The Cutting Edge of the Apocalypse

नोर्मल म्य्स्तिसिस्म हस

2008-05-18T07:14:00.000-07:00

NORMAL MYSTICISM HAS MOVED

If anyone is looking for my old post Normal Mysticism which I wrote about three or so years ago, I've moved it here.

I have no idea why my post titles keep on coming out in an Asian script, and I don't know how to fix it. So, enjoy the cross-cultural experience, and don't take me as someone who can read whatever language that alphabet comes from.

The Euphemist

2005-09-20T05:45:00.000-07:00

I'm refocusing my blogging efforts. I invite you to check out The Euphemist.

Yay! I got a B+

2005-09-16T08:55:00.000-07:00

It took extra long to get my grade on the Jewish Theology course - I think God thought I needed an exercise in patience ... He seems to think I need many such lessons ... He's right ....

Anyway, I finally contacted them about the matter (it's supposed to be about 6 weeks, and it was 10 as of this week), and Dr. Bell & crew got right on it. I was soon told that an "unforeseen circumstance" had delayed my grading, but I would receive my grade this week. I suspect that my papers somehow ended up in the wrong stack.

Anyway, I heard by phone today that I'll be getting my papers back by FedEx early next week, and my grade was B+ ... I'll take it!!!! Praise the LORD that I successfully completed another course!!!! Only 13 to go, plus the Hebrew exam!!!!

Talmud - the original World Wide Web?

2005-07-11T19:25:00.000-07:00

Interesting account of the Talmud as hypertext at Paleojudaica. It seems to me that a cross-reference system such as found in many Bibles is also a form of low-tech hypertext.

What I have written, I have written

2005-06-29T13:22:00.000-07:00

I managed to get all my essays written as of yesterday evening, and off to the prof by mail today. So I'm crawling out from under my rock and announcing to my four or five faithful readers, "I'm back." As usual, I took the entire year allowed to finish my latest Jewish Studies course, even though there's no reason why I couldn't do it in six months instead and save myself a great deal of anxiety. But my mind becomes amazingly clear with a deadline looming over my head ...

I thought I would feel more relieved than this, and it's nice to have it done, but now I get to wait about a month and a half to find out what grade I have earned. Last time I thought I was optimistic to hope for a B, but I actually got an A-. That course (Biblical Israel) was more interesting to me than the one I just completed, so I wouldn't be surprised if I don't do as well this time. I'll hope for a B again, and see what happens. Maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised once again. I guess it's because I know in my heart that I could have conceivably written better essays than I did. As long as I learn something and progress onward, that's enough for me. What I have written, I have written, as Pilate said. I daydream of being done with the core courses and getting on with my concentration area. I'd like to focus on the literature of the post-exilic era (late prophets, Apocrypha, Septuagint, Dead Sea Scrolls, etc.), but at my current rate of progress that won't be until the year 2010. But I press on ... One consolation - I personally think that my essays are at least as good, if not better, than this student in the same program who has posted his essays here (click this text). And apparently he completed the program successfully.

Years ago, in my first undergrad year, I was struggling with a philosophy essay that I needed to get in the next day, I was running into a mental block, I felt a bit ill, so I called Mom, who taught me a great lesson. She said, "what's something you can write down about the subject?" I came up with something. She said, "write it down!" She asked me, "what's something else to say?" I came up with something to add. She said, "write it down." It worked. That essay wasn't a work of genius, but it got the job done - I think I got a B or B+ on it. So I call it "Mom's Method." Think of something to write. Write it down. Move on. It works every time.

My two bits' worth on Episode III

2005-05-29T22:26:00.000-07:00

I’m briefly breaking my “holding pattern” to offer a few reflections on Star Wars Episode III, “Revenge of the Sith”, which I managed to see on Friday. It’s indeed a rite of passage for me to see this movie, ostensibly the last of the franchise (though hints have been dropped lately that episodes VII, VIII and IX aren’t out of the question after all – I don’t know whether to be hopeful or apprehensive ...). I like to call myself part of Lucas’ “original target audience”, since he has said that he aimed his story at the 12-year-old viewer, and that’s exactly how old I was when the original movie was released in 1977 (though I actually didn’t see it until 1978 at age 13 – but that’s another story).

But I’m happy to report that IMHO Episode III is not stupid! In view of the shortcomings of Episodes I and II, I had my concerns. Observing the buildup to “Sith”, I sometimes thought to myself, “This thing could be really stupid!” Not that it doesn’t have a couple of brushes with stupidity – more about that below. But I think it turned out rather well. In fact, I would rank it slightly, but very slightly, above “Return of the Jedi.” Apparently Lucas sought advice from veteran playwright Tom Stoppard, and that was a good move. Too much was at stake for him to proudly go it alone and risk driving the thing completely into the ground forever.

Before I go into the “spoiler” section of this post, let me offer my standing theory on “the real reason Anakin went to the dark side” – it’s as simple as this: call a boy “Annie” enough times, sooner or later he’s going to snap ...

*** SPOILER ALERT ****** SPOILER ALERT ****** SPOILER ALERT ***
If you haven’t seen it yet, and want to be surprised, save the following for later.

First, I was very gratified to see a couple of my hopes/predictions come true. I had wondered if the reason why some Jedi were able to simply disappear when “dead” and reappear afterward, would be some kind of special technique that had to be learned. And indeed it is so, as Yoda told Obi-Wan that he had learned of it from none other than Qui-Gonn Jinn (a nice touch – I liked that character, and how Liam Neeson played him), and would teach it to Obi-Wan.

