.
So let me offer one link which cuts to the heart of the issue: These elite financiers have promoted endless war, including our current deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan. This has nothing at all to do with defending our nation, but is sold that way. That our government leaders include members, or servants, of these lying traitors to humanity is manifestly obvious. This link will provide one single example where we have an overwhelming effort to smother the truth. It's the truth regarding one single thread of this ugly story: depleted uranium munitions. As you will see if you dare to read the factual evidence presented in the linked document, you will understand these weapons are sold, and their use encouraged, with the full knowledge the troops firing them will suffer horrific, slow and agonizing deaths. That is, after they have sired children who will be horribly disfigured.
A decade from now, Americans will be utterly horrified at the awful price they paid for this "valorous defense of our nation." Christian, you who wave the flag and scream, "God commands you to support your leaders in war!" -- you are putting your hand to a sin so great there is no way to describe it. Do you think the thousands of veterans returning home each year with massive burns, lost and mangled limbs, and utterly shattered minds, are a high price to pay? The evidence suggests those with radiation poisoning will outnumber them. The blood, the unimaginable suffering of our troops and their families, not to mention millions of innocent victims who simply had the misfortune of living in Iraq and Afghanistan, is on your hands.
Oh, and need it be stated? This is an obvious and righteous justification for refusing to enlist or be drafted into military service. Christians, let no one deceive you.
Monday, November 19, 2007
The Art of Mortification
This world is fallen. Not Creation -- that has been subjected to the Fall, and would rather see redemption (Romans 8:18ff). The term "the world" obviously refers to the combined souls of humanity in the grip of sin. A part of that enslavement is to adopt the unspoken and unexamined assumption this life is all there is, or is at least all we can know. This false assumption is the heart and soul of Western Civilization. Bad enough that this serves to raise the barrier to evangelism. Evangelism, at its roots, calls into question basic human assumptions, but the false assumptions follow new believers into their new life in the Kingdom. So very much of discipleship is just clearing the deck. Thus, Jesus spoke of our need to be converted to childlike trust in Him (Matthew 18).
Because of our false assumptions about things, we carry around with us a large body of understanding which is equally false. Whole libraries of doctrine and theology are built like castles on sand, because they assume a Western orientation, with all that entails. So very much of it is a reaction to some other theologies, when both are asking all the wrong questions. Do we have today a Theology of Mortification? Where it exists, it is badly twisted. There are at best mere glimmers of truth buried in great piles of nonsense. I do not call for a Modern Reformation, because this in itself builds a false image of our needs. We have too much already, and need to cut the fat. Castles don't serve to keep the Devil out, but as a place for him to sneak in and live as part of the staff, if not to insuniate himself onto the throne in one form or another.
There is hardly anything wrong with constructing a framework of basic truth. Our problem is making too many things a part of the framework instead of realizing they should be seen as the acknowledged facade of practice. We come to regard our practices as eternal truth, because we refuse to realize even our very thought processes are sometimes mere method. Because of this, we forget we can construct means and method to take us where we need to be, based on our not being in the right place, and remember it's just a path, not the destination.
So let us, in that spirit, endeavor to build an Art of Mortification. I've already hit upon this from several angles, but not often as the central item for consideration. For today, let's look at one simple consideration: We consistently fail to think of sorrow and heartbreak as training from God. For example, you pass through a difficult situation and realize in the process you managed to alienate someone very important in your life. Sure, work to repair it, pray to that end. At the same time, realize the misery of knowing you really did some damage, the very real guilt of sin, is an asset. Sure, grieve and get over it, but know the sense of justified guilt is a critical element in your future Kingdom service.
Take it a little further. Someone you love dearly has turned on you, justified or not. All the better if you believe not. This loss puts you in a position to realize emotional loss is a Kingdom treasure. A broken heart is not to harden you against people -- that's what sinners do with it -- but to harden you against yourself. That is, to help you get past a reliance on anything this world provides as a means to stability and strength, to include people you are certain are a gift from God. Your Christian spouse commit adultery? Abandon you and take the kids? A big chunk of you has died. Use that death to free yourself from earthly concerns. Yes, God demands we take the family seriously as a primary Kingdom asset, but He also demands you remember it all belongs to Him. If you lose it, whether you contributed to the loss or not, the resulting gash across your soul is Reigning Training. It puts you in the frame of mind to bear with this sinful world better than before.
Nothing here suggests we downplay the loss, the horrendous damage to our souls. Nor does is suggest clinical depression is a sin. And for Christ's sake, don't go around dramatically moaning to draw attention to your "worthlessness." What I say is you can and should live through it, and come out the other side a stronger servant of God. I've seen plenty of pastoral counselors do a fine job of empathizing and sympathizing, helping bear people through that Valley of the Shadow of Death. They do it to keep that person alive, to keep them from losing faith. All well and good, but did we ever prepare the ground in advance, telling people such catastrophic losses are the norm in this life? Did we help them map out the Valley as a destination at God's leisure? These sorrows are not exceptional. In a very real sense, we deserve far worse. If the loss of everything and everyone you hold dear stops you, then Satan has won. I say this not for the sake of, "Be tough, be strong; deal with it!" Rather, it is in the sense you can proudly bear the scars on your soul knowing you were such a serious threat to the Kingdom of Darkness Satan had to get permission to pull out the big guns against you. Yeah, he got permission for that; we have a poor theology regarding Satan, too.
We don't understand Job well enough. We can analyze the text all day long, but so very few people plan to be a Job. That's wrong. Job is the quintessential image of what we should expect in this life, and we should expect his final end to be a picture of our afterlife. Stop investing so much of yourself in the here and now. Plan for tomorrow knowing God can, and eventually will, blow it all away. Plan to face your losses; walk that Valley of the Shadow of Death in your mind before you get there. Not fretting, but expecting in a confident sense He knows what He is doing making you ready to serve. After death, in any sense, what can man do to you? How can Satan reach you?
Because of our false assumptions about things, we carry around with us a large body of understanding which is equally false. Whole libraries of doctrine and theology are built like castles on sand, because they assume a Western orientation, with all that entails. So very much of it is a reaction to some other theologies, when both are asking all the wrong questions. Do we have today a Theology of Mortification? Where it exists, it is badly twisted. There are at best mere glimmers of truth buried in great piles of nonsense. I do not call for a Modern Reformation, because this in itself builds a false image of our needs. We have too much already, and need to cut the fat. Castles don't serve to keep the Devil out, but as a place for him to sneak in and live as part of the staff, if not to insuniate himself onto the throne in one form or another.
There is hardly anything wrong with constructing a framework of basic truth. Our problem is making too many things a part of the framework instead of realizing they should be seen as the acknowledged facade of practice. We come to regard our practices as eternal truth, because we refuse to realize even our very thought processes are sometimes mere method. Because of this, we forget we can construct means and method to take us where we need to be, based on our not being in the right place, and remember it's just a path, not the destination.
So let us, in that spirit, endeavor to build an Art of Mortification. I've already hit upon this from several angles, but not often as the central item for consideration. For today, let's look at one simple consideration: We consistently fail to think of sorrow and heartbreak as training from God. For example, you pass through a difficult situation and realize in the process you managed to alienate someone very important in your life. Sure, work to repair it, pray to that end. At the same time, realize the misery of knowing you really did some damage, the very real guilt of sin, is an asset. Sure, grieve and get over it, but know the sense of justified guilt is a critical element in your future Kingdom service.
Take it a little further. Someone you love dearly has turned on you, justified or not. All the better if you believe not. This loss puts you in a position to realize emotional loss is a Kingdom treasure. A broken heart is not to harden you against people -- that's what sinners do with it -- but to harden you against yourself. That is, to help you get past a reliance on anything this world provides as a means to stability and strength, to include people you are certain are a gift from God. Your Christian spouse commit adultery? Abandon you and take the kids? A big chunk of you has died. Use that death to free yourself from earthly concerns. Yes, God demands we take the family seriously as a primary Kingdom asset, but He also demands you remember it all belongs to Him. If you lose it, whether you contributed to the loss or not, the resulting gash across your soul is Reigning Training. It puts you in the frame of mind to bear with this sinful world better than before.
Nothing here suggests we downplay the loss, the horrendous damage to our souls. Nor does is suggest clinical depression is a sin. And for Christ's sake, don't go around dramatically moaning to draw attention to your "worthlessness." What I say is you can and should live through it, and come out the other side a stronger servant of God. I've seen plenty of pastoral counselors do a fine job of empathizing and sympathizing, helping bear people through that Valley of the Shadow of Death. They do it to keep that person alive, to keep them from losing faith. All well and good, but did we ever prepare the ground in advance, telling people such catastrophic losses are the norm in this life? Did we help them map out the Valley as a destination at God's leisure? These sorrows are not exceptional. In a very real sense, we deserve far worse. If the loss of everything and everyone you hold dear stops you, then Satan has won. I say this not for the sake of, "Be tough, be strong; deal with it!" Rather, it is in the sense you can proudly bear the scars on your soul knowing you were such a serious threat to the Kingdom of Darkness Satan had to get permission to pull out the big guns against you. Yeah, he got permission for that; we have a poor theology regarding Satan, too.
We don't understand Job well enough. We can analyze the text all day long, but so very few people plan to be a Job. That's wrong. Job is the quintessential image of what we should expect in this life, and we should expect his final end to be a picture of our afterlife. Stop investing so much of yourself in the here and now. Plan for tomorrow knowing God can, and eventually will, blow it all away. Plan to face your losses; walk that Valley of the Shadow of Death in your mind before you get there. Not fretting, but expecting in a confident sense He knows what He is doing making you ready to serve. After death, in any sense, what can man do to you? How can Satan reach you?
Sunday, November 18, 2007
The Fiction Bug is Biting Again
Sometimes it just comes over me. A story is born in the back of my mind, and I have to tell it. There's not much point in explaining the creative process because it's my own. What matters now is the bug is biting again, and I'm working on a story.
I've written a few previously. Because this one is too long to publish here, I'll have to offer a link when it's finished. It covers a sensitive subject in order to clarify something a lot of people refuse to discuss. It's my nature to deal with such things, because I have no shame. False shame is what sets us up to sin, because we refuse to look in the mirrors of our souls to see what our weaknesses are. While you may remain blissfully unaware, Satan knows, and will use it against you.
Update: The story is finished. I'm calling it "Like A Drug."
I've written a few previously. Because this one is too long to publish here, I'll have to offer a link when it's finished. It covers a sensitive subject in order to clarify something a lot of people refuse to discuss. It's my nature to deal with such things, because I have no shame. False shame is what sets us up to sin, because we refuse to look in the mirrors of our souls to see what our weaknesses are. While you may remain blissfully unaware, Satan knows, and will use it against you.
Update: The story is finished. I'm calling it "Like A Drug."
Saturday, November 17, 2007
Life of Christ: Matthew 18
We come to the final days in Galilee, before Jesus goes to offer Himself as a sacrifice on the Cross. Matthew describes one more essential lesson in pastoral leadership Jesus gave to His Disciples. As always, our familiarity with the lessons and parables in isolation from the context has served to destroy some of the meaning. While our understanding may not be entirely wrong, we are spiritually poorer for not having the richness of the context Jesus Himself gave for these lessons. Here, Jesus is responding to a persistent blindness in the Twelve to the fundamental nature of the Kingdom of Heaven.
Peter has hosted Jesus for at least a couple of years in Capernaum. As a courtesy to His host, Jesus helped pay the Temple Tax for both of them. We can assume the others had to pay their own way. Matthew should hardly have been troubled, but some of the others might not have it so easy. There had already arisen a sensitivity over their relative status as leaders in Jesus' ministry, and He had already been teaching them it was near the time things should come to a head. Since they didn't know quite how the handle the idea the crown lay through the Cross, we find them considering instead the details of how the Messianic Kingdom would play out, specifically regarding who among them was designated for which position in the Messianic Court. They were still suffering from worldly ambitions, envy, and confusion about Messianic expectations.
Children were given scant attention in the Ancient Near East, except within the privacy of the family. Even though highly valued and prized as a proof of God's favor, their status was quite a bit lower than we in the West would find comfortable. While Hebrew tradition was a little better in such things than just about every other culture at that time, we note men didn't give them a lot of time until they were old enough to commence education and training, sometime around age nine. Indeed, we learn from the laws of the time the death from abuse of one younger than nine provoked no curiosity from officials, because their loss was simply a loss to the family. Only after their bar Mitzvah ceremony, meaning literally "a son of the Law," did they have any status in the community, and could ask questions in the synagogue, for example. We know from several Gospel passages Jesus broke this mold. When the Disciples asked Him about their assignments, He called a nearby child, who was surely younger than nine. The boy took his place in the center of the group.
This rather unimportant figure became an object lesson. Jesus referred a need to be changed, to experience a complete shift in understanding how the world works. Rather than the child needing to be trained to the ways of life, it is the world which needed the understanding of a child to enter life in the Kingdom. Once people are "converted" to become like children, they are fit for citizenship. This presents a bewildering paradox to the Twelve, who by now had begun to think of themselves as a class apart. Instead, it's not their leadership they needed to work on, but their mere inclusion in the Kingdom. Children lack ambition, and are all too happy just to be included, to be taken seriously in any degree. They are quite indiscriminate in following the leadership of any adult who seems to care about them. Becoming childlike is the sort of thing which fits men for leadership in the Kingdom.
Once having adopted this childlike faith and trust, any leader in the Kingdom takes up the responsibility of welcoming other children. It is a solemn duty, and taking it lightly by casually misleading them is no joke. Taking advantage of their dependency by leading them astray for any reason is a sin so great, they deserve one of the most hideous forms of Eastern punishment known: tossed in the sea weighted down by a millstone large enough it requires a donkey to push it. It's bad enough the world is loaded with people who lead others astray, and these deserve the greater punishment from God. It would be worth any price to avoid seducing the vulnerable. It's not hard to imagine Jesus draws a picture of the repulsive creatures who debauch children while pretending to love them. If you can't keep your hands to yourself, or even your eyes, remove them. It's better to live life with maimed flesh than to stand before God having seduced any spiritual child to sin.
Further, the dismissive attitude many leaders of that day showed to their subordinates was completely unacceptable in the Kingdom. As all in the Kingdom are children before the Lord, so none is truly above another. Becoming impatient and dismissing someone who doesn't rise to your personal demands is approaching blasphemy. You are not God, and God keeps the angelic representatives of His children close at hand. Jesus uses the image here of a tiny elite group within the court of an Eastern potentate. Most people with business at the court never actually see the ruler, but deal with his servants, taking their words as words of the lord himself. A choice few are allowed to actually see him face to face on a regular basis. Each soul is precious! A better translation of verse 12 has the shepherd leaving his flock in a safe place in the wilderness, while he goes off and seeks the one which got lost. It's not a matter of the others having no value, but that all are invaluable individually. This is frankly a revolutionary concept in that context. While some shepherds would give names to their sheep, it was extremely rare he would do so for a large flock, yet Jehovah calls each of us by name.
Thus, when dealing with a straying brother, leaders must assume his soul is so precious they will be loathe to cast him aside. Give him every chance to repent. By this time, rabbis had long realized Israel was under a foreign ruler in part because no one bothered to concern himself with his neighbor's sins (Leviticus 19:17). This emphasizes the biblical communitarian instinct built into the Kingdom. Go to the brother privately, where it's most likely he'll climb down from presumptuous sin. If that fails, bring a few witnesses to establish whether he is indeed hardened in this sin (Deuteronomy 19:15). If all else fails, let the whole congregation know why they must ostracize this brother. The obvious assumption is the fault in view is dangerous to the community of faith, something which would cause a child to stumble. Such irresponsible behavior is symbolically associated with heathens (goyyim or Gentiles) and those Jews (publicans like Matthew had been) who served them.
Jesus then calls to their memory a standard rabbinical concept: binding and loosing. It was clearly understood by almost anyone who attended synagogue the point was to teach the Law of Moses in the context of everyday life. As cultural and technological shifts came, it was necessary to understand how the agrarian orientation of the Law could be extrapolated to obey the intent. This was the original idea behind the Talmud before it was corrupted by Hellenist rational assumptions. Thus, preachers and teachers of the Law were to declare what was bound, forbidden by Law, and what was loosed, or acceptable. As leaders in the Kingdom, this responsibility was conferred on all the Disciples, and it was no small matter. However, it was not impossible to discern. While one might be mistaken in isolation, two hearts genuinely seeking God's face like children would surely come to a useful conclusion. The smallest possible congregation of faith would not lack for God's presence, and they would eventually know what was bound or loosed in His eyes.
This teaching brought to Peter's mind a question about forgiveness. While the Pharisees taught one only need to forgive the same mistake three times, Peter knew that was wrong. Would a larger number do -- seven? That was a good, sacred number. Jesus' answer showed Peter was missing the point. Echoing the number revealed to Daniel (9:24ff) as the symbolic measure of God's patience with Israel's sin, Jesus indicated there was actually no limit. To emphasize the point, He offered the parable of Debt Forgiveness.
We've noted already many rulers of that time pretended to imitate the legendary luxury and manners of the Persian Empire. Jesus' calls up the image of such a potentate who is auditing his accounts, suggesting the domain was insolvent. The apparent cause was the impossibly flagrant embezzling of a satrap. When the man begged, his lord decided to treat it as a loan, but forgave it. This man promptly went out and seized one of his debtors, who owed a rather ordinary sum. Instead of passing on that magnanimity he had received, he impatiently remanded the servant to a debtor's slave farm. When word got back to the potentate, he ordered the forgiven debt reinstated, and treated the man according to his first crime.
We stand before God with a debt of sin. By no stretch of any imagination could we repay from our own resources. There is nothing we can do, and we most certainly deserve in this life the worst. Yet God chooses to forgive those who fully confess and humble themselves before Him. How can we do any less? The sins which concern us as leaders in the congregation are likely much smaller than our sins before God. The consequences we mete out are equally small, because the issue is sin on a much lower level. However, the power to cause anguish to the soul of a child of God is huge. We rebuke a child of God for endangering other children of God. If our demands themselves constitute a corrupting influence on the faith of another, we are a threat to the Kingdom. Such indicates we have no place in that Kingdom. Being a leader in the Kingdom requires we constantly remember our place as children, with a solemn task for leading the other children closer to Him.
Peter has hosted Jesus for at least a couple of years in Capernaum. As a courtesy to His host, Jesus helped pay the Temple Tax for both of them. We can assume the others had to pay their own way. Matthew should hardly have been troubled, but some of the others might not have it so easy. There had already arisen a sensitivity over their relative status as leaders in Jesus' ministry, and He had already been teaching them it was near the time things should come to a head. Since they didn't know quite how the handle the idea the crown lay through the Cross, we find them considering instead the details of how the Messianic Kingdom would play out, specifically regarding who among them was designated for which position in the Messianic Court. They were still suffering from worldly ambitions, envy, and confusion about Messianic expectations.
Children were given scant attention in the Ancient Near East, except within the privacy of the family. Even though highly valued and prized as a proof of God's favor, their status was quite a bit lower than we in the West would find comfortable. While Hebrew tradition was a little better in such things than just about every other culture at that time, we note men didn't give them a lot of time until they were old enough to commence education and training, sometime around age nine. Indeed, we learn from the laws of the time the death from abuse of one younger than nine provoked no curiosity from officials, because their loss was simply a loss to the family. Only after their bar Mitzvah ceremony, meaning literally "a son of the Law," did they have any status in the community, and could ask questions in the synagogue, for example. We know from several Gospel passages Jesus broke this mold. When the Disciples asked Him about their assignments, He called a nearby child, who was surely younger than nine. The boy took his place in the center of the group.
