Egypt, voting, and culture

Promising news: Egypt's Mubarak Orders Election Reform. I pray, among other things, that this may improve conditions for Egypt's Coptic and other Christians. From another angle, I feel kinda sad that auditorium crowds in our culture aren't prone to "spontaneously reciting verses of poetry". Someone has called the USA the "country that forgot how to sing."

Pray for 60-day stay for Terri Schiavo

See World Magazine Blog for details.

UPDATE: An important three-week period is upon us: Link

Being sharp

"As iron sharpens iron,
so one man sharpens another" Proverbs 27:17

I think another version says, "sharpens his friend."

Yesterday I was falling behind on my confirmation prep, a serious matter, because youth deserve our best, and I'm not naturally gifted at keeping order amongst the rambunctious. I was saved by a deus ex machina, as when I stepped inside the narthex of the town church I saw that the box of educational materials for the recent "Luther" film had arrived. They included a game called the "being saved game", intended to illustrate the type of theology of indulgences, etc. which Luther encountered in the 16th century. It definitely got and held the class's attention. There's also now the responsibility to explain, accurately and fairly, the ways that Catholic theology has changed since that place and time, though on the other hand I have quarrels with them today as well.

There's also the responsibility not to depend upon dei ex machina all the time, though I got by this time.

It's interesting how many people gave me compliments last night on my sermon on the Year of Jubilee AND Purim AND Hanukkah, though I hadn't done much prep there either, and I think it got a bit rambling, perhaps too much territory in one sermon. I think people are just plain blessed by God's Word, especially if it's a corner they haven't heard much about before.

In other news, this year I've decided to work on Bach's 4th Suite for Unaccompanied Cello, new territory since I worked up the first three ages ago. At my age (approaching 40) I can really feel it in my fingers if I neglect practice, and I have this sense that I need to sharpen up by exploring new territory. That's part of why I'm doing the Jewish Studies program as well - if I don't keep on learning new stuff, I have this fear of freezing up in dullness. The number one thing I want to still have when I get old (other than Jesus, of course, Who is #1 in everything) is my mind - and the number two thing I want is fingers that can still play the cello. "Use it or lose it" as they say.

The common thread here is "being sharp". I've appreciated comments from a few people on my recent posts, and I have a sense of being sharpened in my dull points. I just want to say, if there's anybody who's been reading silently, I invite you to join in the mutual sharpening process by dropping a comment or two, and maybe we'll all gain from the experience. Shalom!

She only needs to be fed

All Terri Schiavo needs to live is for someone to feed her. She's not a "vegetable" being kept alive by extraordinary means. I couldn't have said it better than Wittenberg Gate. If her husband doesn't want to be stuck with her, he should just take off & divorce her, rather than seek her death, for crying out loud. Funny that today's devaluation of human life makes it so he can look like a hero by seeking for the life-giving tube to be pulled, while he would look like a cad if he committed the lesser sin (but still a sin) of abandoning her.

Potpourri - Lenten explosion, "Scapegoat" followup, Hooray for Adventists

This post got long again. The first paragraph is very cheerful, & the end is fairly positive as well, but the middle gets kinda deep & lugubrious (maybe "ponderous" would be a more accurate word). You are welcome to skip it and read something more cheerful, like a book by Lemony Snicket.

We had the most amazing, inspiring time at the country church on Wednesday evening, when at least 70 people showed up for Lenten worship! About 40 from the town church and 30 from the country church - it's not atypical for those numbers of people to show up on Sunday! What an encouragement for all, especially the country church, who have experienced some lean times not so very long ago.

It was gratifying to receive a comment from a complete stranger on my "Three Great Scapegoats" post below. Thanks, Archangel, for stopping by. It's nice to know that my new little blog hasn't gone completely unnoticed. He zeroed in on Constantine, saying, "Constantine gets the blame for a lot because he is guilty of a lot. Since he was the architect of much of what remains in modern Christianity, it is no surprise to find those that are his defenders. They simply defend what they know, not what is right."