And I had thought it would be neat if C3PO’s memory was wiped but not R2D2’s. I like the idea that R2 knew what was going on from the get-go, and simply kept it to himself. On Friday eve I pulled out my trusty VHS of the original version of Ep. IV, and when Sir Alec Guinness’ Obi-Wan says “I don’t seem to recall owning a droid”, he gives R2 an interesting inscrutable look, like he’s indeed hiding the fact that he and the droid know each other well. Lucas may not have been thinking that far ahead when he made Ep. IV, but it fits.

Episode III does have its brushes with stupidity, and the biggest one is the line (I think Obi-Wan said it) “Only a Sith deals with absolutes.” Besides being a silly bit of fashionable post-modern relativistic gobbledygook, it isn’t even really true in the context of this very movie! The Jedi truly go by the absolute that there is Good and there is Evil, and that morality is above even the Force, since the dark side of the Force, being evil, is to be avoided, in spite of its power. It is the Sith who muddy things up by saying that we have to take a “broader view” (or however Darth Sidious put it) including both the dark and light sides.

This movie’s closest brushes with brilliance come with the connections with events in the original trilogy, giving them a new depth. For example it is good storytelling to show that part of Anakin’s fall was guilt and remorse over killing an unarmed prisoner (Count Dooku) at Sidious’ direction. Anakin had disarmed him in a light saber fight, just as years later, as Darth Vader, he himself would be disarmed by his son Luke, in another duel also witnessed by Sidious (the Emperor). But Luke would pass the test that his father failed, refusing the emperor’s direction to kill Vader.

To me the most rattling thing about the scene when Vader’s mask goes on for the first time, is that his first words were of desperate concern for Padme. This was indeed the bit of goodness left in him, that buried beneath the anger and hate was love for his family members.

Clever lies on Palpatine/Sidious’ part, that he offers Anakin the knowledge to create and restore life – also the insinuation that his conception by “midi-chlorians” could have been the result of Sith manipulation. Neither one of these claims is ever substantiated. Interesting in this light that it’s those on the light side such as Yoda and Obi-Wan (and ultimately the redeemed Anakin) who can appear after death. Obvious that underneath it all Sidious hates Vader just as much as he hates anybody else.

The best bits of this movie (and the whole series) approach a Tolkien-like mythic grandeur, though “Lord of the Rings” is clearly a much grander and deeper story, drawn from a much deeper spiritual well. So I’d have to say that I’m more of a LOTR fan (both the books and Jackson’s films), but on the other hand Star Wars has its own unique and important place in my heart, next to LOTR.

Commentators have said that this movie has much more of the feel of the original trilogy than Episodes I and II, and I agree. One factor is the music – it feels most like the original trilogy when Luke and Leia’s familiar musical themes are played.

I’ve read that in the DVD of Episode VI, the redeemed Anakin is portrayed by Hayden Christenson instead of Sebastian Cabot, as in the original version. Call me sappy, but I think a nice touch, if they ever did another version yet, would be to also include a spectral Padme in that scene, holding hands with Anakin, reunited and reconciled forever.

Extended holding pattern

2005-04-22T07:18:00.000-07:00

Dear faithful readers (and I know there must be at least 4 or 5 of you ...),

It's becoming clear that I'll have to put this on extended hiatus, for the most part. Not only do I have lots to do as a husband, pastor, grad student, etc., but I'll also be supervising a pastoral intern starting in June - a fellow just finishing up his academic work at our seminary will be serving as a student pastor in a nearby parish, under my supervision. This is a great privilege to help out in this way, and if I may say so, a gratifying affirmation for me, that my stature has apparently grown to the point that the "powers that be" are now willing to entrust me with an intern (I was a bit of a "problem child" when I was in seminary myself ...).

I do plan to submit something once in a blue moon. I'll post something about my latest Jewish Studies essays as soon as I've received them back from grading. And perhaps someday this blog will erupt into lively activity such as I originally envisioned. But for now I invite you to check back once in a blue moon, in case anything new has come up, and check out the links on my sidebar. A few of them, such as "PaleoJudaica", have some especially good info about the formation of Judaism and Christianity. And feel free to drop a comment in case there's something you'd like to discuss.

Be blessed!

In Christ's precious name,
Michael <><

Karol Wojtyla 1920-2005

2005-04-02T20:15:00.000-08:00

Never has a pope of Rome been so loved by so many non-Catholics, me among them.

Requiescat in pace

(Helpful) advice welcome

2005-03-30T15:49:00.000-08:00

I just deleted a post I had made in which I had image-sourced pictures from two other sites (which might not have been ethical anyway), because I thought they might have been related to a problem - I received two anonymous comments, within one minute of each other, one which said "this site has a virus", and the other said, "this is a lame site". So I looked at the site itself, and had trouble downloading it properly. I decided to try deleting the post (it was a silly one anyway), and sure enough, now this site loads correctly again, at least for me.

As to viruses, if any of you are experienced bloggers and can tell me what happened, feel free to drop a comment. Was it indeed through one of the images?

As to the content of my site, I've never had any such vain imaginings as that it would appeal to everybody, or even to more than a few, but I certainly hope to keep on making it better and better. If you don't like it, you're welcome to go to some other part of the vast internet. But if you feel compelled to expend your valuable finger energy offering criticism of my little blog, please do me a favor and at least make it constructive criticism by offering some helpful suggestions as to what would make it better.