This rather unimportant figure became an object lesson. Jesus referred a need to be changed, to experience a complete shift in understanding how the world works. Rather than the child needing to be trained to the ways of life, it is the world which needed the understanding of a child to enter life in the Kingdom. Once people are "converted" to become like children, they are fit for citizenship. This presents a bewildering paradox to the Twelve, who by now had begun to think of themselves as a class apart. Instead, it's not their leadership they needed to work on, but their mere inclusion in the Kingdom. Children lack ambition, and are all too happy just to be included, to be taken seriously in any degree. They are quite indiscriminate in following the leadership of any adult who seems to care about them. Becoming childlike is the sort of thing which fits men for leadership in the Kingdom.
Once having adopted this childlike faith and trust, any leader in the Kingdom takes up the responsibility of welcoming other children. It is a solemn duty, and taking it lightly by casually misleading them is no joke. Taking advantage of their dependency by leading them astray for any reason is a sin so great, they deserve one of the most hideous forms of Eastern punishment known: tossed in the sea weighted down by a millstone large enough it requires a donkey to push it. It's bad enough the world is loaded with people who lead others astray, and these deserve the greater punishment from God. It would be worth any price to avoid seducing the vulnerable. It's not hard to imagine Jesus draws a picture of the repulsive creatures who debauch children while pretending to love them. If you can't keep your hands to yourself, or even your eyes, remove them. It's better to live life with maimed flesh than to stand before God having seduced any spiritual child to sin.
Further, the dismissive attitude many leaders of that day showed to their subordinates was completely unacceptable in the Kingdom. As all in the Kingdom are children before the Lord, so none is truly above another. Becoming impatient and dismissing someone who doesn't rise to your personal demands is approaching blasphemy. You are not God, and God keeps the angelic representatives of His children close at hand. Jesus uses the image here of a tiny elite group within the court of an Eastern potentate. Most people with business at the court never actually see the ruler, but deal with his servants, taking their words as words of the lord himself. A choice few are allowed to actually see him face to face on a regular basis. Each soul is precious! A better translation of verse 12 has the shepherd leaving his flock in a safe place in the wilderness, while he goes off and seeks the one which got lost. It's not a matter of the others having no value, but that all are invaluable individually. This is frankly a revolutionary concept in that context. While some shepherds would give names to their sheep, it was extremely rare he would do so for a large flock, yet Jehovah calls each of us by name.
Thus, when dealing with a straying brother, leaders must assume his soul is so precious they will be loathe to cast him aside. Give him every chance to repent. By this time, rabbis had long realized Israel was under a foreign ruler in part because no one bothered to concern himself with his neighbor's sins (Leviticus 19:17). This emphasizes the biblical communitarian instinct built into the Kingdom. Go to the brother privately, where it's most likely he'll climb down from presumptuous sin. If that fails, bring a few witnesses to establish whether he is indeed hardened in this sin (Deuteronomy 19:15). If all else fails, let the whole congregation know why they must ostracize this brother. The obvious assumption is the fault in view is dangerous to the community of faith, something which would cause a child to stumble. Such irresponsible behavior is symbolically associated with heathens (goyyim or Gentiles) and those Jews (publicans like Matthew had been) who served them.
Jesus then calls to their memory a standard rabbinical concept: binding and loosing. It was clearly understood by almost anyone who attended synagogue the point was to teach the Law of Moses in the context of everyday life. As cultural and technological shifts came, it was necessary to understand how the agrarian orientation of the Law could be extrapolated to obey the intent. This was the original idea behind the Talmud before it was corrupted by Hellenist rational assumptions. Thus, preachers and teachers of the Law were to declare what was bound, forbidden by Law, and what was loosed, or acceptable. As leaders in the Kingdom, this responsibility was conferred on all the Disciples, and it was no small matter. However, it was not impossible to discern. While one might be mistaken in isolation, two hearts genuinely seeking God's face like children would surely come to a useful conclusion. The smallest possible congregation of faith would not lack for God's presence, and they would eventually know what was bound or loosed in His eyes.
This teaching brought to Peter's mind a question about forgiveness. While the Pharisees taught one only need to forgive the same mistake three times, Peter knew that was wrong. Would a larger number do -- seven? That was a good, sacred number. Jesus' answer showed Peter was missing the point. Echoing the number revealed to Daniel (9:24ff) as the symbolic measure of God's patience with Israel's sin, Jesus indicated there was actually no limit. To emphasize the point, He offered the parable of Debt Forgiveness.
We've noted already many rulers of that time pretended to imitate the legendary luxury and manners of the Persian Empire. Jesus' calls up the image of such a potentate who is auditing his accounts, suggesting the domain was insolvent. The apparent cause was the impossibly flagrant embezzling of a satrap. When the man begged, his lord decided to treat it as a loan, but forgave it. This man promptly went out and seized one of his debtors, who owed a rather ordinary sum. Instead of passing on that magnanimity he had received, he impatiently remanded the servant to a debtor's slave farm. When word got back to the potentate, he ordered the forgiven debt reinstated, and treated the man according to his first crime.
We stand before God with a debt of sin. By no stretch of any imagination could we repay from our own resources. There is nothing we can do, and we most certainly deserve in this life the worst. Yet God chooses to forgive those who fully confess and humble themselves before Him. How can we do any less? The sins which concern us as leaders in the congregation are likely much smaller than our sins before God. The consequences we mete out are equally small, because the issue is sin on a much lower level. However, the power to cause anguish to the soul of a child of God is huge. We rebuke a child of God for endangering other children of God. If our demands themselves constitute a corrupting influence on the faith of another, we are a threat to the Kingdom. Such indicates we have no place in that Kingdom. Being a leader in the Kingdom requires we constantly remember our place as children, with a solemn task for leading the other children closer to Him.
Friday, November 16, 2007
Disabled Heart
I don't trust much of what I read, so I really only know what I've experienced first hand. One of the saddest thing about organized religion in the US, a major element keeping me in the home church movement, is the polarization between "liberal" and "conservative." Give what meaning you wish to those terms, but it's pretty rare to find a theologically fundamentalist church which practices really good care for the needy.
I've never been member of a more liberal church, but have done a good bit of work which put me in close contact with quite a few. They always have a good focus on accommodating people with special needs. They always spend a significant part of their building budget on accessability in a broad sense. When I spent several years in a wheelchair, ramps came quickly to the forefront of my consciousness. A few conservative churches have just barely any accommodation at all. Some go so far as to offer some special ministry to, say, the deaf. At least one I know has a decent program for victims of cerebral palsy. But they did these things because someone in the church who was "kinda liberal" pushed for it, and usually because enough somebodies there actually needed the help.
I understand not building ministries for people who aren't there. What I don't understand is the paucity of resources and expertise. Even if we go up to the regional and denominational level, liberal churches do it better. Sometimes it is clearly a matter of political correctness, and that's evil. We don't do things because of human-based theology and expect Christ to be involved. Maybe you can convince me the liberal churches simply make more noise about it. Still, why did it take the ADA before fundamentalists decided it was in their best interests to build ramps and wide doors even when there weren't any members needing it? Where are the Southern Baptists when it comes to asking Congressmen to consider offering subsidies to business who, for example, hire the homebound to work via "telecommute"?
Oh, sorry, they're too busy agitating for more billions to Israel. Does anybody even know there are actually some fellow evangelicals in Gaza? That in the West Bank we have a large number of Palestinian Christians who preach Jesus? Why is it only "liberals" seem to know they exist, and try to help them, in spite of theological differences? We'd rather fund more weapons for Israel so families picnicking on the beach can be shelled by artillery, and concrete walls can be used to separate people from their own farm land, and blockades to starve innocent residents because the Israelis don't like the democratically elected representatives the Gazans choose. Yes, more billions to see our own Christian brothers and sisters slaughtered without cause.
Good theology, but dead hearts. I want no part of them.
I've never been member of a more liberal church, but have done a good bit of work which put me in close contact with quite a few. They always have a good focus on accommodating people with special needs. They always spend a significant part of their building budget on accessability in a broad sense. When I spent several years in a wheelchair, ramps came quickly to the forefront of my consciousness. A few conservative churches have just barely any accommodation at all. Some go so far as to offer some special ministry to, say, the deaf. At least one I know has a decent program for victims of cerebral palsy. But they did these things because someone in the church who was "kinda liberal" pushed for it, and usually because enough somebodies there actually needed the help.
I understand not building ministries for people who aren't there. What I don't understand is the paucity of resources and expertise. Even if we go up to the regional and denominational level, liberal churches do it better. Sometimes it is clearly a matter of political correctness, and that's evil. We don't do things because of human-based theology and expect Christ to be involved. Maybe you can convince me the liberal churches simply make more noise about it. Still, why did it take the ADA before fundamentalists decided it was in their best interests to build ramps and wide doors even when there weren't any members needing it? Where are the Southern Baptists when it comes to asking Congressmen to consider offering subsidies to business who, for example, hire the homebound to work via "telecommute"?
Oh, sorry, they're too busy agitating for more billions to Israel. Does anybody even know there are actually some fellow evangelicals in Gaza? That in the West Bank we have a large number of Palestinian Christians who preach Jesus? Why is it only "liberals" seem to know they exist, and try to help them, in spite of theological differences? We'd rather fund more weapons for Israel so families picnicking on the beach can be shelled by artillery, and concrete walls can be used to separate people from their own farm land, and blockades to starve innocent residents because the Israelis don't like the democratically elected representatives the Gazans choose. Yes, more billions to see our own Christian brothers and sisters slaughtered without cause.
Good theology, but dead hearts. I want no part of them.
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Daniel 4
Where the capital city of Babylon once stood is today a semi-desert, sandy, yet sometimes swampy flat plain. Irrigation at times throughout history could make the area lush with fields of grain and vegetables. In the days of Daniel, a common sight would be onions and barley. The latter mostly because the demand for year-round crops via irrigation had raised the salt content of the soil, and wheat didn't grow well; barley was more tolerant. As noted before, stones were rare, but clay for bricks had been abundant for thousands of years. Nebuchadnezzar's kilns had been busy with bricks more than for executions. We find they had begun mixing colors into the clay, as well as glazing, to produce bricks with various tints, blue being quite dominant in Imperial building projects.
While this has perhaps been one of the easiest places on earth for man to prosper in a sedentary settlement, and is reputed the birth place of civilization and settled living, men brought to this area an unspoken assumption their gods were best met at the tops of mountains. Since there were none in the area, they were built artificially of bricks. Ziggurats, the brick pyramids of the Mesopotamian Valley, were everywhere. They were generally aligned for use in marking astrological observations and events. The stars themselves were believed to be the physical manifestations of gods, with varying ranks and classes in a system we hardly comprehend today. Nebuchadnezzar's capital city was a massive pile of bricks, visible for miles around. His palace included more than one pagan shrine, a network of terraces and high brick towers, from which descended the famous Hanging Gardens. They appeared as mountains in these sandy plains of muted yellow, brightly colored and shining in the sun, draped in glorious green.
Such sights inspired a seemingly justified awe at the man who stood in the center of all these things. Not only a builder and designer, the brilliant ruler managed to vanquish all the armies he met in battle, commanding his troops himself. Yet he was a literate man, apparently conversant in several languages. We would today easily rank him among the grandest geniuses, and Daniel's admiration was fully justified. Yet for all this, his life was darkened by a pagan outlook, loaded with superstition. It is apparent this chapter of Daniel was taken directly from the Imperial archives, a declaration of Nebuchadnezzar himself, written in the first person. The tone and figures of speech retain a pantheistic assumption, even while he confesses Jehovah as God above all gods.
Rather late in his reign as best we can tell, we find the relative absence of official Imperial records for this period rather supports this narrative. It would be contrary to politically correct views of that time and place, and would explain why he felt it was necessary to produce this personal decree, and why it survives only in Daniel's book. Nebuchadnezzar had a dream, and it was obvious to him it was no idle sifting of the brain's memories, but a portent of the future. The dream was troubling, because whatever it meant, it was not a hopeful image. After consulting the usual crowd of magi, with no useful answer, he called Daniel. He related his dream.
Nebuchadnezzar refers to Daniel in the same pagan frame of reference he apparently carried to the grave, for he seems to have died not long after this story and this decree. We know from archeology Nebuchadnezzar dearly loved the great cedars of Lebanon, and had personally supervised the felling of a great many for hauling to his palace. In his dream stood such a great tree, a common symbol of rulers for a very long time. Brutal though he may have been in battle, as ruler he was truly a noble, even imperial kind of man. People who were loyal to his rule did, indeed, prosper quite well. Even the exiled Judeans living in the shadow of his capital were getting quite wealthy and comfortable. Into this scene came one from above. We would know this as an angel, but to Nebuchadnezzar, it was a demi-god at least, one of the stars of the sky.
The decree from this divine being was to cut down the magnificent tree, and drive away all who prospered in its shadow. The log would be trimmed, the leaves pulled and the fruit scattered. The stump would be preserved, but bound with fetters and left alone in the fields. Then, the voice said it would live on grass, rest in the open at night, and rather exist as an animal. This would continue for an undefined period of sevens, symbolic of an offering to the gods. While it's possible this meant years, it need not be so, and to demand such a meaning would miss the point. It was long enough for his place to be nearly forgotten.
Daniel was stunned. Since time was never measured in increments less than an hour, the phrase would certainly mean somewhat less of a period, but long enough to alarm Nebuchadnezzar. To Daniel it was all too obvious. His master demanded an answer, regardless of the consequences. In a day and age when bringing bad news to the throne was often to carry one's death warrant, the Emperor essentially told Daniel not to worry about such consequences, because the interpretation was too important. Daniel somberly noted the dream was a dream to his enemies, implying it was a nightmare for Nebuchadnezzar.
The majestic beginning of the image noted the glory of Babylon and her ruler. It was not so long ago Nebuchadnezzar had finally pacified Syria, Judea, Egypt, Persia and everything within reach of his troops. With peace came trade and prosperity as never before. The recent additions to the palace, the splendid avenue down the city center, and fortifications throughout the empire were beyond comparing with the contemptible and primitive constructions of previous civilizations in that valley. People were genuinely doing well.
But all this was from the hand of Daniel's God. He granted it freely, and could as easily take it away. This He promised to do. The Emperor would be driven insane, apparently a form of lycanthropy, but instead of a wolf, seeing himself as a goat. Apparently a similar malady affected Nabonidus, his successor. This madness would have the man thinking himself an animal, living out of doors and acting wildly. But it was not the end. The band of iron and bronze was as much protective and confining. When the time was passed, and the man came to himself, he would come to God. Still, this was an awful thing, and it could probably be avoided. Daniel's urging was for Nebuchadnezzar to become righteous. In the context, the meaning is a call to become humble, to limit his pride and show compassion to those less fortunate. In short, Daniel warned Nebuchadnezzar to keep in mind he was just a short step from being a destitute nobody himself.
A year later, as the Emperor strolled on the upper terraces of his magnificent palace, he was seized by a powerful pride that all this was the product of his efforts. No sooner had he said it, a voice from Heaven reminded him he had been warned, and now the doom was upon him. He had failed to humble himself and acknowledge it was the God of Israel Who delivered Israel into his hands, along with every other kingdom and empire.
While we can be sure Nebuchadnezzar was given preferential treatment by letting him loose in an Imperial park, this would be pretty much the same for any favored patient -- put them in a safe asylum and hope for the best. One of his sons held regency on his behalf, but not one of his courtiers came to visit him. The man wallowed in the grass, slept on the ground, completely let himself go with matted hair and beard, long filthy nails, etc. These two items were of particular note in a culture where men fussed over having the most carefully curled hair and clean hands. Such were the marks of privilege, education and refined manners. At the end of his time, Nebuchadnezzar came to his senses and immediately gave the glory to Jehovah.
It appears Nebuchadnezzar became a genuine convert, insofar as it was possible. We reasonably doubt he began attending synagogue, but certainly made Jehovah his chief deity. Near as we can tell, this all came just before his death. The records from the end of his reign are scant. However, the narrative tells us he died in the former comfort and luxury of his Imperial majesty. Things were altogether unsettled after his passing. None of those following had anything like his grand stature in intellect, character, and certainly not his late-found devotion to Jehovah.
While this has perhaps been one of the easiest places on earth for man to prosper in a sedentary settlement, and is reputed the birth place of civilization and settled living, men brought to this area an unspoken assumption their gods were best met at the tops of mountains. Since there were none in the area, they were built artificially of bricks. Ziggurats, the brick pyramids of the Mesopotamian Valley, were everywhere. They were generally aligned for use in marking astrological observations and events. The stars themselves were believed to be the physical manifestations of gods, with varying ranks and classes in a system we hardly comprehend today. Nebuchadnezzar's capital city was a massive pile of bricks, visible for miles around. His palace included more than one pagan shrine, a network of terraces and high brick towers, from which descended the famous Hanging Gardens. They appeared as mountains in these sandy plains of muted yellow, brightly colored and shining in the sun, draped in glorious green.
Such sights inspired a seemingly justified awe at the man who stood in the center of all these things. Not only a builder and designer, the brilliant ruler managed to vanquish all the armies he met in battle, commanding his troops himself. Yet he was a literate man, apparently conversant in several languages. We would today easily rank him among the grandest geniuses, and Daniel's admiration was fully justified. Yet for all this, his life was darkened by a pagan outlook, loaded with superstition. It is apparent this chapter of Daniel was taken directly from the Imperial archives, a declaration of Nebuchadnezzar himself, written in the first person. The tone and figures of speech retain a pantheistic assumption, even while he confesses Jehovah as God above all gods.
Rather late in his reign as best we can tell, we find the relative absence of official Imperial records for this period rather supports this narrative. It would be contrary to politically correct views of that time and place, and would explain why he felt it was necessary to produce this personal decree, and why it survives only in Daniel's book. Nebuchadnezzar had a dream, and it was obvious to him it was no idle sifting of the brain's memories, but a portent of the future. The dream was troubling, because whatever it meant, it was not a hopeful image. After consulting the usual crowd of magi, with no useful answer, he called Daniel. He related his dream.
Nebuchadnezzar refers to Daniel in the same pagan frame of reference he apparently carried to the grave, for he seems to have died not long after this story and this decree. We know from archeology Nebuchadnezzar dearly loved the great cedars of Lebanon, and had personally supervised the felling of a great many for hauling to his palace. In his dream stood such a great tree, a common symbol of rulers for a very long time. Brutal though he may have been in battle, as ruler he was truly a noble, even imperial kind of man. People who were loyal to his rule did, indeed, prosper quite well. Even the exiled Judeans living in the shadow of his capital were getting quite wealthy and comfortable. Into this scene came one from above. We would know this as an angel, but to Nebuchadnezzar, it was a demi-god at least, one of the stars of the sky.
The decree from this divine being was to cut down the magnificent tree, and drive away all who prospered in its shadow. The log would be trimmed, the leaves pulled and the fruit scattered. The stump would be preserved, but bound with fetters and left alone in the fields. Then, the voice said it would live on grass, rest in the open at night, and rather exist as an animal. This would continue for an undefined period of sevens, symbolic of an offering to the gods. While it's possible this meant years, it need not be so, and to demand such a meaning would miss the point. It was long enough for his place to be nearly forgotten.
Daniel was stunned. Since time was never measured in increments less than an hour, the phrase would certainly mean somewhat less of a period, but long enough to alarm Nebuchadnezzar. To Daniel it was all too obvious. His master demanded an answer, regardless of the consequences. In a day and age when bringing bad news to the throne was often to carry one's death warrant, the Emperor essentially told Daniel not to worry about such consequences, because the interpretation was too important. Daniel somberly noted the dream was a dream to his enemies, implying it was a nightmare for Nebuchadnezzar.
The majestic beginning of the image noted the glory of Babylon and her ruler. It was not so long ago Nebuchadnezzar had finally pacified Syria, Judea, Egypt, Persia and everything within reach of his troops. With peace came trade and prosperity as never before. The recent additions to the palace, the splendid avenue down the city center, and fortifications throughout the empire were beyond comparing with the contemptible and primitive constructions of previous civilizations in that valley. People were genuinely doing well.