So it looks like some attention to Constantine is in order. Some, such as Dan Brown in The DaVinci Code, claim that Christianity as we know it today (the Divinity of Christ, etc.) was basically concocted as a plot to centralize power. Much could be said on this topic, but for today I'll just ask this question: why would the early Christians cede the power to change Christianity to a theological neophyte like Constantine just because he happened to be emperor? The blood of the martyrs proves that the early Christians would "rather fight than switch" when it comes to foundational beliefs. So where's the mass martyrdom of Christians who didn't believe in Constantine's new form of Christianity? And in places like Ethiopia or the Indus valley, where the Roman Empire never ruled, why are the ancient forms of Christianity there so strangely similar to Roman and Byzantine Christianity? (Monophysitism & Nestorianism may have some differences from Roman & Byzantine Christology, but compared to Dan Brown's faux-gnosticism they're not much different at all from "Mere Christianity" as we know it)

Others, such as many Protestants, affirm "fundamentals of the faith" such as the Divinity/Humanity of Christ, the Virgin Birth, etc., but blame Constantine for taking the ancient catacomb faith and turning it into a hierarchical institution (and I suspect Archangel may be coming from this direction). Seventh-Day Adventist prophetess Ellen G. White makes a comment in The Great Controversy to the effect that Constantine's faith was a sham, and many would agree. Constantine was a flawed person who was responsible for much bloodshed, including members of his own family. Such was par for the course for emperors, though I think we ought to be able to expect better from a Christian.

To me this seems a trickier charge to explore than Dan Brown's charge. Ultimately the answer lies not so much in studying Constantine as in getting to know the Early Church so well that we can see what changed or didn't change when Constantine came along. I've been reading The Apostolic
Fathers, and one thing I've already learned was that Ignatius of Antioch in AD 107 had a much more hierarchical view of the Church than I expected, insisting on the threefold ministry of bishops, presbyters, and deacons. That doesn't mean that he had in mind a Roman-style bishop, but it does show that at least some Christians less than a century after Christ had a very hierarchical view of clergy authority - certainly a challenge to much of my thinking.

Now, let me shift gears. I could voice my disagreements with the Seventh-Day Adventists about the sacraments, about eschatology, about the role of certain Old Testament laws, about their aforementioned part in questioning the sincerity of Constantine's faith, about many other things. But today I want to say, "Three cheers for the Adventists!!!" We've now been to two sessions of a "vegetarian natural life cooking" seminar at the SDA church in our area. I wish more Christians had a comprehensive vision of the meaning of Christianity in all areas of life, the way these dear people do (that's what I appreciate about Francis Schaeffer & L'Abri as well). We're impressed by the team of women, from their 20s to their 60s, who are sharing such a deep knowledge of home economics and healthy cooking (and the food is very tasty, too!). I'm embarrassed that it's an idiosynchratic sect where we have to go to learn these things, and that among more "mainstream" Christians like the Lutherans it can seem a bit kooky for a church to focus so much on treating the body as the temple of the Holy Spirit (as the Bible says it is).

Well, it's time that I spend more of my time & effort working on my class assignments for the distance ed course I'm taking on Jewish Theology, so my blog entries will focus mostly on those topics in the next couple months or so.

Update on SS Reform

As to the issues about Social Security reform and welfare for the mentally ill and others with few resources at their disposal (see SS reform and the weakest among us below), "B" has kindly supplied me with a couple of links:

United States Psyciatric Rehabilitation Association: www.iapsrs.org

National Alliance for the Mentally Ill: www.nami.org

I haven't followed the links yet to see what I may find, but I intend to.

Hatching the EGG

So if these little boxes start exploding all over the world, should we be looking upward for Christ to return? STORY:Can this black box see into the future?