A momentous day

2005-03-25T07:05:00.000-08:00

A rare confluence of notable days in one day today:

Good Friday
The Feast of the Annunciation
Purim
The casting of the Ring into the Crack of Doom

Re: the latter, & in honor of all, here's a word picture of the triumph of good over evil, from the Christian imagination of JRR Tolkien, in The Return of the King:

And even as he spoke the earth rocked beneath their feet. Then rising swiftly up, far above the Towers of the Black Gate, high above the mountains, a vast soaring darkness sprang into the sky, flickering with fire. The earth groaned and quaked. The Towers of the Teeth swayed, tottered, and fell down; the mighty rampart crumbled; the Black Gate was hurled in ruin; and from far away, now dim, now growing, now mounting to the clouds, there came a drumming rumble, a roar, a long echoing roll of ruinous noise.

"The realm of Sauron is ended!" said Gandalf. "The Ring-bearer has fulfilled his Quest."

Holding Pattern

2005-03-22T06:26:00.000-08:00

If I'm going to get my essays done on time for the course I'm taking in "Jewish Theology", and fulfill my callings as a husband, pastor, etc. too, I'm going to have to taper down my ambitious blogging pace for awhile - so entries will probably become sparse for the next few weeks. If you're looking for something to chew on, click this text to read the essays I wrote for the course on "The Religion of Biblical Israel." I'm pleased with how well they turned out, and the grades were better than I expected. I hope, of course, to do as well in the course I'm taking now. Pray for me, as the fact is, the first course was more interesting to me than this one, simply because I'm ultimately more interested in the Bible than in the teachings of a religion other than my own Christian faith. Yet the LORD has given me the opportunity to take this program, and ultimately I hope to focus on my special interest of the Post-exilic period (536 BC - AD 100). But there are hoops to jump through first, such as this present course. And there are things to learn from it.

Though it's still Holy Week for most Christians, and Eastern Christians are still in the early part of Lent, let me pass this eternal truth on:

CHRIST IS RISEN! TRULY HE IS RISEN!
CHRIST IS RISEN! TRULY HE IS RISEN!
CHRIST IS RISEN! TRULY HE IS RISEN!

100 "Top"(?) Movies - which ones have you seen?

2005-03-17T18:33:00.000-08:00

I discovered a new blogging game while visiting A conservative blog for peace, in which you divulge which of AFI's Top 100 movies of all time you've seen. Here's the list, with an asterisk (*) by the ones I've seen in their entirety, and a plus sign (+) by the ones I've seen in part:

1. CITIZEN KANE (1941) +
2. CASABLANCA (1942) *
3. THE GODFATHER (1972)
4. GONE WITH THE WIND (1939) +
5. LAWRENCE OF ARABIA (1962)
6. THE WIZARD OF OZ (1939) *
7. THE GRADUATE (1967)
8. ON THE WATERFRONT (1954) +
9. SCHINDLER'S LIST (1993) *
10. SINGIN' IN THE RAIN (1952) *
11. IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE (1946) *
12. SUNSET BOULEVARD (1950)
13. THE BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI (1957) *
14. SOME LIKE IT HOT (1959)
15. STAR WARS (1977) *
16. ALL ABOUT EVE (1950)
17. THE AFRICAN QUEEN (1951) +
18. PSYCHO (1960) *
19. CHINATOWN (1974)
20. ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO'S NEST (1975) *
21. THE GRAPES OF WRATH (1940) +
22. 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY (1968) *
23. THE MALTESE FALCON (1941) *
24. RAGING BULL (1980)
25. E.T. THE EXTRA-TERRESTRIAL (1982) *
26. DR. STRANGELOVE (1964) *
27. BONNIE AND CLYDE (1967)
28. APOCALYPSE NOW (1979)
29. MR. SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON (1939)
30. THE TREASURE OF THE SIERRA MADRE (1948)
31. ANNIE HALL (1977)
32. THE GODFATHER PART II (1974)
33. HIGH NOON (1952) *
34. TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD (1962)
35. IT HAPPENED ONE NIGHT (1934) *
36. MIDNIGHT COWBOY (1969)
37. THE BEST YEARS OF OUR LIVES (1946)
38. DOUBLE INDEMNITY (1944)
39. DOCTOR ZHIVAGO (1965) +
40. NORTH BY NORTHWEST (1959) *
41. WEST SIDE STORY (1961) *
42. REAR WINDOW (1954) *
43. KING KONG (1933)
44. THE BIRTH OF A NATION (1915)
45. A STREETCAR NAMED DESIRE (1951)
46. A CLOCKWORK ORANGE (1971)
47. TAXI DRIVER (1976)
48. JAWS (1975)
49. SNOW WHITE AND THE SEVEN DWARFS (1937) *
50. BUTCH CASSIDY AND THE SUNDANCE KID (1969) *
51. THE PHILADELPHIA STORY (1940)
52. FROM HERE TO ETERNITY (1953)
53. AMADEUS (1984) *
54. ALL QUIET ON THE WESTERN FRONT (1930)
55. THE SOUND OF MUSIC (1965) *
56. M*A*S*H (1970)
57. THE THIRD MAN (1949)
58. FANTASIA (1940) *
59. REBEL WITHOUT A CAUSE (1955)
60. RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK (1981) *
61. VERTIGO (1958) *
62. TOOTSIE (1982)
63. STAGECOACH (1939)
64. CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND (1977) *
65. THE SILENCE OF THE LAMBS (1991) +
66. NETWORK (1976)
67. THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE (1962)
68. AN AMERICAN IN PARIS (1951)
69. SHANE (1953) *
70. THE FRENCH CONNECTION (1971) *
71. FORREST GUMP (1994)
72. BEN-HUR (1959) *
73. WUTHERING HEIGHTS (1939)
74. THE GOLD RUSH (1925)
75. DANCES WITH WOLVES (1990) *
76. CITY LIGHTS (1931)
77. AMERICAN GRAFFITI (1973)
78. ROCKY (1976)
79. THE DEER HUNTER (1978)
80. THE WILD BUNCH (1969)
81. MODERN TIMES (1936)
82. GIANT (1956)
83. PLATOON (1986)
84. FARGO (1996) *
85. DUCK SOUP (1933) *
86. MUTINY ON THE BOUNTY (1935)
87. FRANKENSTEIN (1931)
88. EASY RIDER (1969)
89. PATTON (1970)
90. THE JAZZ SINGER (1927)
91. MY FAIR LADY (1964) +
92. A PLACE IN THE SUN (1951)
93. THE APARTMENT (1960)
94. GOODFELLAS (1990)
95. PULP FICTION (1994)
96. THE SEARCHERS (1956)
97. BRINGING UP BABY (1938)
98. UNFORGIVEN (1992) +
99. GUESS WHO'S COMING TO DINNER (1967) +
100. YANKEE DOODLE DANDY (1942)