But all this was from the hand of Daniel's God. He granted it freely, and could as easily take it away. This He promised to do. The Emperor would be driven insane, apparently a form of lycanthropy, but instead of a wolf, seeing himself as a goat. Apparently a similar malady affected Nabonidus, his successor. This madness would have the man thinking himself an animal, living out of doors and acting wildly. But it was not the end. The band of iron and bronze was as much protective and confining. When the time was passed, and the man came to himself, he would come to God. Still, this was an awful thing, and it could probably be avoided. Daniel's urging was for Nebuchadnezzar to become righteous. In the context, the meaning is a call to become humble, to limit his pride and show compassion to those less fortunate. In short, Daniel warned Nebuchadnezzar to keep in mind he was just a short step from being a destitute nobody himself.
A year later, as the Emperor strolled on the upper terraces of his magnificent palace, he was seized by a powerful pride that all this was the product of his efforts. No sooner had he said it, a voice from Heaven reminded him he had been warned, and now the doom was upon him. He had failed to humble himself and acknowledge it was the God of Israel Who delivered Israel into his hands, along with every other kingdom and empire.
While we can be sure Nebuchadnezzar was given preferential treatment by letting him loose in an Imperial park, this would be pretty much the same for any favored patient -- put them in a safe asylum and hope for the best. One of his sons held regency on his behalf, but not one of his courtiers came to visit him. The man wallowed in the grass, slept on the ground, completely let himself go with matted hair and beard, long filthy nails, etc. These two items were of particular note in a culture where men fussed over having the most carefully curled hair and clean hands. Such were the marks of privilege, education and refined manners. At the end of his time, Nebuchadnezzar came to his senses and immediately gave the glory to Jehovah.
It appears Nebuchadnezzar became a genuine convert, insofar as it was possible. We reasonably doubt he began attending synagogue, but certainly made Jehovah his chief deity. Near as we can tell, this all came just before his death. The records from the end of his reign are scant. However, the narrative tells us he died in the former comfort and luxury of his Imperial majesty. Things were altogether unsettled after his passing. None of those following had anything like his grand stature in intellect, character, and certainly not his late-found devotion to Jehovah.
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Daniel 3
That Nebuchadnezzar was a brilliant man did not prevent him being an idolater. The world in which he was born was filled with numerous gods and goddesses. While he did seem to favor a few over the rest, he could not have conceived of the possibility there was but one, and the rest were fake. Even Israel seemed to struggle with that notion until the Exile. Further, his declaration at the end of this episode, granting the God of Israel protection from blasphemy and scorn had nothing to do with his pagan beliefs. Many gods and religions were so protected, according to the archaeological evidence. However, in the polytheistic ancient world, probably all gods were valid, but the gods of one's nation and household were given greater attention. You most certainly could bring your own gods from home when, as a foreigner, you were brought into Imperial service in Babylon. However, as with all rulers in those days, Nebuchadnezzar considered it a servant's feudal duty to worship his gods, too. Even if only to humor him, doing any less was considered a form of treason, and few would balk.
The few who balked at such polytheistic practices were the three close friends of Daniel: Shadrach, Mishach, and Abednego, as they were known by their Babylonian names. In keeping with their previous efforts to remain faithful to Jehovah, they at least rejected the notion they could worship other gods, whether real or imagined.
We aren't told where this fits in with the chronology, and there's no reason to assume anything about it. Nor are we told where Daniel was when this happened, because he's not in the picture. We are told simply there was a time when Nebuchadnezzar had an image constructed which was quite large, and it was plated with gold. To envision something so large cast in pure gold would be quite unreasonable, especially given the known practices of the day. Nor should we imagine the basic material was stone. It was brick, or perhaps wood and brick. In the area around ancient Babylon, since as far back as the first Babylon under Nimrod, the only building material available was clay fired in ovens to make bricks, and held together by petroleum tar. The entire city was built of such material. The image could have been anything, and was likely a brick column, with perhaps something mounted on top to represent any of Nebuchadnezzar's favored deities.
The dedication ceremony called for every available official in the area of the city that day to appear. As servants of their emperor, they were to give the appropriate honors to his deity. The signal to prostrate themselves before the idol was the sound of a symphony orchestra, composed of every musical instrument known at that time, including a few borrowed from far distant lands. Some of the instruments are listed with their Greek names because they hadn't been seen in Babylon long enough to have a local name. Apparently everyone did their duty.
However, the Chaldean magi had a complaint. Naturally, this was after they were nearly destroyed and were saved by Daniel. Wholly ungrateful, they made note to the Emperor Daniel's three friends did not bow before the image. His anger was typical of rulers detecting treason in his high officials. Feeling somewhat indebted to them, he gave them another chance. Their answer was that he shouldn't go to so much trouble, because it wouldn't change anything. The narrative shows them as plain-speaking, without all the empty adulation which seemed to irritate rulers of intelligence, even if it was proper protocol. Thus, they weren't disrespectful; they simply got to the point. They weren't going to give honor and glory to any other god but Jehovah. It didn't matter if it cost their lives, nor how horrible such a death might be. If it mattered to Him, their God could save them, or let them toast as He pleased. The point was not lost on Nebuchadnezzar they considered Jehovah above his gods.
The brick kilns of Babylon had developed over several thousand years at this point. They were quite large, and evidence indicates most of them were round, partially sunk into the earth, and made themselves of several layers of brick. There was a single side door, and entering meant stepping down a ways. Fresh clay blocks were taken inside, arranged in stacks along the walls. The center was an oven or a fire pit, with a chimney above that. The fire was stoked, the door sealed, and the flames allowed to burn down, most likely overnight. As soon as it was cooled down enough, the door was unsealed and the finished bricks hauled out. To use these ovens as a means of execution is hardly surprising, given Babylonian brutality.
With such a direct answer, the Emperor was hotter in temper than the oven. If nothing else, it was deeply embarrassing for such protected officials to defy him publicly. He ordered the slaves to build a fire "seven times hotter" than normal, but we would be fools to think this is a literal expression, as if there was some means to measure the temperature accurately. Seven was a number symbolizing sacredness in a very broad sense, and these men were being offered to the god they had offended. Further, they were not stripped as most victims, but bundled up in ropes fully clothed, including their turbans. The command to throw them in fell on captains over the guards who normally executed this duty, symbolizing the utter necessity of it being done right. By getting close enough to toss them in, the captains died from heat exposure. That is, they swooned from the heat, and no one could get to them before they died, because the heat was too intense. It suggests the side door was used, and left open. Without a load of bricks to bake, the men slid down to fire itself.
No one knows how much time passed before Nebuchadnezzar looked to see, but it seems to have been rather soon. Perhaps this situation called for watching the victims incinerate, as a sort of ceremonial overabundance of effort to insure they did, indeed, die. They didn't. From his seat far enough away to be safe, but still close enough to watch, he noticed the men were unbound, alive, and not alone. He asked his advisers to make sure he wasn't seeing a vision. The term he used to describe the fourth character inside was common to that culture as anyone clearly not human, but above that. Any angelic being would be called the same thing by a Babylonian, and it might be used of exceptional men. Insisting we see it as a theophany of Jesus Christ is bad theology, silly pietism, because it would have had no meaning to Nebuchadnezzar, the one who needed the lesson here.
This sight so amazed Nebuchadnezzar he stood up and walked toward the kiln as close as he dared go. Calling out to those inside, he asked them by the name of their God, as he knew it, to come back out. Do not miss the point that he humbles himself before that God. They clambered out unharmed. Aside from the lack of bonds, they were completely untouched by the fire, nor so much as smelled of smoke. Nebuchadnezzar then publicly confessed the greatness of a God who could do such a thing. Then he declared their religion protected by the throne. Never again would they have to find ways to get around Imperial policies contrary to the Law of Moses. They were exempt. Further, no one in the empire was allowed to disparage their religion. This would forever shut up Chaldean magi in their carping about the Jewish upstarts. At this point, it is safe to say Nebuchadnezzar gave Jehovah an honored place in his pantheon. His later actions indicate little more, but at least that much.
In the end, the magi were frustrated. Not only did they fail to get rid of these three, but the men were promoted even higher above them. We don't hear from the trio again. We are left with an image of men who prospered and did not face any more hassles.
The few who balked at such polytheistic practices were the three close friends of Daniel: Shadrach, Mishach, and Abednego, as they were known by their Babylonian names. In keeping with their previous efforts to remain faithful to Jehovah, they at least rejected the notion they could worship other gods, whether real or imagined.
We aren't told where this fits in with the chronology, and there's no reason to assume anything about it. Nor are we told where Daniel was when this happened, because he's not in the picture. We are told simply there was a time when Nebuchadnezzar had an image constructed which was quite large, and it was plated with gold. To envision something so large cast in pure gold would be quite unreasonable, especially given the known practices of the day. Nor should we imagine the basic material was stone. It was brick, or perhaps wood and brick. In the area around ancient Babylon, since as far back as the first Babylon under Nimrod, the only building material available was clay fired in ovens to make bricks, and held together by petroleum tar. The entire city was built of such material. The image could have been anything, and was likely a brick column, with perhaps something mounted on top to represent any of Nebuchadnezzar's favored deities.
The dedication ceremony called for every available official in the area of the city that day to appear. As servants of their emperor, they were to give the appropriate honors to his deity. The signal to prostrate themselves before the idol was the sound of a symphony orchestra, composed of every musical instrument known at that time, including a few borrowed from far distant lands. Some of the instruments are listed with their Greek names because they hadn't been seen in Babylon long enough to have a local name. Apparently everyone did their duty.
However, the Chaldean magi had a complaint. Naturally, this was after they were nearly destroyed and were saved by Daniel. Wholly ungrateful, they made note to the Emperor Daniel's three friends did not bow before the image. His anger was typical of rulers detecting treason in his high officials. Feeling somewhat indebted to them, he gave them another chance. Their answer was that he shouldn't go to so much trouble, because it wouldn't change anything. The narrative shows them as plain-speaking, without all the empty adulation which seemed to irritate rulers of intelligence, even if it was proper protocol. Thus, they weren't disrespectful; they simply got to the point. They weren't going to give honor and glory to any other god but Jehovah. It didn't matter if it cost their lives, nor how horrible such a death might be. If it mattered to Him, their God could save them, or let them toast as He pleased. The point was not lost on Nebuchadnezzar they considered Jehovah above his gods.
The brick kilns of Babylon had developed over several thousand years at this point. They were quite large, and evidence indicates most of them were round, partially sunk into the earth, and made themselves of several layers of brick. There was a single side door, and entering meant stepping down a ways. Fresh clay blocks were taken inside, arranged in stacks along the walls. The center was an oven or a fire pit, with a chimney above that. The fire was stoked, the door sealed, and the flames allowed to burn down, most likely overnight. As soon as it was cooled down enough, the door was unsealed and the finished bricks hauled out. To use these ovens as a means of execution is hardly surprising, given Babylonian brutality.
With such a direct answer, the Emperor was hotter in temper than the oven. If nothing else, it was deeply embarrassing for such protected officials to defy him publicly. He ordered the slaves to build a fire "seven times hotter" than normal, but we would be fools to think this is a literal expression, as if there was some means to measure the temperature accurately. Seven was a number symbolizing sacredness in a very broad sense, and these men were being offered to the god they had offended. Further, they were not stripped as most victims, but bundled up in ropes fully clothed, including their turbans. The command to throw them in fell on captains over the guards who normally executed this duty, symbolizing the utter necessity of it being done right. By getting close enough to toss them in, the captains died from heat exposure. That is, they swooned from the heat, and no one could get to them before they died, because the heat was too intense. It suggests the side door was used, and left open. Without a load of bricks to bake, the men slid down to fire itself.
No one knows how much time passed before Nebuchadnezzar looked to see, but it seems to have been rather soon. Perhaps this situation called for watching the victims incinerate, as a sort of ceremonial overabundance of effort to insure they did, indeed, die. They didn't. From his seat far enough away to be safe, but still close enough to watch, he noticed the men were unbound, alive, and not alone. He asked his advisers to make sure he wasn't seeing a vision. The term he used to describe the fourth character inside was common to that culture as anyone clearly not human, but above that. Any angelic being would be called the same thing by a Babylonian, and it might be used of exceptional men. Insisting we see it as a theophany of Jesus Christ is bad theology, silly pietism, because it would have had no meaning to Nebuchadnezzar, the one who needed the lesson here.
This sight so amazed Nebuchadnezzar he stood up and walked toward the kiln as close as he dared go. Calling out to those inside, he asked them by the name of their God, as he knew it, to come back out. Do not miss the point that he humbles himself before that God. They clambered out unharmed. Aside from the lack of bonds, they were completely untouched by the fire, nor so much as smelled of smoke. Nebuchadnezzar then publicly confessed the greatness of a God who could do such a thing. Then he declared their religion protected by the throne. Never again would they have to find ways to get around Imperial policies contrary to the Law of Moses. They were exempt. Further, no one in the empire was allowed to disparage their religion. This would forever shut up Chaldean magi in their carping about the Jewish upstarts. At this point, it is safe to say Nebuchadnezzar gave Jehovah an honored place in his pantheon. His later actions indicate little more, but at least that much.
In the end, the magi were frustrated. Not only did they fail to get rid of these three, but the men were promoted even higher above them. We don't hear from the trio again. We are left with an image of men who prospered and did not face any more hassles.
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Ancient Warfare
In order to provide a fuller context for details in Daniel and throughout the Old Testament, it behooves us to understand the basic elements of ancient warfare, and it's place in ancient societies.
The fundamental element of any king or other ruler is the task of warlord. If there weren't some sort of threat to the tribe, there'd be no reason at all to give anyone emergency power. However, once the warlord is chosen, and the threat is handled, some how things are never the same. Over time, particularly with success in defending against threats, the office becomes rather permanent, as well as the emergency powers. Sounds familiar, no?
When the office of warlord slips over into actual rule as king, the growth of the realm naturally requires full time bodyguards, as well as other lieutenants. These must be generally freed from regular labor, so there is a "leisure class" which is able to pursue military training and so forth as full time warriors. As the warlord becomes king, the warriors become nobility. As things improve economically, the nobility become wealthier. As they are better fed, they are naturally larger. However, selection of competent warriors usually results in that class being somewhat healthier in the first place.
Semitic culture and customs require the separation between noble and peasant be a small one. Many nobles arise as much from the fortunes of being the first born of a clan as from warrior talents. At some point, these warriors actually have to justify their place by leading into battle. The peasants are conscripted en masse, and most of them are expected to be capable of using the ancient weapons available. They are hardly as skillful or as well equipped as the warriors, but often receive some peace-time training at least, as well as provided some weapons.
The warriors lead into battle quite literally. In the most primitive of societies, the attack was generally single file, with the commander in front. Surviving combat repeatedly means you keep your command position, obviously. In later times, these men would lead a formation behind them. Tactics advanced to the point where simply keeping your formation together in ranks was pretty much a victory in itself, not to mention the most effective way to do battle in melee conditions.
Even within the Nation of Israel, there was a perception one went into battle with full courage only because God was with you. It was the general assumption of all Semite races. If you trusted in your god, you held your formation. If you fled, your god had abandoned you. During the Conquest, we see such phrases used often. If the Lord was with them, they won. It was not a matter of mass slaughter, though it might turn out that way. It was a matter of getting your enemy to break ranks and flee. Most all victories were essentially psychological. Most defeated enemies followed the rules and capitulated, at least for a time.
Thus, the phrase "greatest warrior" or "mightiest men" was more about leadership than physical size and power. While the latter was often true, it was beside the point. I scrawny runt with skill, speed and lots of courage was also a "mighty man." His battle success naturally got the king's attention, and the fellow got promoted. If he charged fearlessly into enemy formations, mowing down a path, there was a tendency for the conscripts in formation behind him to follow through. If he fell, they were quite likely to run. Warriors who survived repeated battles were chosen by God, de facto. Thus, they were the leaders.
Some ancient empires found ways to gain distinct advantages over this standard situation. The Hittites were the first to mass-produce iron weapons, a clear advantage over bronze, wood and such. The Assyrians simply massed more troops than anybody else. Babylon seems to have given their conscripts better training and weapons, so they were much more like full-time warriors across the board. A formation of warriors beats a formation of part-time conscripts any day. In all these cultures, it was a mixture of things which made one a combat leader. As above, it included noble birth, combat experience and success, but there seems to have been some actual leadership training, too. In Israel, a man who got training usually got it from a father or other close male relative. He might get some attention and be promoted from the conscripts, but training was iffy at best.
The other distinct advantage in Babylon was the brutality of the troops. Most armies respected certain widely known protocols, and observed certain limits. Babylon paid scant heed to such things. They offered but a single chance to capitulate, after which there was no quarter offered in any way. While a city or army might surrender after some fighting, it was almost surely no better than fighting to the death, just quicker. Survivors not taken at the place of battle were inevitably conscripted into the military, or enslaved.
The fundamental element of any king or other ruler is the task of warlord. If there weren't some sort of threat to the tribe, there'd be no reason at all to give anyone emergency power. However, once the warlord is chosen, and the threat is handled, some how things are never the same. Over time, particularly with success in defending against threats, the office becomes rather permanent, as well as the emergency powers. Sounds familiar, no?
When the office of warlord slips over into actual rule as king, the growth of the realm naturally requires full time bodyguards, as well as other lieutenants. These must be generally freed from regular labor, so there is a "leisure class" which is able to pursue military training and so forth as full time warriors. As the warlord becomes king, the warriors become nobility. As things improve economically, the nobility become wealthier. As they are better fed, they are naturally larger. However, selection of competent warriors usually results in that class being somewhat healthier in the first place.
Semitic culture and customs require the separation between noble and peasant be a small one. Many nobles arise as much from the fortunes of being the first born of a clan as from warrior talents. At some point, these warriors actually have to justify their place by leading into battle. The peasants are conscripted en masse, and most of them are expected to be capable of using the ancient weapons available. They are hardly as skillful or as well equipped as the warriors, but often receive some peace-time training at least, as well as provided some weapons.
The warriors lead into battle quite literally. In the most primitive of societies, the attack was generally single file, with the commander in front. Surviving combat repeatedly means you keep your command position, obviously. In later times, these men would lead a formation behind them. Tactics advanced to the point where simply keeping your formation together in ranks was pretty much a victory in itself, not to mention the most effective way to do battle in melee conditions.
Even within the Nation of Israel, there was a perception one went into battle with full courage only because God was with you. It was the general assumption of all Semite races. If you trusted in your god, you held your formation. If you fled, your god had abandoned you. During the Conquest, we see such phrases used often. If the Lord was with them, they won. It was not a matter of mass slaughter, though it might turn out that way. It was a matter of getting your enemy to break ranks and flee. Most all victories were essentially psychological. Most defeated enemies followed the rules and capitulated, at least for a time.
Thus, the phrase "greatest warrior" or "mightiest men" was more about leadership than physical size and power. While the latter was often true, it was beside the point. I scrawny runt with skill, speed and lots of courage was also a "mighty man." His battle success naturally got the king's attention, and the fellow got promoted. If he charged fearlessly into enemy formations, mowing down a path, there was a tendency for the conscripts in formation behind him to follow through. If he fell, they were quite likely to run. Warriors who survived repeated battles were chosen by God, de facto. Thus, they were the leaders.
Some ancient empires found ways to gain distinct advantages over this standard situation. The Hittites were the first to mass-produce iron weapons, a clear advantage over bronze, wood and such. The Assyrians simply massed more troops than anybody else. Babylon seems to have given their conscripts better training and weapons, so they were much more like full-time warriors across the board. A formation of warriors beats a formation of part-time conscripts any day. In all these cultures, it was a mixture of things which made one a combat leader. As above, it included noble birth, combat experience and success, but there seems to have been some actual leadership training, too. In Israel, a man who got training usually got it from a father or other close male relative. He might get some attention and be promoted from the conscripts, but training was iffy at best.