SS reform and the weakest among us

Today the World Magazine Blog has a post entitled Welfare Experience, in which opinions are solicited concerning how well welfare reform has worked for people in the last ten years. The very first comment someone left got my attention. "B" pointed out some alarming things about how "Proposed changes in Social Security and Medicaid may reduce disability benefits."

Investment-wise, I've never considered the private investment idea for SS to be as risky as some paint it, but it was alarming to see how it could greatly reduce available benefits for people such as the mentally ill who often have no other resource available. Again, from B's comment:

"Medicaid, a partnership between the federal government and states, has become the single most important public funder of mental health services. Incoming HHS Secretary Mike Leavitt has proposed reduced coverage of services for individuals in Medicaid's "optional" eligibility categories, which includes many people with significant disabilities. Leavitt's proposals as Governor of Utah resulted in substantial cuts in mental health benefits in that state.

Also the disincentives to work are remarkable for those persons with psychiatric disabilities who rely strongly on SSDI. If they try to work they may lose their benefits altogether and if the work trial fails they are without any security whatsoever."

I've seen first-hand cases exactly like that. I left a comment there as well, which I'll copy below:

"Thanks, B, for your info. I had leaned in favor of the private investment option for SS reform, but it is alarming to see how it could affect the mentally ill. They are already in one of the weakest points of the social safety net. The mentally ill are routinely turned down for medical insurance, and even a history of "mere" clinical depression can result in being turned down for disability insurance. The options are few for one of the most studiously ignored classes of needy people in our land - studiously ignored by the Church as well as the State."

There's a big part of me that looks at government welfare and says, "why are we depending upon the State to do the work of the Church?" But I don't think the Church is quite ready to carry whatever load the State dumps. I am very "conservative" on "social issues", and moderately so on fiscal issues, though I have a populist streak that makes me "miss" the Democratic Party of days before I was born. But having said what I said in the first part of the paragraph, I'll turn around and say that I do believe "we the people" have a responsibility as a nation not to ignore the plight of the weakest among us.

UPDATE: "B" has yet to provide documentation for the above allegations, so it's possible that it's just a rumor, or a "red herring" as another commentor has said on that thread. But I'm still concerned. Everything's up for grabs when congress goes to work. I generally support our conservative congress, but that doesn't mean that I completely trust them.

Three Great Scapegoats, Part I

This post got rather long. Feel free to read it in installments. For that matter, as Lemony Snicket would say, you're welcome to set it aside right now and read something more pleasant, such as Peter Rabbit.

Well, my wife and I just took a new step into the 21st Century the other night when I came home with our first DVD player - nothing fancy, just one of the little "Symphonic" players that Wal-Mart is selling by the crateload for $38. But it's doing the trick. Soon I intend to get the complete boxed set of Jackson's "Lord of the Rings", but for now our DVD collection includes "Mary Poppins 40th Anniversary Edition", "10 Roy Rogers Episodes" (that one was the most promising selection in the bargain bin), and the 2004 "Luther" movie starring Joseph Fiennes - which brings us to the main subject of this post.

It's a shame that "Luther" barely made a dent in the box office. It's really pretty good, though perhaps not an all-time classic. Curious that it bombed in the same year that "Passion" was so popular, though my wife offered an explanation that makes sense. Perhaps people thought the Luther movie looked too "churchy". Ironically lots of people in our society don't see Jesus as being "churchy." People who would never step inside a church still find Jesus interesting (sometimes they project their own wishes & pet beliefs on Him rather than getting to know Him as He really is, but that's a subject in itself). People stay away often because they feel hurt by the Church in some way. Yet many of them don't blame Christ for it.

It's right, of course, that Jesus is more popular than Luther (for that matter, He remains more popular than John Lennon and the Beatles, but I digress...). I think Luther himself would say with John the Baptist, "He must increase and I must decrease" (John 3:30).

It does look, though, like video sales are pretty good - the DVD is ranked #162 at Amazon, which is pretty good. Perhaps right now lots of fellow members of "Thrivent Financial For Lutherans" are doing what I'm doing - getting the video in time to send in a $5 rebate coupon in time for the Feb. 15th deadline.