One may dispute this exact "top 100" selection, of course. For example, I think "The Empire Strikes Back" deserves to be in there if "Star Wars" is, and "Mary Poppins" is a work of pure genius. I have a great respect for Jackson's "Lord of the Rings" films, and there are others. Which ones have you seen? Which ones do you think belong in the list?

Schwarzenegger and the moral decorum of office

2005-03-12T08:20:00.000-08:00

Something's bothered me for awhile, so I thought I'd mention it since I thought of it this morning.

If I were a Californian, it's perhaps likely that I would be voting for Schwarzenegger in the upcoming election, barring the arrival of a better candidate. It's my impression that he has really taken the bull by the horns to address many of California's economic woes. I'm disappointed in the stands he takes on "moral issues" such as abortion, but as I said, it's still possible that if I were a voter in his state that I'd find him the best candidate running.

Having said that, it seems to me a sign of the times that with all the issues that have been brought up in connection with him, grope-gate and what have you, nobody has ever said "boo" about the fact that he has appeared nude in films. Californians, all you have to do to see what your governor looks like in the buff is to head down to Blockbuster and rent the original "Terminator" film.

I'm not saying that such a thing should bar someone from office, though I personally think a public disavowal or repentance would be in order. It just seems to me that not so long ago, even within my own short lifetime, that this would be an issue, if not a scandal of public decorum. But to my knowledge, nobody on either the right or the left has said anything about it at all, and that just seems strange to me (call me a prude if you want). Is there no sense of embarrassment anymore?

"Athens & Jerusalem" or, "Blue state & Red State Christians"

2005-03-08T05:43:00.000-08:00

Here's an interesting paragraph from one of my very favorite books, The Discarded Image by C.S. Lewis (you'll want your own copy - if you buy one from Amazon via the link on my sidebar, you'll make a small contribution to my Amazon Associates fund at no extra charge to you, helping me to expand my already-too-big library, not to twist your arm or anything...):

The present study, however, is interested not in the short-lived impact of the new religion [i.e. Christianity] on the old [i.e. Paganism] but with the enduring effect of the old upon the new. The last, and neo-Platonic, wave of Paganism which had gathered up into itself much from the preceding waves, Aristotelian, Platonic, Stoic, and what not, came far inland and made brackish lakes which have, perhaps, never been drained. Not all Christians at all times have detected them or admitted their existence: and among those who have done so there have always been two attitudes. There was then, and is still, a Christian 'left', eager to detect and anxious to banish every Pagan element; but also a Christian 'right' who, like St. Augustine, could find the doctrine of the Trinity foreshadowed in the Platonici,, or could claim triumphantly, like Justin Martyr, 'Whatever things have been well said by all men belong to us Christians'. (Pp. 48-49)

So, faithful readers (and I know there must be at least four or five of you), what do you think? Should we be on the Christian right or the Christian left, or somewhere in the middle? I guess I'm mostly leaning to the right, but not without some influences toward the left, which interestingly is much like my politics, which are overall "red state", albeit a noticeably purplish red.

Ad fontes! To the sources!

2005-03-07T13:14:00.000-08:00

Another issue that Fred's comments have me thinking about is, how do we understand the "Little Apocalypse" in Matt. 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21 (must be important, if all three synoptics have it)? Is it about future events, or was it fulfilled in the First Century AD, such as in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70? The latter view is current among a number of people of the "preterist" persuasion (don't confuse all preterists with the "full preterist" heresy which puts the return of Christ & everything back at AD 70, which leaves me wondering, "how did Christ return without anyone at the time noticing?").

I also had an interesting chat about the end times recently with my new Seventh-Day Adventist pastor friend (they, of course have some rather distinctive & strong views about the end times), who had never heard such an idea as Mt. 24 being fulfilled, even partially, in AD 70, and wondered where anyone got that idea. On the other hand, the Adventists (a distinctive form of "historicism/futurism" in prophecy) are definitely agreed with the preterists that there are no future prophecies to be fulfilled in connection with Israel, other than Jewish people coming to faith in Jesus Christ.