The other distinct advantage in Babylon was the brutality of the troops. Most armies respected certain widely known protocols, and observed certain limits. Babylon paid scant heed to such things. They offered but a single chance to capitulate, after which there was no quarter offered in any way. While a city or army might surrender after some fighting, it was almost surely no better than fighting to the death, just quicker. Survivors not taken at the place of battle were inevitably conscripted into the military, or enslaved.
Monday, November 12, 2007
Just a Reminder: West versus East
There's not good word for it, no apt phrase which isn't already loaded with useless baggage. While I consider it the quintessential "spiritual viewpoint" or "biblical understanding," you and I both know everyone and his dog have their own ideas about what that means. In the end, I often revert to using terms like "Hebraic" and "Eastern Mysticism" because those come closest to jarring people loose from their false rationalist basis. Even then, the academic meanings of the terms are dismissive, implying something less than civilized, something less than educated. Even among the "tolerant" public educators, recognizing children from other cultures learn differently from middle-class white Americans comes off dismissive, all the while they construct "inclusive" classroom methods. The aim remains to insure those "other learners" come out with a Western rationalist education.
That's all you can do, from the Western viewpoint. It's the unwritten, unspoken assumption that the analytical-inductive approach to knowledge is the only valid one. It's the crowning achievement of Western Civilization to put all other forms of human intellectual achievement under its feet. How often do I hear my own dear fellow believers insisting Western Civilization is the result of Christian influence on pagan European culture? Just whose brand of "Christianity" are we talking about? Aristotelianism, named after the pagan Greek philosopher, Aristotle. Sorry, but building faith on him is building on sand. He, in turn, built on Plato, who gave us this damnable heresy there was a barrier between the "real" and the "ideal" and that the former is not as good. Does no one realize that is wholly different from the understanding of those whose fingers produced the Scripture by which we claim to know our God? Let's get this straight: In it's fundamental existence before we got involved, all Creation was "very good" from God's viewpoint (Genesis 1:31).
Perhaps the greatest achievement of Satan is stealing away organized Christian religion from its "Eastern Mystical" Hebrew roots. Does it occur to no one to notice? God chose the Hebrew cultural background as the one best place to reveal Himself. Do we now suppose He made some mistake, and had to create Western rationalism to give its final expression? Look at it for moment. Our modern Western world arose from the fusion of pagan Greek philosophy, blended with pagan Germanic-Nordic tribal culture, to produce a cold and lifeless set of assumptions which posits this world is all we have. Whatever else there may be in any other alleged plane of existence, it is beneath our notice, it says. Its highest expression came in the Enlightenment, a very anti-Christian viewpoint which gave birth to Deism in all its various expressions. God help us -- some ninety percent of our modern Western theology starts from Enlightenment assumptions, using the Enlightenment frame of reference, and the Enlightenment methods to arrive somehow at a gospel message born in Eastern cultures. This is why I reject the latter Reformation structure of the Westminster accords. They are inherently Aristotelian, seeking an analytical logical precision which would be abhorrent to Hebrew minds.
Reading the Greek New Testament with a Greek mind will help you with words and phrases, but if you stop there, you don't know much. You have to dig down past the linguistic framework to see the fundamental parabolic frame of mind from which Jesus Christ Himself taught His disciples. Paul did his best to bridge the gap, but everyone insists on ignoring that man was born Hebrew. Do we not note James, the brother of Jesus, in his letter insisted on removing the false conceptual barrier between faith and action? That division was a Greek idea; the unity of human behavior with human thought is a distinctly Eastern idea. To then see James as preaching salvation by works is just the other side of Greek madness. What you do expresses what commitments hold you. It's widely known if you change your behavior intentionally, you will have a least some idea where your commitments are wrong, but the changing the commitments is the point. If the behavior change won't stick, you haven't changed. Commitment is another word for faith.
In the Hebrew mind, this world was at best a poor reflection of spiritual truths. They acknowledged a spiritual realm, but symbolized it as being in the sky. They knew spirit beings were present at all times, but not always manifested directly. Most of the time, spiritual reality could not be grasped by fallen minds, but only as a miracle act of God bringing His brand of "enlightenment." There wasn't some divide in the "real world," but a sense we were blinded from seeing ultimate reality present at hand. All of life was a struggle to catch the glimpses God offered -- He is both just and merciful -- in this world by matching events to what had already been revealed. All of wisdom was deduction, not discovery; it came down from above, it was truth and understanding ordered by an eternal touch from God. The barrier was in us, not in Creation. That is so fundamentally opposite of our native mental framework, we have to spend hours explaining it from the pulpit and in the classroom. Given the looks of things in organized Christian religion, we still aren't getting it.
Not every burning bush is an omen of God. Many are simply on fire and being consumed. While there may be some truth observed there, some devotional lesson there, it only works that way insofar as the Holy Spirit is present. Yes, all His work lines up with the written record of God's revelation, so don't act like a Charismatic with some "new revelation from God." The Canon is closed; revelation is finished until Christ returns. Yet He is a most active and living God (Hebrews 4:12), and the very best way to understand Him and the workings of His Spirit is to grasp the fundamental truth you can't explain it in concrete terms. That's because you can't explain Him in concrete terms. Concrete terms are great for building computers, and aren't too bad in pressing forward medical knowledge -- for both of these we give hearty thanks to God. But getting to know Him takes place somewhere outside the realm of logic, words, and mere knowledge and understanding. The ultimate truth of God is beyond all those, and rises to the conscious mind in ways we'll never grasp this side of Eternity. See? I can't even explain it this way.
The ultimate truth of God is never in the words. It is always in the Spirit to the spirit. Dead spirits don't learn. Jesus taught in parables because the living spirit touched by God understood it. A truly Western mind rejects that. If we do not place the Western
That's all you can do, from the Western viewpoint. It's the unwritten, unspoken assumption that the analytical-inductive approach to knowledge is the only valid one. It's the crowning achievement of Western Civilization to put all other forms of human intellectual achievement under its feet. How often do I hear my own dear fellow believers insisting Western Civilization is the result of Christian influence on pagan European culture? Just whose brand of "Christianity" are we talking about? Aristotelianism, named after the pagan Greek philosopher, Aristotle. Sorry, but building faith on him is building on sand. He, in turn, built on Plato, who gave us this damnable heresy there was a barrier between the "real" and the "ideal" and that the former is not as good. Does no one realize that is wholly different from the understanding of those whose fingers produced the Scripture by which we claim to know our God? Let's get this straight: In it's fundamental existence before we got involved, all Creation was "very good" from God's viewpoint (Genesis 1:31).
Perhaps the greatest achievement of Satan is stealing away organized Christian religion from its "Eastern Mystical" Hebrew roots. Does it occur to no one to notice? God chose the Hebrew cultural background as the one best place to reveal Himself. Do we now suppose He made some mistake, and had to create Western rationalism to give its final expression? Look at it for moment. Our modern Western world arose from the fusion of pagan Greek philosophy, blended with pagan Germanic-Nordic tribal culture, to produce a cold and lifeless set of assumptions which posits this world is all we have. Whatever else there may be in any other alleged plane of existence, it is beneath our notice, it says. Its highest expression came in the Enlightenment, a very anti-Christian viewpoint which gave birth to Deism in all its various expressions. God help us -- some ninety percent of our modern Western theology starts from Enlightenment assumptions, using the Enlightenment frame of reference, and the Enlightenment methods to arrive somehow at a gospel message born in Eastern cultures. This is why I reject the latter Reformation structure of the Westminster accords. They are inherently Aristotelian, seeking an analytical logical precision which would be abhorrent to Hebrew minds.
Reading the Greek New Testament with a Greek mind will help you with words and phrases, but if you stop there, you don't know much. You have to dig down past the linguistic framework to see the fundamental parabolic frame of mind from which Jesus Christ Himself taught His disciples. Paul did his best to bridge the gap, but everyone insists on ignoring that man was born Hebrew. Do we not note James, the brother of Jesus, in his letter insisted on removing the false conceptual barrier between faith and action? That division was a Greek idea; the unity of human behavior with human thought is a distinctly Eastern idea. To then see James as preaching salvation by works is just the other side of Greek madness. What you do expresses what commitments hold you. It's widely known if you change your behavior intentionally, you will have a least some idea where your commitments are wrong, but the changing the commitments is the point. If the behavior change won't stick, you haven't changed. Commitment is another word for faith.
In the Hebrew mind, this world was at best a poor reflection of spiritual truths. They acknowledged a spiritual realm, but symbolized it as being in the sky. They knew spirit beings were present at all times, but not always manifested directly. Most of the time, spiritual reality could not be grasped by fallen minds, but only as a miracle act of God bringing His brand of "enlightenment." There wasn't some divide in the "real world," but a sense we were blinded from seeing ultimate reality present at hand. All of life was a struggle to catch the glimpses God offered -- He is both just and merciful -- in this world by matching events to what had already been revealed. All of wisdom was deduction, not discovery; it came down from above, it was truth and understanding ordered by an eternal touch from God. The barrier was in us, not in Creation. That is so fundamentally opposite of our native mental framework, we have to spend hours explaining it from the pulpit and in the classroom. Given the looks of things in organized Christian religion, we still aren't getting it.
Not every burning bush is an omen of God. Many are simply on fire and being consumed. While there may be some truth observed there, some devotional lesson there, it only works that way insofar as the Holy Spirit is present. Yes, all His work lines up with the written record of God's revelation, so don't act like a Charismatic with some "new revelation from God." The Canon is closed; revelation is finished until Christ returns. Yet He is a most active and living God (Hebrews 4:12), and the very best way to understand Him and the workings of His Spirit is to grasp the fundamental truth you can't explain it in concrete terms. That's because you can't explain Him in concrete terms. Concrete terms are great for building computers, and aren't too bad in pressing forward medical knowledge -- for both of these we give hearty thanks to God. But getting to know Him takes place somewhere outside the realm of logic, words, and mere knowledge and understanding. The ultimate truth of God is beyond all those, and rises to the conscious mind in ways we'll never grasp this side of Eternity. See? I can't even explain it this way.
The ultimate truth of God is never in the words. It is always in the Spirit to the spirit. Dead spirits don't learn. Jesus taught in parables because the living spirit touched by God understood it. A truly Western mind rejects that. If we do not place the Western
Sunday, November 11, 2007
Veterans' Day, 2007: My Prayer
Tomorrow, Lord willing, I'm going to the local Golden Corral restaurant and enjoy a free buffet meal as a veteran of the US Military. It so happens I am also a 50% disabled veteran, but I'm doing really well. I'm not employed regularly, but my pension is enough to make life tolerable on the resources available to my household. I'm going to the free meal in part because I can't afford to eat there often at my own expense. Still, I'm blessed far more than I deserve.
I suppose the attitude of support which makes such celebrations possible will continue in the main population of the US. Too bad the current administration, and perhaps many in Congress, pay only lip service to such sentiment. Maybe you've read about the returning injured vets, getting accommodations which the homeless might reject. Maybe you know a huge portion of the homeless are vets, anyway. Maybe you know the medical care is uneven, at best, and many don't get any at all. And how many returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, sorely wounded and barely holding onto life, and are charged for lost equipment? How many find their stored property sold out from under them? How many have lost their homes because military pay could hardly match their civilian wages?
Perhaps you suggest they are doing the best they can. You are mistaken. Find your own links, if you care:
I could go on, but you get the picture. These people are used and abused, and when they can't be sent out any more, they come home and are kicked out without any treatment because the upper command has ordered processing medical centers to find any bogus excuse to mark their injuries "pre-existing conditions." If you don't think the DoD is run on unwritten policies, you've never worn a uniform.
This reflects the policy of the current administration all the way up the chain to the POTUS. While I might be able to deduce some motives, it won't make any difference. He's running our troops through the grinder, and obviously it's intentional. My prayer is these veterans somehow get just a little bit of what was promised them. Until they do, my celebrations will be pretty somber.
I suppose the attitude of support which makes such celebrations possible will continue in the main population of the US. Too bad the current administration, and perhaps many in Congress, pay only lip service to such sentiment. Maybe you've read about the returning injured vets, getting accommodations which the homeless might reject. Maybe you know a huge portion of the homeless are vets, anyway. Maybe you know the medical care is uneven, at best, and many don't get any at all. And how many returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, sorely wounded and barely holding onto life, and are charged for lost equipment? How many find their stored property sold out from under them? How many have lost their homes because military pay could hardly match their civilian wages?
Perhaps you suggest they are doing the best they can. You are mistaken. Find your own links, if you care:
- Not one single justification offered by our government for going over there has stood up to scrutiny. Make up your own guess about the "real purpose," but the standard reasons offered so far are flat out lies. That millions of well-meaning fools repeat them daily does make them true.
- Tons of small arms and explosives we shipped simply disappeared after arriving in Iraq.
- Way too many "terrorist bombings" in Iraq can be traced to CIA/MI6/Mossad and friends.
- Almost no actions are taken against fraud and graft. Sure, some criminal cases do make the news, but nothing compared to the number of people caught whose names are never seen in the mainstream media.
- Supply contracts for the troops are often fraudulent. Remember the unusable fuel loads, the contaminated drinking water, the lack of weapons and armor? Nothing has been done to correct any of this.
- Whistleblowers are unanimously punished.
I could go on, but you get the picture. These people are used and abused, and when they can't be sent out any more, they come home and are kicked out without any treatment because the upper command has ordered processing medical centers to find any bogus excuse to mark their injuries "pre-existing conditions." If you don't think the DoD is run on unwritten policies, you've never worn a uniform.
This reflects the policy of the current administration all the way up the chain to the POTUS. While I might be able to deduce some motives, it won't make any difference. He's running our troops through the grinder, and obviously it's intentional. My prayer is these veterans somehow get just a little bit of what was promised them. Until they do, my celebrations will be pretty somber.
Saturday, November 10, 2007
Life of Christ: Matthew 17
The context keeps us on the retreat north from Galilee, up near Caeserea Philippi, roughly a week after Peter's dramatic declaration that Jesus was the Messiah. The apparent reason for the retreat was avoiding an untimely arrest by the Sanhedrin. Jesus must insure He dies as the Passover Lamb. This is not some cynical plot to appear falsely as the Messiah, but obedience to the Law and Prophets, the Word of His Father. Furthermore, it was necessary His Disciples receive further training. After the coming of the Holy Spirit, all these experiences and teachings would be recalled with their proper meaning.
Having already vested Peter as the leader among the Disciples, Jesus adds the Sons of Zebedee to round out the leadership team. Their fitness for this became more apparent after the Day of Pentecost. Until that point, we see them jockeying for privilege as if they possess very little understanding. However, it's safe to assume a certain level of kinship and fellowship which exceeded merely being cousins of Jesus. As a man, He very much needed their support for the coming trial, along with having someone trustworthy in charge during the early days of building His Kingdom. Their leadership training begins with a demonstration of some things Jesus had been teaching all along.
While a lot of ink has been spilled over which mountain it was they climbed, it hardly matters. That's part of the lesson here. We can safely assume it was part of Mount Hermon or some other major rise which afforded Jesus and the trio some measure of privacy. They needed very much to realize this was not about politics and privilege, but about the ongoing work of revelation. Thus, in the middle of prayer over their task as leaders, they witnessed a transformation in their Master. He took on the form of His true identity. While much of the lore common to Hebrew teaching has been lost, we know at least when the divine comes into contact with the fallen Creation, there is a glow which is clearly unearthly. Significantly, two figures appear at His side: Moses and Elijah. While the latter had a mode of dress which made him distinctive 2 Kings 1:8), and copied by John the Baptist as the signal he was calling all men to repent (Matthew 3:4), we aren't told of a distinctive garb for Moses. More than likely, their exchange of greetings and conversation with Jesus was more than enough to establish who they were. While the symbolism is thick, most important is their endorsement of Jesus and His teaching, representing all the Law and the Prophets. Were than any doubt about Jesus correctly teaching what the Old Testament was all about, it was removed here. There were three ordinary witnesses to testify, sufficient in any Jewish court, that Jesus was God's clearest revelation. It didn't matter where they were; where Jesus was, all God's glory and truth was present.
This was no quick flash, no brief conversation. Peter recovered enough from his amazement to show he clearly had not grasped the meaning of it all. Still thinking along the lines of an earthly paradise ruled by Jesus, he suggested building on the mountain top a meeting place, with hopes of keeping Moses and Elijah around for awhile. Surely Peter had a thousand questions he would ask them to clarify matters in his own mind. Before Peter even finished proposing this, the presence of God Himself -- described as both an enveloping cloudy presence, yet luminescent -- overwhelmed them all. The voice from the cloud affirmed Jesus was the Son of God, but pointedly told Peter and his two cousins there was no need to probe the matter with Moses and Elijah. All they needed to know came from the mouth of Jesus, because Jehovah was completely satisfied with their Master's work. The voice was enough to make them swoon, with the altogether normal response of any human to the presence of God Almighty: complete and utter fear, reverence and awe.
Jesus came over and touched them, a warm and friendly gesture. His words were, "Arise, fear not." Words not idly chosen, He pronounced them fit to stand before God, if they would take up the faith to do so. Upon looking around, they saw the dramatic scene was gone. While it burned in the minds, Jesus warned they were not to relate this experience until after His resurrection. This presented a problem for them. Was it not prophesied Elijah had to appear before the Messiah could begin to reign (Malachi 4:5-6)? Surely this required announcement! Jesus answered this was true, and had already happened, but Elijah's message was rejected, and he was treated very badly. They realized this prophecy was fulfilled in John the Baptist, who even dressed like Elijah. To the degree Israel would accept his message, all things were restored, but only a small righteous remnant did not bow the knee to a false understanding of God's Word (1 Kings 19:18). Yet from this tiny remnant of Israel, Jesus had promised to build His Kingdom, a spiritual kingdom. Everything had to be understood in the spiritual sense, from the other-worldly mind of the ancient faith.
As always, Jesus had been teaching crowds who needed healing, gathered in open areas outside the towns and cities. They descended from the mountaintop experience to find the usual crowd, but with an unusual problem. A young boy was demonized, as manifested by a condition literally translated as "moon-struck." Whether it resembled modern epilepsy isn't important. What mattered is the boy was seized suddenly by the demon at times, and too often the seizures found him falling into danger. The other nine disciples had been unable to cast the demon out. Just whose faith was the failure also didn't matter. The whole Jewish nation had been so long and so far separated from Moses and the Prophets, they simply could not grasp the underlying message of Jesus, that message which empowered His miracles. Taking His divine authority, Jesus dismissed the demon. Notice, while Jesus had given His disciples authority over sickness and demons (Matthew 10:1), the authority remained His (Jude 1:9). The lack of persistence in using this delegated authority indicated a lack of faith.
When they later asked Jesus privately why they failed this time, His answer points to something we easily miss. The power of faith while in this world, and over things of this world, is by no means related to power as this world understands it. The weakness of the flesh is the problem, but paradoxically is the answer, too. To aggressively weaken the flesh spiritually is to empower the spirit over the flesh. Thus, it is hardly a matter of ritual self-abuse, but a holy disregard for things of lesser importance to engage spiritual powers in the spirit realm in a spiritual way. The phrase "prayer and fasting" was symbolic of self-mortification. We as humans are nothing, and thinking we are something is the fundamental failure. By implication, we see the disciples were not acting in faith, but in some way exhibited an element of self pride. That's hardly surprising when, for the first time we know of, there was an element of segregation between the three and the nine. The nine did not take it well. To the very last day of Jesus' ministry on earth, they struggled with this human ambition to be seen as great in the eyes of others. By this time they should have passed the period of discipleship where they silently absorb the master's teaching, and were now ready to begin acting on it. Had they actually absorbed His teaching, commanding the Mount of Transfiguration itself to jump into the sea would have been an elementary task for neophytes. As we saw in the previous lesson, the key to that power was to embrace death. Their spiritual understanding, and thus their commitment -- another word for "faith" -- to this life of the Spirit didn't amount to the mustard seed Jesus mentioned once before (Matthew 13:31).