In Church History I see Three Great Scapegoats, namely Constantine, Augustine, and Luther. All three were Christian leaders who rightfully are praised for their strong points (Augustine & Luther especially had very large minds), are rightfully criticized for their weak points, but even more so, wrongfully get blamed for lots of things that really aren't their fault. I was originally going to call them THE Three Great Scapegoats, but there could be other ones I haven't thought of, and none of them has received a fraction of the blame as what Christ Himself has received. Come to think of it, Paul falls into the "scapegoat" category too, certainly occupying a position above the "Three", though of course still below Christ in every way.

Martin Luther, for his part, gets blamed for a host of things. Some decry him as a "rebel", though no reformer tried harder to avoid a schism than he did, and nobody wanted a denomination named after himself less than he did. He had a bull-headed, cantankerous streak, but that's not the same thing as being deliberately rebellious. Some Protestants think he didn't go far enough as a reformer, by leaving in "Catholic" doctrines such as baptismal regeneration. Some call him "deranged", some consider him a proto-Nazi, though the things he said against the Jews (which I think he was wrong to say) were no harsher than things he said against Roman church officials, or "murderous hordes of peasants", or Calvinistic reformers, or anyone else who became his adversary. Some blame him for doubting the canonicity of certain Bible books such as James, though in fact other Augustinians before him had done the same thing - it wasn't his own innovation (and his opinion of James, etc., improved as he got older).

On the other hand, some who like him create him in their own image, and credit him for things he would have rejected. An admissions rep from a well-known Calvinistic grad school (at which I didn't matriculate) once told me, "I understand Luther was a Calvinist." He intended it as a compliment. He meant that in his mind, writings of Luther such as "The Bondage of the Will" logically led to Calvinistic conclusions about grace and election. Yet it was part of Luther's very nature "not to go there", not to let reason lead him to any conclusion that diminished Christ's free offer of salvation to all.

So like the other Great Scapegoats, he produces a sharp divide among those who behold him. "The thoughts of many hearts are revealed" (Luke 2:35). As for me, I actually come away from my first viewing of the movie, appreciating Luther the most that I have at any time since my seminary days. He had a large mind, and a sincere desire to have a right relationship with God and to serve Him faithfully. He rightfully protested the multiple errors related to the sale of indulgences, the commercialization and corruption of the Church, and the lack of clear teaching about salvation by grace through faith in a loving God revealed in Jesus Christ (though of course it was not totally absent from the Church - the movie does a good job with Luther's superior in the Augustinian order, Johann von Staupitz, a God-loving, compassionate man of integrity who did much to steer Luther in the right direction). As for Joseph Fiennes, it was a bit hard for me to get used to his narrow face when I'm so used to the stocky, square-jawed look of Luther's actual portrait. It was easier than I expected to put behind me the memory of Fiennes' role as a viciously amoral Nazi in "Schindler's List". I partly agree & partly disagree with Roger Ebert that Fiennes put too much wavering doubt and too little conviction into his portrayal of Luther. I think he did overplay the "doubt" thing, but in real life I believe Luther truly was stunned by the unexpected consequences of his attempt to reform the Church from the inside, and I doubt that he reacted to it like some kind of marble statue. As for the conviction, I think there was plenty of it in the film. He clearly is portrayed as one who said and did what he thought was right, regardless of how terrified he may have been of the outcome.

His theological development, especially his key doctrines concerning faith and grace, isn't developed very thoroughly, though there are some interesting vignettes. Orthodox viewers may find a scene interesting, in which Luther is in class listening to the professor lecture on the then-recently reaffirmed doctrine that "outside the [Catholic] Church there is no salvation", to which Luther replies, "what of the Greek Christians? Are the saints of the Greek Church damned?" Whether that's based upon an actual classroom event I don't know. I know he wrote on the subject.