Anyway, rather than pondering this on my own, I decided I'd better do what my prof said and go "to the sources". There's nothing like primary sources, and I believe Chesterton said something about tradition being "giving the dead a vote", so I wondered, "when did early Christians believe Mt. 24 would be (or was) fulfilled?" The Didache, chapter 16, contains an apocalyptic section very similar to Mt. 24, Mk 13, and Lk 21:

16:1 Watch concerning your life; let not your lamps be quenched or your loins be loosed, but be ye ready, for ye know not the hour at which our Lord cometh.
(cf. Mk 13:35,37; Mt. 24:42,44; Lk 12:35,40)
16:2 But be ye gathered together frequently, seeking what is suitable for your souls; for the whole time of your faith shall profit you not, unless ye be found perfect in the last time.

16:3 For in the last days false prophets and seducers shall be multiplied, and the sheep shall be turned into wolves, and love shall be turned into hate;

16:4 and because iniquity aboundeth they shall hate each other, and persecute each other, and deliver each other up; and then shall the Deceiver of the world appear as the Son of God, and shall do signs and wonders, and the earth shall be delivered into his hands; and he shall do unlawful things, such as have never happened since the beginning of the world. (cf. Mt 24:10-12, Mk 13:22)

16:5 Then shall the creation of man come to the fiery trial of proof, and many shall be offended and shall perish; but they who remain in their faith shall be saved by the rock of offence itself. (Mt. 24:10,13)

16:6 And then shall appear the signs of the truth; first the sign of the appearance in heaven, then the sign of the sound of the trumpet, and thirdly the resurrection of the dead (Mt. 24:30

16:7 -- not of all, but as it has been said, The Lord shall come and all his saints with him; (Mt. 24:31; I Cor. 15:52; I Thess. 4:12; Zech. 14:5; I Thess. 3:13)

16:8 then shall the world behold the Lord coming on the clouds of heaven.
(cf. Mt. 24:30)

According to Holmes (on my sidebar), pp. 247-248, dates from AD 50 to the third century have been proposed for the Didache, though the UBS Greek NT & the Nestle-Aland list it as a second century work. So it's likely that Christians after AD 70 were viewing these apocalyptic events as future events, though the uncertainties in dating the Didache mean that it isn't absolutely proven.

Another thing about the Didache - note that Chapter 1 quotes the "Sermon on the Mount" (Mt. 5ff) as if it is indeed a guide for present-day Christians (that present day being when the Didache was composed, probably in the second century). That means that the early Christians were not dispensationalists! At least not the kind that say that the Sermon on the Mount is not intended for the Church Age, but for the future Millennium (some dispensationalists divvy up the Bible in astonishing ways, listing in great detail which parts of the Bible are for our time, and which aren't).

Fun with geography

2005-03-04T18:56:00.000-08:00

Thanks to David Holford, I've just discovered a fun site on which you can make a map of which states (or Canadian provinces, or foreign countries) you've been to. Here's my USA map. I've also been to the provinces of Manitoba and Sasketchewan, and I've walked about 10 blocks into Nuevo Laredo, Tamaulipas, Mexico, and also went on a trip to England 16 years ago.

Create your own personalized map of the USA

Update: While we're at it, here are the states where I've lived:

I'm a skier again!

2005-03-01T21:12:00.000-08:00

After 22 years ... And I didn't break anything! I only fell four times ... then there was the time I kinda had to kneel to catch myself ... and the time I had to fall on purpose to avoid hitting anything at the bottom of the slope ... but that doesn't count, does it? Now I'm ready for the big multi-church ski extravaganza this coming Sunday! (Pray for me)

(Actually that's not me in the picture)

Egypt, voting, and culture

2005-02-26T07:02:00.000-08:00

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

2005-02-25T08:06:00.000-08:00

See World Magazine Blog for details.

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

Being sharp

2005-02-24T07:22:00.000-08:00

"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

2005-02-22T06:51:00.000-08:00

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

2005-02-18T15:12:00.000-08:00

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

2005-02-17T13:24:00.000-08:00

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

2005-02-16T06:36:00.000-08:00

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

2005-02-15T06:54:00.000-08:00

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

2005-02-14T04:38:00.000-08:00

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 ...

2005-02-11T07:36:00.000-08:00

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 ...

2005-02-09T20:30:00.000-08:00

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

2005-02-09T05:51:00.000-08:00

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

2005-02-08T06:46:00.000-08:00

"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 ...

2005-02-08T04:58:00.000-08:00

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

2005-02-06T05:15:00.000-08:00

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 ...

2005-02-05T06:59:00.000-08:00

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

2005-02-04T05:12:00.000-08:00

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"

2005-02-04T04:30:00.000-08:00

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

2005-02-02T07:40:00.000-08:00

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

2005-02-01T07:59:00.000-08:00

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

2005-02-01T07:06:00.000-08:00

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.

Miracles

2005-01-31T11:08:00.000-08:00

I preach at two churches. I've been pastor at a church in a tiny town of about 65 people for 3 1/2 years, and at another church in the countryside just since this past year. Yesterday morning I was driving south on my way to the country church, appreciating God's miracles, as I prepared to preach a message on God's Powerful Wisdom and Wise Power in Christ Crucified, from I Corinthians 1:20ff. Five whitetail deer bounded across the roadway a (safe) distance ahead of me, a sight to behold as they lept gracefully into a harvested cornfield, radiating the joy of jumping. Someone has said, "glory to God for dappled things". I sometimes wonder if animals can see God and spirit beings. Interesting that in Numbers 22:22ff, it is treated as a matter-of-fact that the donkey sees the Angel of the LORD, and that the only think pointed out as remarkable is that the donkey talked. Perhaps indeed our two (now deceased) cats Tigger & Kitty were seeing angels when, in different places and different times, they both looked intently at a certain spot overhead, close to, yet not directly at the ceiling. & Kitty Cat spent a lot of time sitting under our icon collection shortly before she died.