Eventually they all made their way back toward Capernaum. On the way, it surely crossed their minds they were once again coming within easy reach of the Sanhedrin. It was the right time to approach once again the matter of His impending suffering and death. Jesus' point was to show this would be the path to His conquest, His ultimate victory. They didn't see it. Instead, they grieved at their sense of loss. Things were just beginning to firm up, they must have thought. Now it would all come apart. They never quite grasped that actions of human government, even to the point of taking life, could hardly interrupt the God's plans for His Kingdom.
Indeed, Jesus showed a simple principle in dealing with human government. It was well past the time of year for paying the Temple Tax (Exodus 30:11-16). Peter was confronted by the local committee for that tax, asking in essence why he and Jesus had not paid it. Was Jesus some kind of rebel against His nation? Peter didn't think so, but hurried off to discuss it with Jesus. They didn't have the money. Before Peter could ask, Jesus wanted to clarify the principles involved. It was common knowledge tribute was collected by rulers from conquered nations, not their own people. The priests were exempt; even more so was the God whose Temple it was. As Son of God, He and His close Disciples were exempt by the nature of their duties. By extension, the entire Law of Moses and Prophets was subject to Jesus' interpretation. The Mount of Transfiguration made that all too obvious. Following Christ fulfilled the Law.
Yet, there was little to be gained by asserting that privilege at every turn. In the case of the Temple Tax, it was best to pay up. Since they were broke, Peter needed to return to his previous employment to pay. However, not in the sense of fishing from a boat all night, or even in the surf. Rather, Peter was to throw in a single hook and take the first fish which he caught. Fishermen today know anything bright and shiny dropped in the water serves to lure some fish to bite. In the busy port of Capernaum, how many coins were accidentally lost in the sea? In this case, Peter would find in the mouth of this fish a coin of sufficient value to pay the tax for Jesus and Peter. Apparently the fish itself would be small enough he couldn't swallow it, so it was all good Hebrew joke on Peter the fisherman. Meanwhile, Jesus and His friends stayed under the radar just a bit longer.
Having already vested Peter as the leader among the Disciples, Jesus adds the Sons of Zebedee to round out the leadership team. Their fitness for this became more apparent after the Day of Pentecost. Until that point, we see them jockeying for privilege as if they possess very little understanding. However, it's safe to assume a certain level of kinship and fellowship which exceeded merely being cousins of Jesus. As a man, He very much needed their support for the coming trial, along with having someone trustworthy in charge during the early days of building His Kingdom. Their leadership training begins with a demonstration of some things Jesus had been teaching all along.
While a lot of ink has been spilled over which mountain it was they climbed, it hardly matters. That's part of the lesson here. We can safely assume it was part of Mount Hermon or some other major rise which afforded Jesus and the trio some measure of privacy. They needed very much to realize this was not about politics and privilege, but about the ongoing work of revelation. Thus, in the middle of prayer over their task as leaders, they witnessed a transformation in their Master. He took on the form of His true identity. While much of the lore common to Hebrew teaching has been lost, we know at least when the divine comes into contact with the fallen Creation, there is a glow which is clearly unearthly. Significantly, two figures appear at His side: Moses and Elijah. While the latter had a mode of dress which made him distinctive 2 Kings 1:8), and copied by John the Baptist as the signal he was calling all men to repent (Matthew 3:4), we aren't told of a distinctive garb for Moses. More than likely, their exchange of greetings and conversation with Jesus was more than enough to establish who they were. While the symbolism is thick, most important is their endorsement of Jesus and His teaching, representing all the Law and the Prophets. Were than any doubt about Jesus correctly teaching what the Old Testament was all about, it was removed here. There were three ordinary witnesses to testify, sufficient in any Jewish court, that Jesus was God's clearest revelation. It didn't matter where they were; where Jesus was, all God's glory and truth was present.
This was no quick flash, no brief conversation. Peter recovered enough from his amazement to show he clearly had not grasped the meaning of it all. Still thinking along the lines of an earthly paradise ruled by Jesus, he suggested building on the mountain top a meeting place, with hopes of keeping Moses and Elijah around for awhile. Surely Peter had a thousand questions he would ask them to clarify matters in his own mind. Before Peter even finished proposing this, the presence of God Himself -- described as both an enveloping cloudy presence, yet luminescent -- overwhelmed them all. The voice from the cloud affirmed Jesus was the Son of God, but pointedly told Peter and his two cousins there was no need to probe the matter with Moses and Elijah. All they needed to know came from the mouth of Jesus, because Jehovah was completely satisfied with their Master's work. The voice was enough to make them swoon, with the altogether normal response of any human to the presence of God Almighty: complete and utter fear, reverence and awe.
Jesus came over and touched them, a warm and friendly gesture. His words were, "Arise, fear not." Words not idly chosen, He pronounced them fit to stand before God, if they would take up the faith to do so. Upon looking around, they saw the dramatic scene was gone. While it burned in the minds, Jesus warned they were not to relate this experience until after His resurrection. This presented a problem for them. Was it not prophesied Elijah had to appear before the Messiah could begin to reign (Malachi 4:5-6)? Surely this required announcement! Jesus answered this was true, and had already happened, but Elijah's message was rejected, and he was treated very badly. They realized this prophecy was fulfilled in John the Baptist, who even dressed like Elijah. To the degree Israel would accept his message, all things were restored, but only a small righteous remnant did not bow the knee to a false understanding of God's Word (1 Kings 19:18). Yet from this tiny remnant of Israel, Jesus had promised to build His Kingdom, a spiritual kingdom. Everything had to be understood in the spiritual sense, from the other-worldly mind of the ancient faith.
As always, Jesus had been teaching crowds who needed healing, gathered in open areas outside the towns and cities. They descended from the mountaintop experience to find the usual crowd, but with an unusual problem. A young boy was demonized, as manifested by a condition literally translated as "moon-struck." Whether it resembled modern epilepsy isn't important. What mattered is the boy was seized suddenly by the demon at times, and too often the seizures found him falling into danger. The other nine disciples had been unable to cast the demon out. Just whose faith was the failure also didn't matter. The whole Jewish nation had been so long and so far separated from Moses and the Prophets, they simply could not grasp the underlying message of Jesus, that message which empowered His miracles. Taking His divine authority, Jesus dismissed the demon. Notice, while Jesus had given His disciples authority over sickness and demons (Matthew 10:1), the authority remained His (Jude 1:9). The lack of persistence in using this delegated authority indicated a lack of faith.
When they later asked Jesus privately why they failed this time, His answer points to something we easily miss. The power of faith while in this world, and over things of this world, is by no means related to power as this world understands it. The weakness of the flesh is the problem, but paradoxically is the answer, too. To aggressively weaken the flesh spiritually is to empower the spirit over the flesh. Thus, it is hardly a matter of ritual self-abuse, but a holy disregard for things of lesser importance to engage spiritual powers in the spirit realm in a spiritual way. The phrase "prayer and fasting" was symbolic of self-mortification. We as humans are nothing, and thinking we are something is the fundamental failure. By implication, we see the disciples were not acting in faith, but in some way exhibited an element of self pride. That's hardly surprising when, for the first time we know of, there was an element of segregation between the three and the nine. The nine did not take it well. To the very last day of Jesus' ministry on earth, they struggled with this human ambition to be seen as great in the eyes of others. By this time they should have passed the period of discipleship where they silently absorb the master's teaching, and were now ready to begin acting on it. Had they actually absorbed His teaching, commanding the Mount of Transfiguration itself to jump into the sea would have been an elementary task for neophytes. As we saw in the previous lesson, the key to that power was to embrace death. Their spiritual understanding, and thus their commitment -- another word for "faith" -- to this life of the Spirit didn't amount to the mustard seed Jesus mentioned once before (Matthew 13:31).
Eventually they all made their way back toward Capernaum. On the way, it surely crossed their minds they were once again coming within easy reach of the Sanhedrin. It was the right time to approach once again the matter of His impending suffering and death. Jesus' point was to show this would be the path to His conquest, His ultimate victory. They didn't see it. Instead, they grieved at their sense of loss. Things were just beginning to firm up, they must have thought. Now it would all come apart. They never quite grasped that actions of human government, even to the point of taking life, could hardly interrupt the God's plans for His Kingdom.
Indeed, Jesus showed a simple principle in dealing with human government. It was well past the time of year for paying the Temple Tax (Exodus 30:11-16). Peter was confronted by the local committee for that tax, asking in essence why he and Jesus had not paid it. Was Jesus some kind of rebel against His nation? Peter didn't think so, but hurried off to discuss it with Jesus. They didn't have the money. Before Peter could ask, Jesus wanted to clarify the principles involved. It was common knowledge tribute was collected by rulers from conquered nations, not their own people. The priests were exempt; even more so was the God whose Temple it was. As Son of God, He and His close Disciples were exempt by the nature of their duties. By extension, the entire Law of Moses and Prophets was subject to Jesus' interpretation. The Mount of Transfiguration made that all too obvious. Following Christ fulfilled the Law.
Yet, there was little to be gained by asserting that privilege at every turn. In the case of the Temple Tax, it was best to pay up. Since they were broke, Peter needed to return to his previous employment to pay. However, not in the sense of fishing from a boat all night, or even in the surf. Rather, Peter was to throw in a single hook and take the first fish which he caught. Fishermen today know anything bright and shiny dropped in the water serves to lure some fish to bite. In the busy port of Capernaum, how many coins were accidentally lost in the sea? In this case, Peter would find in the mouth of this fish a coin of sufficient value to pay the tax for Jesus and Peter. Apparently the fish itself would be small enough he couldn't swallow it, so it was all good Hebrew joke on Peter the fisherman. Meanwhile, Jesus and His friends stayed under the radar just a bit longer.
Friday, November 9, 2007
Can There Be Any Further Doubt?
I'm stunned. I've always claimed Dispensationalism was a heresy, never expecting that many to take me seriously. I certainly never expected the number one spokesman for Dispensationalism in the US today to come right and confess something which is so obviously heresy, there can be no doubt.
John Hagee comes right and says Israel did not reject the Messiah when they goaded Roman authorities to execute Him. Hagee further asserts Jesus never claimed to be the Messiah.
Here are the links, unadorned, without annotation; see for yourself:
http://www.apprising.org/archives/2007/10/john_hagee_says.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0K1GEs2gAI
http://pjmiller.wordpress.com/2007/10/18/jesus-did-not-come-to-be-the-messiah/
I've often prayed God would release us from the political bondage of "godly men" serving a lie. By no means would I suggest any punishment for Hagee, but leave that in the hands of God Almighty. There is now no longer any excuse for people to follow this man.
Update: Because of questions I've been asked offline, I felt it would be good to post something concrete regarding Hagee's claim. If you examine Matthew 27:63-64; Mark 14:61-62; and Luke 22:67-70, you'll see where Jesus standing before the Sanhedrin bluntly confesses to be the Messiah, the Son of God. If there is any other agency in that day representing the Nation of Israel in an official capacity, I'd like to know who that would be.
John Hagee comes right and says Israel did not reject the Messiah when they goaded Roman authorities to execute Him. Hagee further asserts Jesus never claimed to be the Messiah.
Here are the links, unadorned, without annotation; see for yourself:
http://www.apprising.org/archives/2007/10/john_hagee_says.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0K1GEs2gAI
http://pjmiller.wordpress.com/2007/10/18/jesus-did-not-come-to-be-the-messiah/
I've often prayed God would release us from the political bondage of "godly men" serving a lie. By no means would I suggest any punishment for Hagee, but leave that in the hands of God Almighty. There is now no longer any excuse for people to follow this man.
Update: Because of questions I've been asked offline, I felt it would be good to post something concrete regarding Hagee's claim. If you examine Matthew 27:63-64; Mark 14:61-62; and Luke 22:67-70, you'll see where Jesus standing before the Sanhedrin bluntly confesses to be the Messiah, the Son of God. If there is any other agency in that day representing the Nation of Israel in an official capacity, I'd like to know who that would be.
Thursday, November 8, 2007
User Technology: openSUSE 10.3 on Dell Latitude D505
The Open Source community loves laptops as much as anyone else. As you might expect, the laptops they own tend to get most of the attention when it comes to accommodating the software to the machines. Thus, IBM/Lenovo machines are supported best, especially among FreeBSD developers. Toshiba and a few others get strong support, too. Several brands get less support, and Dell is among them. This might seem rather odd, given Dell is actually selling laptops with Linux installed. However, that's only on brand new hardware, and two models, at that. The Latitude D505 is "too old" for Dell to support on Linux.
Thus, I find I've had to do it myself. There are plenty of things I know about, but even more I don't, when it comes to getting BSD and Linux to work in the unique environment of laptops. In my struggle to come up with something useful, I noticed three primary areas of trouble.
1. ACPI: The unique ability of laptops to power down in various ways is half of what makes them so useful. You can schlep the thing around without having to reboot when you stop. In particular, the S3 standard (sleep mode or suspend-to-RAM) and S4 (hibernate or suspend-to-disk) are not well implemented across the board. Apparently, my Latitude is not quite proper. Without the use of these two suspend modes, there's no point in having a laptop.
2. Wireless: The other half of what makes laptops worth the trouble is wireless access to the Net. In my urban area, there are dozens of wireless nodes around town offering free access. From my own bedroom I can pick up one strong open wireless signal, beside mine and three other encrypted ones. If I can't make it work, there's no point in having a laptop.
3. Framebuffer modes: This is a peculiar Linux/BSD issue. The Commandline Brotherhood is strong among us, and we want better than just 80x25 characters such as you get with old DOS. We want full VESA mode displays from 800x600 (100x37 characters) and up.
Because of the lightweight hardware on my particular model of the D505, these things became the major headaches. Mine has the 14.1" LCD, so 1024x768 is the native display resolution. The graphics is handled by Intel 855GM. The wireless is a Dell MiniPC 1350, which translates to a Broadcom 4306 (rev. 03) chipset. Finally, my ACPI implementation is probably not standard.
On FreeBSD, all three were hopeless. Indeed, ACPI work has about the lowest priority possible. There is a set of tools for debugging and submitting support requests, but don't expect an answer this week, nor the next. They probably have better things to do. Their version of Ndiswrapper doesn't support my chipset, nor for any of my external cards. Finally, FreeBSD has done nothing on the framebuffer, and darn little on direct VESA modes on Intel chipsets. I'd much rather run FreeBSD, but I can't get enough assistance to make it happen in less than a month. It's just not a priority with the developers.
Ubuntu, the Linux distribution offered by Dell on their two Linux models, failed me in the last two versions. ACPI might have eventually worked if I were willing to compile a custom module, but it still would need some careful research and scripting. What I got when I tried it "out of the box" were lockups and file corruption which almost required reinstalling. The console would not have worked at all without compiling a custom kernel. The developer for the
CentOS came pretty close. I got ACPI S2 to work on lid closure, but it would require high-tech scripting to do better. At least it has the potential for working without compiling anything. The console would require a custom kernel, though. Ndiswrapper required some serious hacking to even compile, because of the way CentOS (Red Hat, actually) likes to backport kernel patches, creating a mismatch internally. Other packages for my external hardware failed for similar reasons. One of them worked only unencrypted, but at least it didn't die after a few minutes and require a reboot.
There were several other Linux distros with similar results, but I finally decided to try openSUSE. As I noted previously, it worked just fine. There are a couple of minor issues worth noting for those who want to try it themselves. During installation, at the point where the installer is setting up your X server, keep your hands away from the Alps touchpad, or the installer will freeze. You'll have to reboot and lose some 15 minutes of configuration work. On the hibernate command (shutdown menu), the screen becomes garbled, but it still works. When it comes back up, you can safely ignore the comical notice the suspend failed.
I've not gotten any screensaver to work; they all stop after a few seconds. The system doesn't freeze, just the screensaver itself. No big deal, since I prefer a power-down on the screen in the first place. As noted before, fwcutter won't work, so use the Ndiswrapper. Follow the instructions from SUSE for Ndiswrapper and it'll be just fine. Oddly, I can turn off the radio with the Fn+F2 keystroke. While Linux doesn't know what it means, the BIOS still shuts it off and the system realizes it's off. I tried to find a good way to implement anti-aliasing on the fonts, but even compiling the Freetype libs myself didn't help. So I turn it off, get pixelated fonts and it looks just fine to my eyes.
In other words, these very minor glitches are easily tolerated in the effort to dump Windows. Even XP with all the official drivers didn't work quite right on this machine, so why not go with something better?
Thus, I find I've had to do it myself. There are plenty of things I know about, but even more I don't, when it comes to getting BSD and Linux to work in the unique environment of laptops. In my struggle to come up with something useful, I noticed three primary areas of trouble.
1. ACPI: The unique ability of laptops to power down in various ways is half of what makes them so useful. You can schlep the thing around without having to reboot when you stop. In particular, the S3 standard (sleep mode or suspend-to-RAM) and S4 (hibernate or suspend-to-disk) are not well implemented across the board. Apparently, my Latitude is not quite proper. Without the use of these two suspend modes, there's no point in having a laptop.
2. Wireless: The other half of what makes laptops worth the trouble is wireless access to the Net. In my urban area, there are dozens of wireless nodes around town offering free access. From my own bedroom I can pick up one strong open wireless signal, beside mine and three other encrypted ones. If I can't make it work, there's no point in having a laptop.
3. Framebuffer modes: This is a peculiar Linux/BSD issue. The Commandline Brotherhood is strong among us, and we want better than just 80x25 characters such as you get with old DOS. We want full VESA mode displays from 800x600 (100x37 characters) and up.
Because of the lightweight hardware on my particular model of the D505, these things became the major headaches. Mine has the 14.1" LCD, so 1024x768 is the native display resolution. The graphics is handled by Intel 855GM. The wireless is a Dell MiniPC 1350, which translates to a Broadcom 4306 (rev. 03) chipset. Finally, my ACPI implementation is probably not standard.
On FreeBSD, all three were hopeless. Indeed, ACPI work has about the lowest priority possible. There is a set of tools for debugging and submitting support requests, but don't expect an answer this week, nor the next. They probably have better things to do. Their version of Ndiswrapper doesn't support my chipset, nor for any of my external cards. Finally, FreeBSD has done nothing on the framebuffer, and darn little on direct VESA modes on Intel chipsets. I'd much rather run FreeBSD, but I can't get enough assistance to make it happen in less than a month. It's just not a priority with the developers.
Ubuntu, the Linux distribution offered by Dell on their two Linux models, failed me in the last two versions. ACPI might have eventually worked if I were willing to compile a custom module, but it still would need some careful research and scripting. What I got when I tried it "out of the box" were lockups and file corruption which almost required reinstalling. The console would not have worked at all without compiling a custom kernel. The developer for the
intelfb module said there was no way around it on laptops. The wireless I tried, and tried, and tried. It turns out the developers for bcm43xx-fwcutter dropped support for my chipset, so that was a waste of time. I used every method, every trick I could find, and the best I got was brief connections unable to handle any encryption scheme. When it died, I had to reboot before there was any way to bring it back up. I'm told the kernel as some bugs, but that was reported some time ago. No fixes yet.CentOS came pretty close. I got ACPI S2 to work on lid closure, but it would require high-tech scripting to do better. At least it has the potential for working without compiling anything. The console would require a custom kernel, though. Ndiswrapper required some serious hacking to even compile, because of the way CentOS (Red Hat, actually) likes to backport kernel patches, creating a mismatch internally. Other packages for my external hardware failed for similar reasons. One of them worked only unencrypted, but at least it didn't die after a few minutes and require a reboot.
There were several other Linux distros with similar results, but I finally decided to try openSUSE. As I noted previously, it worked just fine. There are a couple of minor issues worth noting for those who want to try it themselves. During installation, at the point where the installer is setting up your X server, keep your hands away from the Alps touchpad, or the installer will freeze. You'll have to reboot and lose some 15 minutes of configuration work. On the hibernate command (shutdown menu), the screen becomes garbled, but it still works. When it comes back up, you can safely ignore the comical notice the suspend failed.