The movie is more honest than the old 1953 "Martin Luther" film about the Peasant Wars - more honest in that I don't think they get touched upon at all in the older film.

Anyway, I overall give a positive recommendation to the film, at least as a good discussion starter, an introduction to Luther, but by no means the final word. As for Luther himself, he is neither as perfect as some people hold him to be, nor as bad as others consider him. His impact came partly because people in Germany were already angry with the Roman Church. He didn't march in and stir up trouble where none existed before. It came partly because he truly had a large mind and a large vision. It came partly because of his sincerity and love (the movie gives some vignettes which, though probably fictionalized, show a neglected truth - that he wasn't just a lofty leader, but a parish pastor loved by the people in his church, winning them over by his integrity and compassion). And I believe (not just because I happen to be a Lutheran by affiliation) that he truly had some important things to say from Scripture that people needed to hear.

There's a multi-volume, encyclopedic edition of Luther's Works edited by church historian extraordinaire Jaroslav Pelikan. It represents much of Pelikan's life work. Pelikan was Lutheran for most of his career, but in 1998 joined the Orthodox Church, which has its quarrels with both Augustine and Luther. It's interesting in that light that no quotes from Pelikan are floating around which pooh-pooh the importance of either Augustine or Luther. In Pelikan's "The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition", written while he was a Lutheran, he speaks of their importance, neither fawning over them nor belittling them, but acknowledging their tremendous influence and originality, giving credit where credit is due. Never has Pelikan said that all the time and effort he spent on Luther was wasted. Whatever our persuasion or affiliation, let's not be too quick to dismiss genius or slow to acknowledge the best that Luther offers.

National treasures? On the lighter side ...

Did you know that President Theodore Roosevelt sounded exactly like Mr. Magoo? That and other facts from a "humor tour" of the National Archives, here from Gene Weingarten:

Whee the People

On the other hand ...

Mere Comments has a couple of posts which present well the "pro" arguments for the ash ceremony. Anyway, our ashless Ash Wednesday fellowship and worship were beautiful this evening, with the country church folks coming to our joint worship at the town church. Next Wednesday the town church folks will head out to the country church. The LORD took the hasty plans I laid out for this evening's message on the Spring feasts of ancient Israel (Leviticus 23) and how they point to Christ, and He made much more come out of His Word than my own efforts could have accomplished. It's a joy to be along for the ride when God is on the move.

Clean Wednesday

I've always loved Lent. It is one of the strong points of Upper Midwestern Lutheranism that there's a strong tradition of Wednesday Lenten services each Wednesday, not just on Ash Wednesday and Good Friday, as I observed among many Lutherans in other parts of the USA. The extra helping of devotion to Christ Crucified has always seemed luminous to me. Some Christian traditions would decry our lack of "fasting", and they could be right, but there is such a healthy willingness here to set aside other pursuits, and such a special, glowing quality to our Lenten Wednesday evening services, that it seems to me that that in itself is a kind of fast. Lutherans don't do seasonal fasting (which to some would seem too "Catholic"), nor do we often set aside special, personal times of prayer and fasting (the form which Protestants do more lip service to, though it actually is done very seldomly). We could do with a lot more fasting. After all, it's in the Bible. We who trumpet the Bible, "Sola Scriptura", can be just as conveniently selective as anyone else about which portions of the Bible we will actually pay attention to. (It happens that starting tomorrow evening we have plans to attend a five-week vegetarian cooking workshop at the Seventh-Day Adventist Church - interesting teachers for our Lenten fast!) But, to our churches' credit, there is a great desire shown to exercise the kind of fast recommended in Isaiah 58:6ff.