Back to yesterday's sermon, as I was speaking of miracles as signs of God's power, I made brief mention of a miracle the LORD allowed me to be in on a few weeks ago. "D", a family man in the country church, was recently diagnosed with "hairy-cell leukemia", fortunately the most treatable kind, but still a serious matter indeed. On his first day in the hospital in Sioux Falls, as a tube was being inserted for his 168-hour continuous chemo treatment, a needle touched the lining around his heart, and his heart rate and blood pressure jumped dangerously high. About that time was when I called him on the phone. I led a prayer for healing, according to God's will, and later I learned that as soon as we hung up the phone, he perceived that his heart was near to normal again. He told the nurses, who didn't believe it, because they expected it to persist until sometime the next morning. But they checked his pulse & pressure, & it was normal! They asked who was on the phone, and D said it was his pastor. The next morning his cancer doctor remarked that "that wasn't medicine, that was God".

Anyway, I made very brief mention of it during the sermon, but just before the closing hymn, D felt prompted to come up front and share the story with the church in greater detail, an emotional moment for him and a blessing for all.

The LORD makes His own decisions about how to answer each prayer. Even as I am blessed to have been along for the ride when He did this miracle, I think of times I have prayed for people and miraculous healings have not happened. God alone sees the big picture. Ultimately He does what glorifies Him the most, whatever that is, and I believe also does what will help people the most in reaching Heaven. Glory be to God for His miracles, and His powerful wisdom and wise power, seen most in Christ Crucified!

Heartcries of the Apocalypse, Part I

2005-01-29T09:01:00.000-08:00

"But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, to show that the transcendent power belongs to God and not to us" 2 Corinthians 4:7

The Apocalypse is the end of the present age, the revealing of that which was hidden, the unveiling of the Kingdom.

Signs of the Apocalypse are all around us. World events center ever more in the lands of the Bible. As I write, the world holds its breath to see what comes of the election in Iraq - home of ancient Babylon and Assyria, birthplace of Abraham. A bloodbath is threatened by "insurgents" upon those who vote in the election. Earthquakes, floods, tsunamis, wars and rumors of wars, the beginning of birth pangs.

But the signs of the Apocalypse are not found only in the "signs of the times", but in the Kingdom, hidden in the hearts of believers in Jesus. "The Kingdom of Heaven is at hand". Those who have heard the voice of the Master answering their heart-cries know what I mean. "The creation waits in eager expectation for the sons of God to be revealed" Romans 8:19. It is our task to answer the heart-cries of the Apocalypse.

As I was preparing to make this entry, two Jehovah's Witnesses rang the doorbell, youngish women with friendly voices (the one who spoke had a southern accent, though they had South Dakota plates on the car) who spoke of stress as a sign of the coming end of the age. Every time Witnesses stop by I react differently. Once I got into a debate & actually stumped one on a Trinity-related point. Another time I got lazy and didn't say anything constructive. Yet another time I told them in no uncertain terms that they were lost. This time, after leaving the usual "Awake" and "Watchtower" magazines, they asked if they could stop by again sometime, and I said yes. That was pretty much the conversation this time. It'll be interesting to see if and when they stop by again. I pray that the LORD will open their eyes to the truth. They were right - rampant stress is indeed a sign of the coming Apocalypse - yet the true Solution is just beyond their field of vision. They asked my name - I wonder if they noticed that the sign on the church next door says the pastor's name is "Michael", and put two & two together.

I've been reading the "Series of Unfortunate Events" books by "Lemony Snicket", the newest youth reading sensation since "Harry Potter" (I'll save the complex matter of the Potter books for another time). Like Potter, they are apocalyptic. Three highly intelligent orphan siblings weather one misfortune after another, trying to keep out of the clutches of the evil Count Olaf, which will apparently continue until the eldest comes of age and can inherit the family fortune. I think the books are successful, partly because they are witty, partly because they connect with the apocalyptic sense of impending doom, the coming of a day of reckoning, the feeling of helplessness in a world of forces beyond our control.

The "Left Behind" books (another issue in themselves) sold millions of copies. In 1999 the surprise movie hit was "The Sixth Sense", a movie which I interpret as a movie about "unfinished business", the sense that there isn't enough time in this life to tie up all the loose ends. Loose ends tied or not, people have a sense that the end is approaching. Rock and rap music is filled with a sense of anger and despair - according to a Christian talk show episode I heard recently, a major recurring theme is rage over being abandoned by one's father. Some despair, others seek to escape or transcend the ruins. I don't keep up much with popular music, but the sound of one new band has caught my ear, "Evanescence". A young woman's clear, bell-like voice soars over a hard rock sound that sounds to me, well, apocalyptic. The message of their first big hit? "Bring me to life."

There is a Way to have Heaven in your heart, a way to soar over the barren landscape through which you walk, a way to come to a place high on a desert plain, take shelter from the poison rain, where the streets have no name (yeah, I'm quoting U2, I hope it doesn't come across as tacky, because they're expressing the aspiration I'm describing). A way to be filled with life in a world of death. "Draw near to God and he will draw near to you" James 4:8. He draws near to us in Christ Emmanuel, "GOD WITH US". And, believers, the heartcries of the Apocalypse are for truth, for life, for real love and fellowship, for acceptance and belonging, for honest answers to honest questions, for beauty out of ashes. Let us show in our lives that what they seek is what we have to give.

At National Geographic News ...