I've not gotten any screensaver to work; they all stop after a few seconds. The system doesn't freeze, just the screensaver itself. No big deal, since I prefer a power-down on the screen in the first place. As noted before, fwcutter won't work, so use the Ndiswrapper. Follow the instructions from SUSE for Ndiswrapper and it'll be just fine. Oddly, I can turn off the radio with the Fn+F2 keystroke. While Linux doesn't know what it means, the BIOS still shuts it off and the system realizes it's off. I tried to find a good way to implement anti-aliasing on the fonts, but even compiling the Freetype libs myself didn't help. So I turn it off, get pixelated fonts and it looks just fine to my eyes.
In other words, these very minor glitches are easily tolerated in the effort to dump Windows. Even XP with all the official drivers didn't work quite right on this machine, so why not go with something better?
Wednesday, November 7, 2007
Daniel 2
It becomes obvious from the text Daniel's final published work is a selective collection of things he wrote, or perhaps dictated to a scribe. Referring to himself in the third person was hardly inconsistent with literary practices of those times. At the point in verse 4 where Daniel mentions the Chaldeans speaking in the official court language of Aramaic, our copies of this text shift from Hebrew to Aramaic writing. It continues until the end of the historical accounts, and shifts back to Hebrew in the second half of this book for the visions and prophecies. It's hard to know exactly why, but an obvious guess would be the Aramaic portion was composed first, then the prophecies, then Daniel collected all the material together in a single volume, adding the introductory material in Hebrew.
The point of this chapter is primarily for Daniel to confess his complete and utter reliance in faith on Jehovah. It also indicates how Daniel and his friends rose from their low starting positions in the court hierarchy to prominence within the empire. Daniel is clearly one of the few figures in Hebrew history to rise above mere obedience to the Law of Moses to the higher calling of faith and trust in a God who was Himself far above such things. Where the Law had an obvious application, Daniel obeyed because of His faith. Where mere observance of ritual requirements could not answer the need of the moment, Daniel's faith made it possible to see in wisdom what God had intended.
Some have supposed Nebuchadnezzar forget this troubling dream. While possible, it makes little sense in the story from an Eastern viewpoint. Rather, we should gather from the scant clues here a picture of Nebuchadnezzar pondering deep and puzzling issues. While Daniel in chapter 1 referred to him as "King of Babylon" at the time of the conquest of Jerusalem, it seems that was simply noting his eventual ascension to the throne some years later. Many ancient cultures called for the heir to a throne to win his respect by leading the battles for his reigning father. In this case, Nabopolassar was the original ruler of Babylon in rising up against his former master, Assyria. He dispatched his son, Nebuchadnezzar, as general of forces on other fronts while mopping up the old Assyrian Empire. One of those campaigns netted Daniel and his friends, among a large retinue of royal Judean hostages. At some point, Nabopolassar died, and his son spent some time consolidating his position. There was a period of co-regency, a very common practice, and perhaps Daniel prefers to date things from the actual official solitary rule of his master. At any rate, the Emperor was clearly a man of tremendous intellect himself, and the scant historical evidence supports this. Now ruling alone, he ponders things of great importance to himself and his empire. He no doubt recognizes many of his court counselors are charlatans and "yes-men." How can he hope to rule with such advisers? A test of their supposed divine powers was in order. Thus, he demanded they tell him his dream.
A very troubling dream it was, indeed. It addressed things pertaining to his ruminations about the affairs of men and empires. It's quite possible he recognized the meaning himself, to some degree, but the whole experience was quite disturbing. Calling his large and varied staff of counselors, magicians, soothsayers, etc. -- the terms are not meant to be taken too precisely -- he presented his demand. Normally they would listen, the compare the story with a large collection of clay tablets with lists of omens and symbols. Quite likely its the sort of detailed digging Daniel and his friends would be assigned as neophytes to the craft. They were dumbfounded when Nebuchadnezzar demanded they tell him the dream, too. His accusation is based on an understanding of astrology, a key element in religious matters since at least the time of Nimrod many thousands of years earlier in that area. If they delayed long enough, the astrological signs would change, and the meaning of the dream would be lost. His threat would seem to have been a part of his plan all along. When the matter was ended, the captain of the Imperial Bodyguard began organizing the task. This was no small matter, for they all had to found and it would take several days. Whatever it was Nebuchadnezzar understood from his dream seemed to call for some truly dramatic changes in the way he ruled.
Obviously, none of these advisers were executed before they got to Daniel, but it was close. With all the composure of a man who valued faith above his own life, he asked the captain why the decree was so urgent. Executions normally were not summary with this class of people, but allowed adequate time for the settlement of a man's personal affairs, probably a week or more. The reply was something Daniel knew his God could handle. Daniel's service in the Imperial Court was predicted rather precisely by Isaiah (2 Kings 20:18), several generations before Daniel was born. We aren't told how he persuaded the Emperor to wait, and this could also be part of the ruler's plan, though Daniel seems not to know of it. Either way, it was certainly God's plan. Returning to their quarters, Daniel shared his convictions with his friends, and they sought the Lord's face together. If the Lord intended to use them, He would find a way to spare them.
Daniel receive a replay of the dream in his own, as well as what to him was the obvious meaning. His hymn of praise deserves its own book, but he clearly contrasts Jehovah as the real God in the context of confused Chaldean flummery and guesswork. Being a generous man serving a generous God, Daniel made it the first order of business that morning to save the wise men with whom he had many and profound differences, along with saving himself and his friends. The captain immediately brought him before the Emperor, taking advantage of his position to solve a major crisis. To the Emperor's query, Daniel was careful to establish he operated from a different basis than the other wise men, and relied on none of their tricks to keep others in the dark. Instead, he was open and honest, deflecting glory from himself, pointing it to his God instead.
The vision of the statue revealed more to Daniel than it did to Nebuchadnezzar. While the Emperor was absorbed in issues of this world on a large scale, Daniel saw a dramatic change in things for his nation, and for the Covenant. While the man of men, king of earthly kings, received a more or less plain description of succeeding empires -- his the head of gold, the Medo-Persians the upper body of silver, the bronze of Alexander's Macedonian conquest, and the iron of Rome -- he was unable to give much detail about the final, ultimate Kingdom established without human hands, a Kingdom built by God. However, the Hebrew reader who knew the Word would immediately see what Daniel left cloaked from those without God. We lack sufficient archaeological details to fill out the picture. However, we know Daniel's own assessment of his master was honestly high. He states Nebuchadnezzar was justly ruler of all known kingdoms; Daniel was courtly, but did not engage in flattery. The next empire would be stronger, but somehow less noble, and the next even more so. Finally, Rome's rule would be the strongest ever, yet with little real intrinsic value. In the end, that would allow for common folks to gain the authority, though they could never have the intrinsic greatness of any ruler before them. To this day, we see the result of commoners ruling in the feet of hard iron power mixed with a complete lack of any noble character. This is not about royal or noble blood compared to peasant DNA, but about the character and wisdom of those who rule. Tragic though this loss has been, it meant for Daniel and his nation they no longer had any real significance in God's plan as a free and independent people. They would never be truly free again.
However, God Himself would displace this with a Kingdom which did not rely on humanity. It would crush the entire history of noble human rule by raising a far higher standard, an impossible, inhuman standard of holiness. This new Kingdom would make all the rest insignificant. It was heartening to see God would not let things rest with the mongrelized rule of democracy, a rule of force without any redeeming graces; it was saddening for Daniel to see nothing in this vision of his people, only His God. We aren't told how Daniel responded to the worship directly from the man on the throne, but we know it vaulted him to the forefront of imperial politics. Yet he never forgot the veiled meaning of the parabolic warning of future things, as more visions were added to it later in his career.
Meanwhile, he was promoted to governor of the royal district, the personal domain of the Imperial family. Daniel in turn asked for his friends to be deputized to oversee daily affairs while Daniel remained on duty in the court. The image of "sitting at the gate" was a way of indicating Daniel was a chief counsel, for the gates were the meeting place where judges heard disputes and other legal business was formalized. In modern terms, Daniel literally stood near the throne, a trusted and close confidant. He was also promoted to the head of all the wise men. This was galling to men much older and more established, and their conniving ways later prove they were lesser men than their savior, but not able to foil God's plans.
I must add one note at this point: The writers of ancient times, such as Daniel, assumed what would be common knowledge for their readers. The secular historical information of this period is highly confusing and spotty. It's possible we really don't have a clue, and some of the historical background is mistaken. This does not really change the story itself. Assuming the worst, we would find only that we had misidentified characters peripheral to the narrative. We can be sure Nebuchadnezzar lead a Babylonian army to Jerusalem more than once, and Daniel calls him king. There are great and many questions whether he was the first or second to wear that name, and whether he was actually the son of Nabopolassar, but not the father of Nabonidus, nor grandfather of Belshazzar. These questions do not affect the events of Daniel's life, nor their meaning to our faith.
(Edited to reflect finding I had mixed the names of Nabopolassar and Nabonidus.)
The point of this chapter is primarily for Daniel to confess his complete and utter reliance in faith on Jehovah. It also indicates how Daniel and his friends rose from their low starting positions in the court hierarchy to prominence within the empire. Daniel is clearly one of the few figures in Hebrew history to rise above mere obedience to the Law of Moses to the higher calling of faith and trust in a God who was Himself far above such things. Where the Law had an obvious application, Daniel obeyed because of His faith. Where mere observance of ritual requirements could not answer the need of the moment, Daniel's faith made it possible to see in wisdom what God had intended.
Some have supposed Nebuchadnezzar forget this troubling dream. While possible, it makes little sense in the story from an Eastern viewpoint. Rather, we should gather from the scant clues here a picture of Nebuchadnezzar pondering deep and puzzling issues. While Daniel in chapter 1 referred to him as "King of Babylon" at the time of the conquest of Jerusalem, it seems that was simply noting his eventual ascension to the throne some years later. Many ancient cultures called for the heir to a throne to win his respect by leading the battles for his reigning father. In this case, Nabopolassar was the original ruler of Babylon in rising up against his former master, Assyria. He dispatched his son, Nebuchadnezzar, as general of forces on other fronts while mopping up the old Assyrian Empire. One of those campaigns netted Daniel and his friends, among a large retinue of royal Judean hostages. At some point, Nabopolassar died, and his son spent some time consolidating his position. There was a period of co-regency, a very common practice, and perhaps Daniel prefers to date things from the actual official solitary rule of his master. At any rate, the Emperor was clearly a man of tremendous intellect himself, and the scant historical evidence supports this. Now ruling alone, he ponders things of great importance to himself and his empire. He no doubt recognizes many of his court counselors are charlatans and "yes-men." How can he hope to rule with such advisers? A test of their supposed divine powers was in order. Thus, he demanded they tell him his dream.
A very troubling dream it was, indeed. It addressed things pertaining to his ruminations about the affairs of men and empires. It's quite possible he recognized the meaning himself, to some degree, but the whole experience was quite disturbing. Calling his large and varied staff of counselors, magicians, soothsayers, etc. -- the terms are not meant to be taken too precisely -- he presented his demand. Normally they would listen, the compare the story with a large collection of clay tablets with lists of omens and symbols. Quite likely its the sort of detailed digging Daniel and his friends would be assigned as neophytes to the craft. They were dumbfounded when Nebuchadnezzar demanded they tell him the dream, too. His accusation is based on an understanding of astrology, a key element in religious matters since at least the time of Nimrod many thousands of years earlier in that area. If they delayed long enough, the astrological signs would change, and the meaning of the dream would be lost. His threat would seem to have been a part of his plan all along. When the matter was ended, the captain of the Imperial Bodyguard began organizing the task. This was no small matter, for they all had to found and it would take several days. Whatever it was Nebuchadnezzar understood from his dream seemed to call for some truly dramatic changes in the way he ruled.
Obviously, none of these advisers were executed before they got to Daniel, but it was close. With all the composure of a man who valued faith above his own life, he asked the captain why the decree was so urgent. Executions normally were not summary with this class of people, but allowed adequate time for the settlement of a man's personal affairs, probably a week or more. The reply was something Daniel knew his God could handle. Daniel's service in the Imperial Court was predicted rather precisely by Isaiah (2 Kings 20:18), several generations before Daniel was born. We aren't told how he persuaded the Emperor to wait, and this could also be part of the ruler's plan, though Daniel seems not to know of it. Either way, it was certainly God's plan. Returning to their quarters, Daniel shared his convictions with his friends, and they sought the Lord's face together. If the Lord intended to use them, He would find a way to spare them.
Daniel receive a replay of the dream in his own, as well as what to him was the obvious meaning. His hymn of praise deserves its own book, but he clearly contrasts Jehovah as the real God in the context of confused Chaldean flummery and guesswork. Being a generous man serving a generous God, Daniel made it the first order of business that morning to save the wise men with whom he had many and profound differences, along with saving himself and his friends. The captain immediately brought him before the Emperor, taking advantage of his position to solve a major crisis. To the Emperor's query, Daniel was careful to establish he operated from a different basis than the other wise men, and relied on none of their tricks to keep others in the dark. Instead, he was open and honest, deflecting glory from himself, pointing it to his God instead.
The vision of the statue revealed more to Daniel than it did to Nebuchadnezzar. While the Emperor was absorbed in issues of this world on a large scale, Daniel saw a dramatic change in things for his nation, and for the Covenant. While the man of men, king of earthly kings, received a more or less plain description of succeeding empires -- his the head of gold, the Medo-Persians the upper body of silver, the bronze of Alexander's Macedonian conquest, and the iron of Rome -- he was unable to give much detail about the final, ultimate Kingdom established without human hands, a Kingdom built by God. However, the Hebrew reader who knew the Word would immediately see what Daniel left cloaked from those without God. We lack sufficient archaeological details to fill out the picture. However, we know Daniel's own assessment of his master was honestly high. He states Nebuchadnezzar was justly ruler of all known kingdoms; Daniel was courtly, but did not engage in flattery. The next empire would be stronger, but somehow less noble, and the next even more so. Finally, Rome's rule would be the strongest ever, yet with little real intrinsic value. In the end, that would allow for common folks to gain the authority, though they could never have the intrinsic greatness of any ruler before them. To this day, we see the result of commoners ruling in the feet of hard iron power mixed with a complete lack of any noble character. This is not about royal or noble blood compared to peasant DNA, but about the character and wisdom of those who rule. Tragic though this loss has been, it meant for Daniel and his nation they no longer had any real significance in God's plan as a free and independent people. They would never be truly free again.
However, God Himself would displace this with a Kingdom which did not rely on humanity. It would crush the entire history of noble human rule by raising a far higher standard, an impossible, inhuman standard of holiness. This new Kingdom would make all the rest insignificant. It was heartening to see God would not let things rest with the mongrelized rule of democracy, a rule of force without any redeeming graces; it was saddening for Daniel to see nothing in this vision of his people, only His God. We aren't told how Daniel responded to the worship directly from the man on the throne, but we know it vaulted him to the forefront of imperial politics. Yet he never forgot the veiled meaning of the parabolic warning of future things, as more visions were added to it later in his career.
Meanwhile, he was promoted to governor of the royal district, the personal domain of the Imperial family. Daniel in turn asked for his friends to be deputized to oversee daily affairs while Daniel remained on duty in the court. The image of "sitting at the gate" was a way of indicating Daniel was a chief counsel, for the gates were the meeting place where judges heard disputes and other legal business was formalized. In modern terms, Daniel literally stood near the throne, a trusted and close confidant. He was also promoted to the head of all the wise men. This was galling to men much older and more established, and their conniving ways later prove they were lesser men than their savior, but not able to foil God's plans.
I must add one note at this point: The writers of ancient times, such as Daniel, assumed what would be common knowledge for their readers. The secular historical information of this period is highly confusing and spotty. It's possible we really don't have a clue, and some of the historical background is mistaken. This does not really change the story itself. Assuming the worst, we would find only that we had misidentified characters peripheral to the narrative. We can be sure Nebuchadnezzar lead a Babylonian army to Jerusalem more than once, and Daniel calls him king. There are great and many questions whether he was the first or second to wear that name, and whether he was actually the son of Nabopolassar, but not the father of Nabonidus, nor grandfather of Belshazzar. These questions do not affect the events of Daniel's life, nor their meaning to our faith.
(Edited to reflect finding I had mixed the names of Nabopolassar and Nabonidus.)
Danger: Geek Posting
This won't count as a full daily blog post, just a note in passing: I have found the Holy Grail! That is, I found a Linux distribution which would run on this laptop without major surgery, and without losing any major functionality.
It's not just conspiracy theories which fire my dislike of Windows. I used it off-n-on for the past three weeks, and hated it. Twice I faced malware attacks. Linux is almost totally immune to that stuff. Windows is by design insecure against such threats. While there has been a tremendous amount of work done by MicroSoft to fix XP, and the improvements are huge, it's still fundamentally open to attack. That's because Windows is built to be convenient and that means leaving every door and window open to every force outside the machine. Every security measure is an add-on, an afterthought. The most effective security applications will fight with system internals, and some things will quit working because of plain old bad design. Basic functions of computer use require insecurity.
While Windows has the advantage on most hardware issues because, as the near-monopoly OS they have hardware manufacturers in their pocket, in Linux Land it's a little more dicey. Most of the work done in that area is without cooperation from hardware makers, and without a whole lot of funding. It takes a major corporation to fight/compete against a major corporation. That's where Novell comes into play. I was all too willing to work and tweak and run diagnostics until I could get any Linux to run properly on my laptop. After testing a half-dozen different flavors of Linux and Unix, I despaired of making it happen. So I did some homework, and pestered folks on free support forums dedicated to the various possible Linux distributions. Only one answered: SUSE. That happens to have been my old favorite some years ago. I was put off by Novell's purchase of SUSE, and some subsequent decisions they made didn't help much. Yet Novell proved themselves by taking on the SCO lawsuit fiasco and protecting the Linux community. It seemed to me, if I could see myself compromising to run XP, why not compromise to run SUSE?
Further, I have spent so long doing things the Unix/Linux way I just cannot readjust to the Windows way. Would I be able to get SUSE to run on this thing? Sure. Would it allow me a reasonable path to getting essential functions working? Sure -- in fact, it really didn't have to do much at all. Suspend to RAM (sleep-mode) and suspend to disk (hibernate-mode) both worked without any changes or configuration. I assure you, that's a miracle, because not a single other Unix/Linux would do that. Further, I've got wireless working, an absolute necessity in my world. Finally, all the other Unix-y stuff I really want is at my fingertips.
You may not care a whit for stepping away from Windows, but if you decide to try something more secure and stable, not to mention free of charge, I'd suggest SUSE (AKA openSUSE) as the most painless way to go. I'll be right here waiting to help anyone who needs it. If you really need the corporate version with all the warranties, etc., try the commercial version, Novell's Linux.
It's not just conspiracy theories which fire my dislike of Windows. I used it off-n-on for the past three weeks, and hated it. Twice I faced malware attacks. Linux is almost totally immune to that stuff. Windows is by design insecure against such threats. While there has been a tremendous amount of work done by MicroSoft to fix XP, and the improvements are huge, it's still fundamentally open to attack. That's because Windows is built to be convenient and that means leaving every door and window open to every force outside the machine. Every security measure is an add-on, an afterthought. The most effective security applications will fight with system internals, and some things will quit working because of plain old bad design. Basic functions of computer use require insecurity.