One thing about the Scandinavian Pietist Lutheran Ash Wednesday tradition - it is done without ashes, and I'm OK with that. I've been in on the ash tradition, and I have no quarrel with those who find it meaningful. I believe it's connected with the concept of repentance in sackcloth and ashes. But our wing of Lutheranism likes to do things plainly and simply, so the ashes are omitted. This is an interesting congruence with the Eastern Orthodox tradition (not the only such congruence between Orthodoxy and Scandinavian non-Scholastic Lutheranism), which begins Lent not with "Ash Wednesday" but "Clean Monday", referencing Matthew 6:17,18: "But when you fast, put oil on your head and wash your face, so that it will not be obvious to men that you are fasting, but only to your Father, who is unseen; and your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you."

I suppose in light of those verses it would be backwards to signify fasting with an unwashed face, but not to fast! Pray for us, that the inner fast we begin on this "Clean Wednesday" will truly result in inner cleansing and the greater glory of God.

A call for creative Christians

"Might we please see less energy (and money) spent on criticizing what others are producing and more channeled into developing better lawyers, professors, philosophers, artists, journalists and filmmakers? This way produces results. Criticizing cartoon characters doesn't."

Cal Thomas: "Shedding Light In Dark Places"

You would never guess this from our media ...

From Ending slavery - Thomas Sowell:

"Nothing could be more jolting and discordant with the vision of today's intellectuals than the fact that it was businessmen, devout religious leaders and Western imperialists who together destroyed slavery around the world. And if it doesn't fit their vision, it is the same to them as if it never happened."

Transfiguration Sunday

There is an ancient tradition in which the Transfiguration is celebrated on August 6, but in Lutheranism we have a custom of observing the last Sunday before Lent as Transfiguration Sunday.

Almighty God, on the mountain you showed your glory in the Transfiguration of your Son. Give us the vision to see beyond the turmoil of our world and to behold the King in all His glory; through your Son, Jesus Christ our LORD, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and forever. Amen.

Mark your 2029 calendar ...

This is close, man! If anything like this ever actually hit the Earth, "Things wouldn't be the same." "But in keeping with his promise we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, the home of righteousness." 2 Peter 3:13.

Asteroid 2004 MN4: A Really Near Miss!

Today's small piece of the Big Picture

A couple of weeks ago we went to the Pastors' & Wives' Retreat in Wisconsin, my first time there in eight years, my wife's first time ever. We were blessed by some refreshing insights from Gene Edward Veith, culture editor of "World Magazine", on "vocation". Our life consists of callings from God, that generally are very concretely connected with the here and now, in the roles we find ourselves in, loving and serving those around us because God is "hidden" in them. For example, marriage is God's calling to love and serve my wife. And today I'm called to love and serve the people who call me "pastor", by submitting bulletin info, visiting a bereaved family, visiting a young farmer who broke his leg, and the list goes on.

I find myself (rather often) focusing on things beyond today's callings. I'm working on a master's degree in Jewish studies, at a rather slow pace. I have up to a year to do each course. It's nearly a year since I finished the first course. I have until June to do the current one, but I don't want to fall too far behind a one-course-per-year pace. At my current rate I'll finish the program in 2018, which means that I'm wasting my time whenever I surf the web looking for what program to do on the doctoral level after that (and I admit I do that occasionally). My current course on "Jewish Theology" is interesting, but not what I'm ultimately interested in. Eventually I hope to do a "concentration area" on the "Postexilic era", the crucial time between 400 BC & AD 100 when Christianity appeared, because my real goal in Jewish studies is to get to know the origins of my own Christian faith better. To see the beginning of the Church through new eyes, by working forward from a knowledge of the Church's direct precessor in post-exilic Judaism rather than working backward from Lutheranism. But I'm not there yet. This spring's calling is to do some essays on topics like "describe the role of 'polarity' in Jewish theology" and "describe the Jewish 'smorgasbord' of ideas concerning God." Not my top priority, but indeed if it's God's call for me to acquire a deep knowledge of the Jewish side of my faith's origins, then this is a hoop I need to jump through today.

Martin Luther said something like this: "I pray an hour each morning, unless I'm going to be especially busy that day. Then I pray for two hours!" That's the opposite of my own trend, I'm afraid. LORD, please teach me today's priorities, that I may answer the calls you give me today, just today. In Jesus' name, Amen.