2005-01-28T12:13:00.000-08:00

A very interesting report:

Photo in the News: Shroud of Turin

And a very unsettling report:

Animal-Human Hybrids Spark Controversy

Did I give up too quickly?

2005-01-27T08:15:00.000-08:00

Awhile ago I stumbled upon a blog entitled "Pharyngula", an atheistic, pro-evolution site done by a biology professor at a university in Minnesota not far from where I live. I decided to respond to a post entitled "To people who hate humanity" (pro-lifers being people who hate humanity, in his opinion, by virtue of confusing humans with "mere" zygotes, etc.). An active debate ensued on the subject of personhood. Someone called "BrianTHP" valiantly argued a pro-life position, but didn't convince anyone. I entered a reply which I thought was modest and carefully reasoned. In it I called myself a "mere religionist, a spiritual heir of bronze age goat-herders", playing upon words another post-er had written ridiculing the foundations of Christian belief. The professor himself never did respond to my post. Another post-er did respond, but didn't engage my arguments at all, instead delivering an ad hominem dismissal of my right to join a a scientific discussion. And that was all. So many issues seemed to be at stake - the reliability of God's voice in revelation, the right to life - I thought of trying to respond further, but it was an exercise in inner frustration trying to think of a reply that might get someone's attention. I had other important priorities, so I let it slide. So, did I give up too quickly, or is it best to move on, knowing that there will be other battles? In case anyone wants to read through the thread, here's the link:

pharyngula.org/index/weblog/
comments/to_people_who_hate_humanity

Pieta

2005-01-25T21:39:00.000-08:00

Click picture for larger version.

Credit: www.hollywoodjesus.com/passion_photo.htm

My (incomplete) list of who should've been nominated

2005-01-25T06:14:00.000-08:00

Best actress in a leading role: Maia Morgenstern, The Passion of the Christ

Best actor in a supporting role: Hristo Shopov, The Passion of the Christ

Bravest filmmaking: Mel Gibson, The Passion of the Christ

Humblest offering of oneself in portraying the Savior: James Caviezel, The Passion of the Christ

Another troubling report

2005-01-24T21:53:00.000-08:00

Fla. Loses Appeal in Terri Schiavo Case :

story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/ap/20050125/
ap_on_go_su_co/scotus_brain_damaged_woman

For an important and little-reported side of this story, read this article:

www.thechristianactivist.com/new/schiavo/schiavo.htm

Jews in Russia

2005-01-24T21:29:00.000-08:00

A troubling report: news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050124/ap_on_re_eu/russia_anti_semitism

Christ, the Scapegoat

2005-01-24T06:19:00.000-08:00

Interesting read in "The Epistle of Barnabas" 7:6-11 (www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.vi.ii.vii.html). He clearly says that the scapegoat in Leviticus 16 is a type of Christ. That caught my eye because the Seventh-Day Adventists have a teaching that in Lev. 16 the goat on which the LORD's lot falls stands for Christ, and the "scapegoat" for Satan. They then have to backpedal and emphasize how they don't mean that Satan atones for our sin, and I take them at their word. I think they have tied themselves into a pretzel on this one, by thinking over-literally that the two goats have to stand for two different persons, rather than two things that the One Savior does for us. But I believe them when they say that they believe in Jesus alone as Savior and atonement for sin.

Our pastor in the Lutheran Brethren church we went to for awhile in Minnesota also gave a very good interpretation of Lev. 16 awhile back, saying that the two goats stood for two aspects of Christ's atonement for sin. He is also a Bible professor and a fine Christian man. May the LORD richly bless him.

I bring up this quote from "Barnabas" because it shows that as early as AD 70-135 (the range within which is believed to have been written), there was clearly a Christian interpretation of Lev. 16 which differed from today's Adventist view. One thing about the Early Church is that everybody wants a piece of it. Adventists, Lutherans, Orthodox, Baptists, Catholics, you name it, all claim the Early Church as an early form of themselves (of course, heretical cults such as the Jehovah's Witnesses do the same thing). So, who's right? On the one hand, the reading I've done so far of the Apostolic Fathers makes the Early Church look not exactly like any church body we have today. On the other hand, it's remarkable to me how, though the Trinity hadn't yet been officially defined, the faith of the early Christians was exactly the same religion that Trinitarian Christians follow today. It doesn't have an alien flavor, like the gnostic sources that Dan "DaVinci Code" Brown advocates (but doesn't really understand - they weren't the sexual "liberators" he thinks they are, but that's for a different post sometime). It's exactly the same faith I grew up with, exactly the same Savior. All Christians may see the core of their faith in Christ in the Early Church, but not our own denominational idiosyncrasies. So I'm not really picking on the Adventists any more than on my own church body, for example. We all have lots to learn.

In these Last Days, we need to learn more about what the Early Church really taught & believed. The sources are readily available in print and on the net. This is one of the main weaknesses in the Church that the Enemy is exploiting, that we don't know our own history, so people can shrug off Christ by saying, "Oh, it was all made up in a smoke-filled room."

Praise be to the LORD Jesus Christ, who carried our sins out into the wilderness for us (Lev. 16:21,22)! Praise to His Name!

"When women go through an abortion, the baby feels pain."

2005-01-23T17:38:00.000-08:00

Interesting bill being considered in Minnesota. It's not enough, of course, but I'm in favor of anything that might help reduce abortion (or the victim's pain) in any way. Imagine how it would feel to refuse anaesthesia for a child you were about to abort - a real attention-getter. This also highlights another one of my laments - as a deliberate ticket-splitter and old-fashioned progressive-populist, I rue the fact that there's so often only one pro-life choice on the ballot.

www.echopress.com/article.cfm?Article_ID=29923

An idle thought

2005-01-22T07:43:00.000-08:00

I've only seen the first of the "Matrix" films, but I know the thing about how there's been "more than one matrix". So, what if there was a new matrix invented in which everyone thinks they are hobbits? Agent Smith has a sinister disguise, hanging out in Rivendell ...