While Windows has the advantage on most hardware issues because, as the near-monopoly OS they have hardware manufacturers in their pocket, in Linux Land it's a little more dicey. Most of the work done in that area is without cooperation from hardware makers, and without a whole lot of funding. It takes a major corporation to fight/compete against a major corporation. That's where Novell comes into play. I was all too willing to work and tweak and run diagnostics until I could get any Linux to run properly on my laptop. After testing a half-dozen different flavors of Linux and Unix, I despaired of making it happen. So I did some homework, and pestered folks on free support forums dedicated to the various possible Linux distributions. Only one answered: SUSE. That happens to have been my old favorite some years ago. I was put off by Novell's purchase of SUSE, and some subsequent decisions they made didn't help much. Yet Novell proved themselves by taking on the SCO lawsuit fiasco and protecting the Linux community. It seemed to me, if I could see myself compromising to run XP, why not compromise to run SUSE?
Further, I have spent so long doing things the Unix/Linux way I just cannot readjust to the Windows way. Would I be able to get SUSE to run on this thing? Sure. Would it allow me a reasonable path to getting essential functions working? Sure -- in fact, it really didn't have to do much at all. Suspend to RAM (sleep-mode) and suspend to disk (hibernate-mode) both worked without any changes or configuration. I assure you, that's a miracle, because not a single other Unix/Linux would do that. Further, I've got wireless working, an absolute necessity in my world. Finally, all the other Unix-y stuff I really want is at my fingertips.
You may not care a whit for stepping away from Windows, but if you decide to try something more secure and stable, not to mention free of charge, I'd suggest SUSE (AKA openSUSE) as the most painless way to go. I'll be right here waiting to help anyone who needs it. If you really need the corporate version with all the warranties, etc., try the commercial version, Novell's Linux.
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
Not Much to Add
Please take the time to see this wonderful article by Bob DeWaay. No, his isn't a perfect match to my theology, but sometimes he says things so much better than I, there's just no point in trying to summarize or restate. Please, read it for yourself. You'll be blessed with a heaping helping of spiritual food. That it follows closely on my comments covering Matthew 16 will be obvious.
Monday, November 5, 2007
Daniel 1
To say Daniel was chosen by God for a unique task is an understatement. Had there been no Babylon, he'd have been a giant among men in Judea, figuratively, and perhaps somewhat literally. We have ample evidence he bore a genius-level intellect, but as a son of royalty or upper nobility, he would have been physically larger than average. Peasants throughout history suffered mild to severe malnutrition, and were generally smaller than the well fed privileged classes. Further, it's almost certain he had already received extensive martial training. Most importantly, he was a moral and spiritual giant. God had prepared Daniel's soul to fulfill a role for which he is still famous today, but was even more famous during his lifetime.
Just a few years previously, King Josiah had gone out to do battle against Pharaoh Neco of Egypt. Pharaoh was marching along the coast of Palestine on the way to face Babylon, the former tributary of Assyria. Pharaoh was a faithful ally of Assyria, and sought to restore the empire to Nineveh. He had no interest in Josiah, but once the latter was killed and his troops scattered, Judah became a tributary of Egypt. Pharaoh replaced Josiah's successor with a brother eager to please him, Jehoiakim. In 608 BC, the new king returned to Jerusalem with orders to collect a massive tribute, bankrupting the little kingdom, to support his battle against Nebuchadnezzar far to the north at Carchemish. Pharaoh was defeated and the army of Babylon eventually rolled through Judea on the way south to Egypt, taking portions of the royal household and some upper nobility as hostage against Jehoiakim's good behavior.
Thus, in 605 BC, Daniel found himself in the entourage of royal hostages sent to Babylon. We should not imagine this as chains and abuse, but not necessarily plush treatment, either. Still, royalty of any nation was treated with respect befitting their class until they rebelled. Daniel and his relatives were not hustled off in a forced march, but took a few months at least, traveling by wagons. Along with the people was a majority of the Temple treasures, especially the fine gold and gold-plated furnishings. In Babylon, the people were probably kept in a quarter of the city designed to accommodate dignitaries from across the empire. The emperor of any nation would naturally desire to enlarge his court with the best of foreign servants, if for no other reason to have the service of people with no possible local political loyalties against him. Also, the more exotic the mix, the greater the ruler's grandeur.
The order was given to sift through the hostages of Judea for young men who looked royal and could absorb the academic training necessary for court service. Daniel and his friends were the best qualified. Given new names somewhat parallel to their original Hebrew names, either in meaning or in sound, their new identities were a dramatic departure from their former lives. They would have been about 15, as this was the age when a privileged lad had gained the full flower of early manhood, and would not lose much when castrated. Given the man appointed to this task, named by his title as Chief of Eunuchs, we are foolish to think Daniel and his friends were not made eunuchs themselves. This ancient custom was more than the obvious matter of trusting men as harem guards, though it began there. Rather, it symbolized far more. Pertinent here is to note it made a man trustworthy for the most private matters of the Emperor's household, an elevation in social rank just short of the princes in the realm.
The training was to focus on Chaldean literature and history. The name "Chaldean" was an ancient term derived from the region -- Chaldees or Chaldea. The language was similar to Hebrew. Oddly, it was a return to the language of Abraham, also called today Aramaic or Syriac. Hebrew was more the language of Canaanites. Somewhere far back in ancient Mesopotamia, there arose a class of priestly princes. They were highly cultured and educated, and gave themselves to the biggest field of research of those times: the study of various religions. We recognize Balaam as among them, as well as the Magi seeking Jesus. Succeeding waves of conquest adopted the heritage of these men and their academies as their own, with massive funding to underwrite construction of libraries and translations of every legend available, recorded on clay tablets in cuneiform. While Daniel and his friends would learn to read and write Chaldean, the purpose was to become fully acquainted with this body of literature, with large doses of astrology, black magic, and proto-science, along with legends gleaned from every culture and ethnic group conquered by every empire in turn.
Under the tutelage of Josiah's reforms from birth, Daniel was determined to remain as faithful to his God as he could. This was not about fighting, but about winning by taking upon himself the burden of proof. His faith was sufficient to press the matter, but quite willing to accept failure if Jehovah did not grant them favor. While there is little of the food and wine itself which threatened their purity, it was that both meat and wine were offered first to pagan gods before seeing the Emperor's kitchen. Massive quantities of this food kept a whole cadre of pagan priests busy each day in preparation for all the hundreds, perhaps thousands, who "dined from the king's table," as it were. The meats would have been as varied as any could imagine, but all would have been offered first to idols. The wine would have been fermented as often in temples as anywhere else. Thus, Daniel and his friends chose the one sort of food which escaped such handling: things which were served fresh as harvested. The term would include anything grown from seeds and picked or cut, with little further processing, such as fruits, vegetables, nuts, grains, and the like. All of these were kosher, and God blessed this choice in a test, to make them appear healthier by Babylonian standards than all the rest of the students.
Upon their personal interview before the Emperor, these four stood out. We should read the description as standard Semitic superlatives, rather than a precise description. The language of the text is designed to make us feel we are there, to experience it for ourselves, rather than to provide a detailed explanation. The narrative conjures a vision of Jehovah watching over these four young men, seeing to it they prospered and brought to their calling a background and commitment lacking in all the other students from the other exotic places around the empire. Viewing all things in light of the Lord's revelation imparts a far wiser understanding, a better grasp of what matters. God had plans for these boys. At the same time, it indicated He had a strong interest in Babylon's health and prosperity, at least for a time. As it turns out, Daniel managed to serve the entire Exile Period, and was taken into the service of the Medo-Persian conquerors some 70 years later.
Just a few years previously, King Josiah had gone out to do battle against Pharaoh Neco of Egypt. Pharaoh was marching along the coast of Palestine on the way to face Babylon, the former tributary of Assyria. Pharaoh was a faithful ally of Assyria, and sought to restore the empire to Nineveh. He had no interest in Josiah, but once the latter was killed and his troops scattered, Judah became a tributary of Egypt. Pharaoh replaced Josiah's successor with a brother eager to please him, Jehoiakim. In 608 BC, the new king returned to Jerusalem with orders to collect a massive tribute, bankrupting the little kingdom, to support his battle against Nebuchadnezzar far to the north at Carchemish. Pharaoh was defeated and the army of Babylon eventually rolled through Judea on the way south to Egypt, taking portions of the royal household and some upper nobility as hostage against Jehoiakim's good behavior.
Thus, in 605 BC, Daniel found himself in the entourage of royal hostages sent to Babylon. We should not imagine this as chains and abuse, but not necessarily plush treatment, either. Still, royalty of any nation was treated with respect befitting their class until they rebelled. Daniel and his relatives were not hustled off in a forced march, but took a few months at least, traveling by wagons. Along with the people was a majority of the Temple treasures, especially the fine gold and gold-plated furnishings. In Babylon, the people were probably kept in a quarter of the city designed to accommodate dignitaries from across the empire. The emperor of any nation would naturally desire to enlarge his court with the best of foreign servants, if for no other reason to have the service of people with no possible local political loyalties against him. Also, the more exotic the mix, the greater the ruler's grandeur.
The order was given to sift through the hostages of Judea for young men who looked royal and could absorb the academic training necessary for court service. Daniel and his friends were the best qualified. Given new names somewhat parallel to their original Hebrew names, either in meaning or in sound, their new identities were a dramatic departure from their former lives. They would have been about 15, as this was the age when a privileged lad had gained the full flower of early manhood, and would not lose much when castrated. Given the man appointed to this task, named by his title as Chief of Eunuchs, we are foolish to think Daniel and his friends were not made eunuchs themselves. This ancient custom was more than the obvious matter of trusting men as harem guards, though it began there. Rather, it symbolized far more. Pertinent here is to note it made a man trustworthy for the most private matters of the Emperor's household, an elevation in social rank just short of the princes in the realm.
The training was to focus on Chaldean literature and history. The name "Chaldean" was an ancient term derived from the region -- Chaldees or Chaldea. The language was similar to Hebrew. Oddly, it was a return to the language of Abraham, also called today Aramaic or Syriac. Hebrew was more the language of Canaanites. Somewhere far back in ancient Mesopotamia, there arose a class of priestly princes. They were highly cultured and educated, and gave themselves to the biggest field of research of those times: the study of various religions. We recognize Balaam as among them, as well as the Magi seeking Jesus. Succeeding waves of conquest adopted the heritage of these men and their academies as their own, with massive funding to underwrite construction of libraries and translations of every legend available, recorded on clay tablets in cuneiform. While Daniel and his friends would learn to read and write Chaldean, the purpose was to become fully acquainted with this body of literature, with large doses of astrology, black magic, and proto-science, along with legends gleaned from every culture and ethnic group conquered by every empire in turn.
Under the tutelage of Josiah's reforms from birth, Daniel was determined to remain as faithful to his God as he could. This was not about fighting, but about winning by taking upon himself the burden of proof. His faith was sufficient to press the matter, but quite willing to accept failure if Jehovah did not grant them favor. While there is little of the food and wine itself which threatened their purity, it was that both meat and wine were offered first to pagan gods before seeing the Emperor's kitchen. Massive quantities of this food kept a whole cadre of pagan priests busy each day in preparation for all the hundreds, perhaps thousands, who "dined from the king's table," as it were. The meats would have been as varied as any could imagine, but all would have been offered first to idols. The wine would have been fermented as often in temples as anywhere else. Thus, Daniel and his friends chose the one sort of food which escaped such handling: things which were served fresh as harvested. The term would include anything grown from seeds and picked or cut, with little further processing, such as fruits, vegetables, nuts, grains, and the like. All of these were kosher, and God blessed this choice in a test, to make them appear healthier by Babylonian standards than all the rest of the students.
Upon their personal interview before the Emperor, these four stood out. We should read the description as standard Semitic superlatives, rather than a precise description. The language of the text is designed to make us feel we are there, to experience it for ourselves, rather than to provide a detailed explanation. The narrative conjures a vision of Jehovah watching over these four young men, seeing to it they prospered and brought to their calling a background and commitment lacking in all the other students from the other exotic places around the empire. Viewing all things in light of the Lord's revelation imparts a far wiser understanding, a better grasp of what matters. God had plans for these boys. At the same time, it indicated He had a strong interest in Babylon's health and prosperity, at least for a time. As it turns out, Daniel managed to serve the entire Exile Period, and was taken into the service of the Medo-Persian conquerors some 70 years later.
Sunday, November 4, 2007
Islam: Do You Really Want to Know?
I've already stated my opinion of Islam plenty of times: It's a pagan Arab religion with elements of Judaism, Christianity and Zoroastrianism thrown in to distinguish it. I'm not sure I care for all the efforts to analyze The Prophet from this distance, but I suspect when he was young and traveling with his future first wife, Kadija, he was impressed by the power of monotheism and certain civilizing elements of the other faiths compared to his native Arabic polytheism. The result was a book of scripture which many regard as internally inconsistent. That has been said of the Bible, too.
However, Islam has enough genuine flaws; we need not allege a host of imaginary ones to go with that. If you ever happen to read the pages of WorldNetDaily, you'll note a powerful anti-Muslim hatred. No, not just fear and suspicion, but a seething hatred calling for genocide. Even within my Eastern Mystical view of Scripture, there is no grounds for such an attitude in Christian religion.
Consider this fine article from Jebediah Koogler at the Brown Daily Herald. From my own study, I'd say he presents an accurate portrayal. WND's rabid writers make that long stretch between a bad religion and a bad people without batting an eye. They want you to ignore the logical shift this requires. Do we not often preach how professing Christians, with the power of God Almighty at their disposal -- the real God -- so often fall short of His glorious will? Yet we buy without question the rotten pottage of assuming all Muslims are killers as rabid as the WND war-loving commentators.
Let me suggest such commentators are hardly different from the murderous Islamic preachers so frequently paraded before our eyes in TV news clips. Neither represents the mainstream of their proclaimed faith, and I sincerely hope the mass of our Christian believers are equally uninterested in killing all the mass of Muslim believers, as those Muslims are of killing us.
Now, just to make sure we keep things clear, here's a little more, "Do you really want to know?" Independent investigations have shown quite clearly the vast majority of violence in the name of Islam, especially the most hideous bombings, are committed by agents of non-Muslim governments. Sure, Muslims around the world, like anyone else, will resist with violence anyone trying to conquer them, take their land, etc. Yet the truly inhumane acts of violence are almost invariably done by some Mossad, CIA, MI6, or some similar black ops team trying to provoke sentiment against Muslims. So just who are the barbarians?
However, Islam has enough genuine flaws; we need not allege a host of imaginary ones to go with that. If you ever happen to read the pages of WorldNetDaily, you'll note a powerful anti-Muslim hatred. No, not just fear and suspicion, but a seething hatred calling for genocide. Even within my Eastern Mystical view of Scripture, there is no grounds for such an attitude in Christian religion.
Consider this fine article from Jebediah Koogler at the Brown Daily Herald. From my own study, I'd say he presents an accurate portrayal. WND's rabid writers make that long stretch between a bad religion and a bad people without batting an eye. They want you to ignore the logical shift this requires. Do we not often preach how professing Christians, with the power of God Almighty at their disposal -- the real God -- so often fall short of His glorious will? Yet we buy without question the rotten pottage of assuming all Muslims are killers as rabid as the WND war-loving commentators.
Let me suggest such commentators are hardly different from the murderous Islamic preachers so frequently paraded before our eyes in TV news clips. Neither represents the mainstream of their proclaimed faith, and I sincerely hope the mass of our Christian believers are equally uninterested in killing all the mass of Muslim believers, as those Muslims are of killing us.
Now, just to make sure we keep things clear, here's a little more, "Do you really want to know?" Independent investigations have shown quite clearly the vast majority of violence in the name of Islam, especially the most hideous bombings, are committed by agents of non-Muslim governments. Sure, Muslims around the world, like anyone else, will resist with violence anyone trying to conquer them, take their land, etc. Yet the truly inhumane acts of violence are almost invariably done by some Mossad, CIA, MI6, or some similar black ops team trying to provoke sentiment against Muslims. So just who are the barbarians?
Saturday, November 3, 2007
Life of Christ: Matthew 16
By the very words in the phrase "Kingdom of Heaven," it should be obvious it would be a kingdom not of this world. Yet the traditions of the Jewish leadership had completely discounted that element in the Covenant of the Law. Having totally missed the implications of Messianic prophecies, they were utterly certain all they needed to seek was paradise on earth. Every spiritual issue was twisted into a mere earthly concern. Had Satan himself dispatched the Romans, granted some wealth and a decent harvest or two, they would gladly have placed him on David's throne. For this reason, the teachings of Jesus were incomprehensible to them.
Having heard of all these miracles, which to the national leaders in Jerusalem sounded very much like the false Messiah they expected, the Sanhedrin sent yet another delegation to Jesus. This time it included both Pharisees and Sadducees. The former we know to have arisen as a supposed revival of covenant faithfulness, but a concept long twisted by materialist assumptions. True, it was this the Law of Moses actually promised, and little more, but its purpose was far above that. However, the Pharisees were the primary force behind promoting the corrupt Talmudic expansions of Mosaic Law. We saw in the previous lesson how these expansions served to break the Law itself. The latter group were quite the opposite, though still thoroughly Hellenized. They embraced the spirit of the Law, proposing God was good and loving. Further, they so embraced the practical applications of Mosaic Law they denied the afterlife to which the Pharisees at least paid lip service. We end up with Pharisees who were conservative, legalistic, materialistic Hellenists, and Sadducees who were liberal, immoral, materialistic Hellenists.
Together, these two were deeply concerned with mere political matters as if it were an issue of holiness. Jesus was upsetting their applecart. So they proposed a test to examine a sample miracle to see if He was just faking it, somehow practicing some sleight of hand or something. Jesus refused, using a parable regarding wisdom. They knew all about the things of this world, but understood nothing of God's Word. The prophets had granted more than enough teaching and warnings, and Israel had resolutely turned away, like an adulterous wife. Having strayed so very far away from the Hebrew mystical understanding of God's creation, they no longer had the bare ability to hear from God. To drive the point home, Jesus referred to the experience of Jonah. On the one hand, Jonah represents the ultimate indictment of Israel's complete failure to take God's revelation to the world. Instead, their smug racism condemned all mankind to Hell. Jesus compare Himself to Jonah, in that He would be presumed dead for three days, then rise to take the message to the world. Jesus was correcting the mistakes of Israel, as exemplified by Jonah's attitude about his mission. It would be a mistake to think the delegation weren't stung by the reminder of their racist hatred.
On this occasion crossing the Galilee, the disciples realized they forgot to pack food. While they were discussing this, Jesus tossed them a parabolic line about the leaven of the Sanhedrin. Jewish teaching had been utterly worthless in embracing materialism, turning away from the Spirit. The Disciples missed the cue, by taking the comment from a materialist viewpoint. Jesus berated them, reminding them of the abundance of food He had produced twice. Even if they starved for a few days, it would hardly hinder their mission. This was the whole point of His comment.
The encounter with the delegation from Jerusalem must have brought to the forefront of Jesus' mind His impending suffering and death. They had taken a journey some 20 miles north toward Caesarea Philippi. As usual, we aren't told the ostensible purpose, which hardly matters, but the spiritual events which do matter. It was not a question of their knowledge, but their spiritual perception. First, we notice what the world thought of Jesus. The answers ranged all over the map of human thought. But what did the Disciples think? It was natural Peter should answer first, for he was even now the acknowledged leader among the Twelve, being the eldest, not to mention brash. In his brashness, he was altogether correct this time: Jesus was the promised Messiah, and the unique Son of God. His Master replied the truth of this answer was not a matter of humans, nor of human understanding. It was the truth of God Almighty. Peter was altogether certain of his answer, but it smacks of a child in school correctly quoting the textbook answer to a question he hardly understands. Time was so short, and there was so much they needed to grow to carry on this gospel ministry.
Still, Jesus is able to press the message with a sense of humor. Looking past the nit-picking debate over the meaning of the words in the Greek text of Matthew's Gospel, we see a Hebrew play on words which just barely comes across in English. Peter, the name Jesus gave His cousin, was both a joke and prophecy. If anyone was more likely to bluster and brag, then reverse himself repeatedly, it was Simon. Jesus called him "a stone." Later, it would be a fit name. Hebrew culture often presumed a man's name given at birth would predict his character, but a name given by one's lord upon vestment of an office was more a title, though often there might be a pun involved. In this setting, Jesus called attention to the joke, then added the image of Peter broken off from the foundation stone of this mighty confession of who Jesus was. With such a confession, Peter would be the first stone of a grand building (1 Peter 2:4-6), a massive congregation of souls committed to following Him.