An "insignificant asterisk"

I don't know much about the "Emerging Church Movement". I think their four values of "humanity, church, scripture, and truth" are on the right track, though I also think it would be better to rejuvenate the old Church rather than to "construct a new church." But I'm on their side on this one: "Desert Pastor" at Paradoxology posted some things about the recent "Emergent convention", including this new "logo":



It was prompted by this (from Paradoxology)

"During the excellent round of discussion with those in our L.C., one particular associate pastor shared that his senior pastor wasn't all that thriled he was attending the Emergent Convention -- he wanted him instead to attend a Willow Creek conference or the like, commenting that the emerging church movement as "an insignificant asterisk on the history of church growth." We all howled! Astutely, Doug Pagitt quickly announced our movement's new "logo" and posted it on the meeting room wall (pictured)."

Someday all the world will see what wonders the LORD has performed through "insignificant asterisks."

Semi-idle thought

It's been 21 years since the first time I heard Steve Taylor's "Meltdown" album, but it wasn't until the early 21st Century that it hit me - he coined a new word, "supremist" (meaning supremacist) for the song "We Don't Need No Colour Code".

"White supremists eat their young" is the line.

Unique origin of YHWH faith - a piece of evidence

While I'm thinking of it, I'd like to share a piece of evidence that the God of the Bible is real, which I gleaned from a course in "The Religion of Biblical Israel" which I took through the Spertus Institute. People often think of Christianity as one "mythology" among many, but the prof, Dr. Rachel Dulin, argued well how the ancient Israelite faith in YHWH was uniquely unlike the mythological religions of their neighbors. Myths generally focus on the "private lives" of the gods and goddesses - their births, marriages, affairs, deaths, wars, parties, etc. - and this world and the people in it are almost an afterthought. Much of it takes place before the creation of, and apart from, the world we live in. But the Bible contains no stories of YHWH's private life, before, during, or after creation. It focuses instead upon YHWH acting in the world we live in, interacting with regular human beings. In ancient Middle Eastern polytheism the king was a sort of in-between person, a point of contact between the realm of the deities and the world of humanity. It is for that very reason that it took a long time before kings were allowed in Israel. The pagan deities were really a part of the universe, and were, like people, subject to forces of nature, magic, etc. not quite under their control. YHWH, on the other hand, is transcendant over nature as Creator, and not a part of it. The reason why magic was considered so evil was that it was a power even higher than the gods and goddesses, and therefore a direct rival to YHWH in a way that the finite, limited deities were not. If you read Leviticus and come across some puzzling thing like not boiling a kid (goat) in its mother's milk, it is a direct, opposing reaction to something that Israel's neighbors did. Israel was to be set apart. Nothing like YHWH faith had ever arisen anywhere. It was unique in the ancient world - something we can easily overlook when there are now so many religions rooted in Abrahamic monotheism.

I believe this is a piece of evidence that YHWH is real. An utterly unique religion is likely to have an utterly unique origin. I believe that origin is in real encounters of real people with the real, living YHWH. Oh, another thing - no other faith cultivated the kind of personal relationship of love and affection between deity and humanity than the relationship of YHWH with His chosen people. This was encouraging to me as I seek to review the roots of my faith as a Christian believer.

Conference on Biblical Reliability

Hey, an interesting-looking conference coming up in Minneapolis, sponsored by something called the Maclaurin Institute (link). Don't know if I can make it or not. I believe that defending the foundations of Christianity against those who would try to discredit it a la "DaVinci Code" is one of the main apologetic tasks of our time, though it will only be effective if it is just one part of an overall effort to reach out with Christ's love. Francis Schaeffer summed it up well in his "Two Contents, Two Realities": Sound doctrine, Honest answers to honest questions, "True spirituality", The beauty of human relationships. The answers are crucially important, yet without love we will be only noisy gongs and clanging cymbals.