The gates of a city were the not just a defense, but the place where the local wise men gathered to conduct the business of the city, especially in dispensing justice as a lower courts system. The justice system of Hades would not be able to stand in the face of God's truth as spoken by Peter. With such a declaration of faith, Peter -- or anyone else -- could execute the justice of God in this fallen world. With such an understanding, the congregation of Christ's followers would represent the King of Heaven in all earthly matters.
However, the time had not yet come to carry this declaration into the world. That had to wait for the carrying out of God's sentence against all sin. Here it was Jesus began to introduce to His Disciples just what sort of Messiah He was. The Jewish leadership were the very heart of opposition on this earth. In the end, they would kill Jesus. Yet, this would hardly be the end of the matter, for He would rise again the third day. Having already taken the mantle of junior leader, Peter pulled Jesus aside and insisted He stop saying such things. Brash as ever, the text indicates Peter was quite sharp in his rebuke. Jesus responded by warning Peter such thoughts made him an adversary, too. Peter was still trapped in dreams of a political kingdom on this earth, not thinking spiritually.
Indeed, Jesus pointedly said following Him required nailing this life to a cross. The image was shocking. Learning to let go of this world, not just our goods and our position, but all our hopes and dreams for this life, would be the most agonizing experience any of them could imagine. Yet it was the only way. Clinging to this existence guaranteed the loss of it and the soul, too. The price of eternal salvation for the soul was abandonment of this life. When He came back to end this age and take up the harvest of souls with His angels, those whose works reflected such truth would join Him in eternity, not some mere earthly kingdom.
Matthew records Jesus' last comment, which was surely something meant to lighten the mood of a dark discussion about His coming death and their future sufferings. Some of those standing with Him at that moment would see something of that eternal glory when the Kingdom was inaugurated on this earth. They would see Him in is glorified body, and would begin living in the temporal manifestation of His reign before they left this world. They would get a taste of eternity here on earth.
Note: Edited for clarity.
Having heard of all these miracles, which to the national leaders in Jerusalem sounded very much like the false Messiah they expected, the Sanhedrin sent yet another delegation to Jesus. This time it included both Pharisees and Sadducees. The former we know to have arisen as a supposed revival of covenant faithfulness, but a concept long twisted by materialist assumptions. True, it was this the Law of Moses actually promised, and little more, but its purpose was far above that. However, the Pharisees were the primary force behind promoting the corrupt Talmudic expansions of Mosaic Law. We saw in the previous lesson how these expansions served to break the Law itself. The latter group were quite the opposite, though still thoroughly Hellenized. They embraced the spirit of the Law, proposing God was good and loving. Further, they so embraced the practical applications of Mosaic Law they denied the afterlife to which the Pharisees at least paid lip service. We end up with Pharisees who were conservative, legalistic, materialistic Hellenists, and Sadducees who were liberal, immoral, materialistic Hellenists.
Together, these two were deeply concerned with mere political matters as if it were an issue of holiness. Jesus was upsetting their applecart. So they proposed a test to examine a sample miracle to see if He was just faking it, somehow practicing some sleight of hand or something. Jesus refused, using a parable regarding wisdom. They knew all about the things of this world, but understood nothing of God's Word. The prophets had granted more than enough teaching and warnings, and Israel had resolutely turned away, like an adulterous wife. Having strayed so very far away from the Hebrew mystical understanding of God's creation, they no longer had the bare ability to hear from God. To drive the point home, Jesus referred to the experience of Jonah. On the one hand, Jonah represents the ultimate indictment of Israel's complete failure to take God's revelation to the world. Instead, their smug racism condemned all mankind to Hell. Jesus compare Himself to Jonah, in that He would be presumed dead for three days, then rise to take the message to the world. Jesus was correcting the mistakes of Israel, as exemplified by Jonah's attitude about his mission. It would be a mistake to think the delegation weren't stung by the reminder of their racist hatred.
On this occasion crossing the Galilee, the disciples realized they forgot to pack food. While they were discussing this, Jesus tossed them a parabolic line about the leaven of the Sanhedrin. Jewish teaching had been utterly worthless in embracing materialism, turning away from the Spirit. The Disciples missed the cue, by taking the comment from a materialist viewpoint. Jesus berated them, reminding them of the abundance of food He had produced twice. Even if they starved for a few days, it would hardly hinder their mission. This was the whole point of His comment.
The encounter with the delegation from Jerusalem must have brought to the forefront of Jesus' mind His impending suffering and death. They had taken a journey some 20 miles north toward Caesarea Philippi. As usual, we aren't told the ostensible purpose, which hardly matters, but the spiritual events which do matter. It was not a question of their knowledge, but their spiritual perception. First, we notice what the world thought of Jesus. The answers ranged all over the map of human thought. But what did the Disciples think? It was natural Peter should answer first, for he was even now the acknowledged leader among the Twelve, being the eldest, not to mention brash. In his brashness, he was altogether correct this time: Jesus was the promised Messiah, and the unique Son of God. His Master replied the truth of this answer was not a matter of humans, nor of human understanding. It was the truth of God Almighty. Peter was altogether certain of his answer, but it smacks of a child in school correctly quoting the textbook answer to a question he hardly understands. Time was so short, and there was so much they needed to grow to carry on this gospel ministry.
Still, Jesus is able to press the message with a sense of humor. Looking past the nit-picking debate over the meaning of the words in the Greek text of Matthew's Gospel, we see a Hebrew play on words which just barely comes across in English. Peter, the name Jesus gave His cousin, was both a joke and prophecy. If anyone was more likely to bluster and brag, then reverse himself repeatedly, it was Simon. Jesus called him "a stone." Later, it would be a fit name. Hebrew culture often presumed a man's name given at birth would predict his character, but a name given by one's lord upon vestment of an office was more a title, though often there might be a pun involved. In this setting, Jesus called attention to the joke, then added the image of Peter broken off from the foundation stone of this mighty confession of who Jesus was. With such a confession, Peter would be the first stone of a grand building (1 Peter 2:4-6), a massive congregation of souls committed to following Him.
The gates of a city were the not just a defense, but the place where the local wise men gathered to conduct the business of the city, especially in dispensing justice as a lower courts system. The justice system of Hades would not be able to stand in the face of God's truth as spoken by Peter. With such a declaration of faith, Peter -- or anyone else -- could execute the justice of God in this fallen world. With such an understanding, the congregation of Christ's followers would represent the King of Heaven in all earthly matters.
However, the time had not yet come to carry this declaration into the world. That had to wait for the carrying out of God's sentence against all sin. Here it was Jesus began to introduce to His Disciples just what sort of Messiah He was. The Jewish leadership were the very heart of opposition on this earth. In the end, they would kill Jesus. Yet, this would hardly be the end of the matter, for He would rise again the third day. Having already taken the mantle of junior leader, Peter pulled Jesus aside and insisted He stop saying such things. Brash as ever, the text indicates Peter was quite sharp in his rebuke. Jesus responded by warning Peter such thoughts made him an adversary, too. Peter was still trapped in dreams of a political kingdom on this earth, not thinking spiritually.
Indeed, Jesus pointedly said following Him required nailing this life to a cross. The image was shocking. Learning to let go of this world, not just our goods and our position, but all our hopes and dreams for this life, would be the most agonizing experience any of them could imagine. Yet it was the only way. Clinging to this existence guaranteed the loss of it and the soul, too. The price of eternal salvation for the soul was abandonment of this life. When He came back to end this age and take up the harvest of souls with His angels, those whose works reflected such truth would join Him in eternity, not some mere earthly kingdom.
Matthew records Jesus' last comment, which was surely something meant to lighten the mood of a dark discussion about His coming death and their future sufferings. Some of those standing with Him at that moment would see something of that eternal glory when the Kingdom was inaugurated on this earth. They would see Him in is glorified body, and would begin living in the temporal manifestation of His reign before they left this world. They would get a taste of eternity here on earth.
Note: Edited for clarity.
Friday, November 2, 2007
Introduction to Daniel
Even before the Exodus, throughout the history of Old Testament Israel, the nation seemed never far from lapsing into idolatry. Once inside the Promised Land, the very similarities between worship of Baal and Ashtarte and that of Jehovah made it all too easy. It was never a case in their minds of rejecting Jehovah, but simply adding the others. The claim of God to being the only god was too foreign a concept for that people in that time. It simply did not register, and once they slipped a bit across that line to adding a familiar worship practice of another god, it was not many steps to accepting other gods.
By the time Manasseh takes the throne of Judah in 696 BC, the deportation of the Northern Kingdom was still a fresh memory. Sadly, the cautionary tale was missed, for Manasseh was the most idolatrous of Southern Kings (1 Chronicles 33). He was also the longest lived, holding power for 55 years. By the time he came to his senses near the end of life, it was too late to undo much of the damage. An entire generation had sunk deeply into polytheism, to the point of shutting down the Temple worship and never reading the Torah. Indeed, no one knew where to find a copy of it, because when the righteous boy-king Josiah came to power, and the Book of the Law was found hidden in the Temple during renovations (622 BC), it's commands shocked those who read it for the first time.
Josiah's Reforms brought a sweeping revival of faith. While we can be sure not everyone was thrilled with the shifting balance of power which must have followed such a revival, we can be sure the entire royal household, by then a huge clan, as well as the upper nobility, at least superficially adopted the reforms. Many within the elite were true believers.
Daniel was among these. While we are not told his precise lineage, we know he was most likely of the royal household because of what we know about ancient Babylonian Imperial policies, within the context of customs throughout that part of the world. Shortly after Josiah's death, his successor faced the steamroller conquest of Babylon. Jeremiah had prophesied Babylon would succeed, and counseled capitulation in the punishing hand of God -- punishment in part due to the sins of Manasseh. This conquest came in 605 BC. Typical of that day and time, regarding royalty as a class apart and above the rabble, Babylon's imperial policy was to draft young men from the royal clans and finish their education in Babylonian academies to fit them for court service, just as lesser men were drafted to serve in the army.
Serving in the Imperial Babylonian Court his entire adult life, Daniel outlived the empire itself. The ruling dynasty, upon reaching the third generation, was promptly conquered by the Medo-Persian Empire. Typically, Daniel was accepted into the service of the new rulers. In those times, conquest was more about gaining control and tribute, not destroying and killing. The previous imperial house may have all been executed or enslaved, but everyone else willing to serve was left pretty much in place. Why waste all that training and experience? It was from this new position in the Medo-Persian Imperial Court Daniel published this book of his experiences and prophecies.
While it was promised the surviving Nation of Israel would be allowed to return to their homes, few went. This was a direct reflection of their failure to learn from the Exile what God intended. Surely, they never again fell into the trap of idolatry, but little else changed. Already the overwhelming emphasis on external ritual observance had begun to extinguish the spiritual fire in the hearts and minds of the people. Obeying the Law was a matter of sentiment, culture, habit, fear -- but never again a matter of true conviction from within, barring a few individual examples we are given. The warning of Asaph (Psalm 78) indicates it was clear long beforehand: Real obedience to God from the heart was the purpose of the Law, but was simply not possible with Israel under the Covenant of Moses. Thus, Asaph promised God would from thenceforth winnow out the fakes from the faithful by using parables. Those whose hearts belonged to God would see the higher truths within parabolic language; the rest would hardly benefit from a direct and plain explanation. Only a handful of prophets after that time spoke in plain terms.
Thus, we find Daniel's prophecies buried in symbolic terms. This aspect of Semitic culture was long established. While a great deal of this lore has been lost to us, enough can be found to make Daniel's book serve its purpose. Further, we to a large extent understand what is must have meant to the immediate target audience. The Post-Exile Nation of Israel was merely an incubator for the Messiah. That they rejected Him when eventually He appeared was merely a symptom of the same disease which put Daniel in Babylon. The nation whose existence was supposed to have been a reflection of God's glorious revelation had rarely come close, and failed utterly to spread His message to other nations (see Jonah; Isaiah 59:14-17 for examples). Indeed, they had rejected that task so completely, they would reject the message itself in the person of Christ. This hideous truth must have torn at Daniel's soul.
By the time Manasseh takes the throne of Judah in 696 BC, the deportation of the Northern Kingdom was still a fresh memory. Sadly, the cautionary tale was missed, for Manasseh was the most idolatrous of Southern Kings (1 Chronicles 33). He was also the longest lived, holding power for 55 years. By the time he came to his senses near the end of life, it was too late to undo much of the damage. An entire generation had sunk deeply into polytheism, to the point of shutting down the Temple worship and never reading the Torah. Indeed, no one knew where to find a copy of it, because when the righteous boy-king Josiah came to power, and the Book of the Law was found hidden in the Temple during renovations (622 BC), it's commands shocked those who read it for the first time.
Josiah's Reforms brought a sweeping revival of faith. While we can be sure not everyone was thrilled with the shifting balance of power which must have followed such a revival, we can be sure the entire royal household, by then a huge clan, as well as the upper nobility, at least superficially adopted the reforms. Many within the elite were true believers.
Daniel was among these. While we are not told his precise lineage, we know he was most likely of the royal household because of what we know about ancient Babylonian Imperial policies, within the context of customs throughout that part of the world. Shortly after Josiah's death, his successor faced the steamroller conquest of Babylon. Jeremiah had prophesied Babylon would succeed, and counseled capitulation in the punishing hand of God -- punishment in part due to the sins of Manasseh. This conquest came in 605 BC. Typical of that day and time, regarding royalty as a class apart and above the rabble, Babylon's imperial policy was to draft young men from the royal clans and finish their education in Babylonian academies to fit them for court service, just as lesser men were drafted to serve in the army.
Serving in the Imperial Babylonian Court his entire adult life, Daniel outlived the empire itself. The ruling dynasty, upon reaching the third generation, was promptly conquered by the Medo-Persian Empire. Typically, Daniel was accepted into the service of the new rulers. In those times, conquest was more about gaining control and tribute, not destroying and killing. The previous imperial house may have all been executed or enslaved, but everyone else willing to serve was left pretty much in place. Why waste all that training and experience? It was from this new position in the Medo-Persian Imperial Court Daniel published this book of his experiences and prophecies.
While it was promised the surviving Nation of Israel would be allowed to return to their homes, few went. This was a direct reflection of their failure to learn from the Exile what God intended. Surely, they never again fell into the trap of idolatry, but little else changed. Already the overwhelming emphasis on external ritual observance had begun to extinguish the spiritual fire in the hearts and minds of the people. Obeying the Law was a matter of sentiment, culture, habit, fear -- but never again a matter of true conviction from within, barring a few individual examples we are given. The warning of Asaph (Psalm 78) indicates it was clear long beforehand: Real obedience to God from the heart was the purpose of the Law, but was simply not possible with Israel under the Covenant of Moses. Thus, Asaph promised God would from thenceforth winnow out the fakes from the faithful by using parables. Those whose hearts belonged to God would see the higher truths within parabolic language; the rest would hardly benefit from a direct and plain explanation. Only a handful of prophets after that time spoke in plain terms.
Thus, we find Daniel's prophecies buried in symbolic terms. This aspect of Semitic culture was long established. While a great deal of this lore has been lost to us, enough can be found to make Daniel's book serve its purpose. Further, we to a large extent understand what is must have meant to the immediate target audience. The Post-Exile Nation of Israel was merely an incubator for the Messiah. That they rejected Him when eventually He appeared was merely a symptom of the same disease which put Daniel in Babylon. The nation whose existence was supposed to have been a reflection of God's glorious revelation had rarely come close, and failed utterly to spread His message to other nations (see Jonah; Isaiah 59:14-17 for examples). Indeed, they had rejected that task so completely, they would reject the message itself in the person of Christ. This hideous truth must have torn at Daniel's soul.
Thursday, November 1, 2007
Marriage Works When You Work at Marriage
Over the past few weeks my wife has discovered a few unusual websites and newsletters by women. Real women -- you know, the kind who know what women are supposed to be and do according the Word. There is some overlap between that and the popular-selling evangelical female authors, but it's not the same thing. Most of those are just prissy middle-class American women selling their suburban Western value system as "godliness."
No, the real thing is different, but you'd have to read an awful lot to catch on if you are coming out of that. My wife tells me she had gotten sick of the fakes long ago, but had a tough time finding writers who really understood. A primary issue remains: There is a clear and radical difference between male and female. God has designed each for different roles. While some have figured that out, they still don't understand just what those differences are supposed to be, based on what males and females are supposed to be.
Here are a few items she's read lately: Men who serve God have visions. Some of them are bunk, but he may not find out until he tries it. Never mind how clearly you see that, you can't protect him from God's teaching hand. Don't be surprised if he tunes you out when you start trying to protect him from failure and mistakes. Support him when he's doing the best he knows, because the support is more important than what you might know. Treat him like a hero, and he'll become more like one. Don't use fake praise, because he can smell it. If you fail to support him for any reason, don't be surprised if a barrier grows between the two of you. Men called of God are granted the final decision and veto power on choosing directions. Vision is far, far more important than prosperity, comfort, or all those other things God promised to take care of, if only you'll trust Him.
The biggest problem we run into is false expectations. If you develop your concept of marriage from books, TV, movies, or just the average suburban church families, you'll be looking for the wrong thing in all the wrong places. The correction of this common false vision is more than books, more than newsletters, more than websites. It has to be seen firsthand, and compared with all the other stuff which fails. If you get lost on the way out, a little counseling can be useful, but choose very carefully whose counsel you seek.
My purpose here is not to present a bunch of links, name a bunch of authors, nor start a long series of lessons on the subject. I'm just asking my readers to begin seeking God's face, and allow the Holy Spirit to begin His work in your spirit behind the conscious processes. When you realize things aren't working, you'll begin seeking His face for the answers.
Of all the things in my life which it can be said I chose, let me proclaim before all Creation: Marrying my wife was the smartest thing I ever did.
No, the real thing is different, but you'd have to read an awful lot to catch on if you are coming out of that. My wife tells me she had gotten sick of the fakes long ago, but had a tough time finding writers who really understood. A primary issue remains: There is a clear and radical difference between male and female. God has designed each for different roles. While some have figured that out, they still don't understand just what those differences are supposed to be, based on what males and females are supposed to be.
Here are a few items she's read lately: Men who serve God have visions. Some of them are bunk, but he may not find out until he tries it. Never mind how clearly you see that, you can't protect him from God's teaching hand. Don't be surprised if he tunes you out when you start trying to protect him from failure and mistakes. Support him when he's doing the best he knows, because the support is more important than what you might know. Treat him like a hero, and he'll become more like one. Don't use fake praise, because he can smell it. If you fail to support him for any reason, don't be surprised if a barrier grows between the two of you. Men called of God are granted the final decision and veto power on choosing directions. Vision is far, far more important than prosperity, comfort, or all those other things God promised to take care of, if only you'll trust Him.
The biggest problem we run into is false expectations. If you develop your concept of marriage from books, TV, movies, or just the average suburban church families, you'll be looking for the wrong thing in all the wrong places. The correction of this common false vision is more than books, more than newsletters, more than websites. It has to be seen firsthand, and compared with all the other stuff which fails. If you get lost on the way out, a little counseling can be useful, but choose very carefully whose counsel you seek.
My purpose here is not to present a bunch of links, name a bunch of authors, nor start a long series of lessons on the subject. I'm just asking my readers to begin seeking God's face, and allow the Holy Spirit to begin His work in your spirit behind the conscious processes. When you realize things aren't working, you'll begin seeking His face for the answers.
Of all the things in my life which it can be said I chose, let me proclaim before all Creation: Marrying my wife was the smartest thing I ever did.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)