The White Bridge

2005-01-22T06:17:00.000-08:00

Do you believe in dreams and visions, as in Acts 2:17-21? The following is from my sister, who does Ripples of Faith. By the way, she describes herself as a "mystic scholarly type with a touch of Bozo", which makes it two for two in our family - our parents survived anyway - actually, I think they encouraged it ... anyway, here's what she has to say:

I read the updated blog tonight, and am sending my prayers for "C".

I thought I would share with you, I have had recurrences of the old dream/visions I had before and a new one as well. I do hope that I'm not of the "old man" dreaming dreams type, but of the "young man" seeing visions category, teehee.

The new dream/vision has an ongoing theme of "cutting off", grass, meat, a CD, Whisker's whiskers, everything being "cut off", as if it were saying there is a "cutting off" coming. These dream/visions are always identifiable as opposed to "normal" dreaming, with the sudden "awakening" I have immediately afterwards, and the feeling of a presence nearby that delivered the message. The other two are the "unveiling" of the supernatural beings surrounding us, where I "see" just how crowded the air around us is with angels and other more scary creatures, and the one where there is a sudden flash in the Eastern sky. Its ALWAYS the eastern sky, and it rocks the entire earth when it happens.

I will say though, that the other dream/vision, the one where people must seek shelter under the "white bridge" has gone ever since Billy Graham broke his hip and postponed the "last" crusade. The ONLY news story I saw about it, was a reporter, walking away from the Rose Bowl after the crusade, and there it was, the White Bridge! It almost appears that a certain event was prevented simply by Dr. Graham's misfortune. I've thought of sharing this with my friend, N, who worked on the crusade.

I just thought I'd share the "mystic" side of this stubborn Scandinavian stuck in a German Lutheran community, LOL!

Deceiving the masses

2005-01-21T18:30:00.000-08:00

Preparations are continuing for the "DaVinci Code" film.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050121/film_nm/france_louvre_dc

Dan Brown and his comrades exploit people's ignorance of Church history (and history in general) in the same way that the Jehovah's Witnesses do. A few months ago I wrote this letter (link) to a former employer who hosted a discussion group about the book at his church. To this date I've received no answer.

Brown claims that Christianity as we know it, including the deity of Christ, is a plot cooked up by Emperor Constantine and others in order to centralize power. Funny that he totally disregards the fact that Christianity existed from early times in parts of Africa and Asia which were never controlled by the Roman Empire, and though the forms of Christianity there (such as Monophysite and Nestorian) differed from the Church in the Empire on the details of the divine & human natures of Christ, they were fully agreed that Christ is indeed both divine and human. One could argue that Brown's dogma betrays a racist bias, since he totally disregards ancient African and Asian Christianity as a piece of evidence. And of course, he pulls the wool over the eyes of those who don't know the very, very early evidence that, within the Empire, Christianity was indeed the exact same religion in the beginning that it still is today.

My big theory of churches (in progress)

2005-01-21T09:36:00.000-08:00

For your consideration, here's a little chart that I use to explain the differing personalities of different church bodies & denominations:

Orthodoxy	Mysticism
Scholasticism	Pietism

Each item is the polar opposite of the one diagonal from it (but remember that a polar opposite can be a complementary paradox rather than a contradiction - for example, my own small church body, the "Free Lutherans", deliberately tries to be both orthodox and pietistic).
Defining terms: I define "orthodoxy" as an emphasis on correct doctrine, "scholasticism" as a particular way of being very analytical about doctrine. It's related, of course, to St. Thomas Aquinas & so forth, but lots of people think in a scholastic way even though they wouldn't want to be caught dead agreeing with the "Dumb Ox." Some Lutherans, Calvinists, and many other Protestants fall into this category.
Pietism is a red flag word for many, the subject of much heated discussion. Like St. Constantine, it gets blamed for lots of things. Here I'll simply define it as an emphasis on experience, in contrast to orthodoxy's emphasis on content. Mysticism is the embracing of mystery as contrasted with the attempt to analyze everything.
I think this little chart helps to avoid some confusions. For example, many (mostly scholastics) confuse scholasticism with orthodoxy. Some Lutherans are equally as conservative as we are, but much more scholastic (analytical), so naturally we are suspected of being less orthodox. There's a class of Lutheran church bodies (LCMS, WELS, etc.) which I call the "Germanic scholastic Lutherans" for this reason. They are from a good hard-headed German heritage. So are we Scandinavians soft-headed? Don't answer that ... But I would say we have an equal emphasis on correct doctrine, but simply are more mystical and pietistic about it, and less analytical.
I doubt that any Christian church is totally free of any one of these four (though some come close). A difference between the Eastern & Western churches would be that the Eastern are more mystical and the Western more scholastic.
Your comments, rebuttals, etc. are invited.

Pleasing nobody by pleasing everybody

2005-01-18T02:47:00.000-08:00

The ELCA (http://www.elca.org), which we don't belong to, has released their Report and "Recommendations from the Task Force for ELCA Studies on Sexuality" last Thursday:

http://www.elca.org/faithfuljourney/tfreport_faq.html

Basically their recommendation is not to make any policy changes on paper, (on paper they're against blessing same-sex unions, and clergy who are homosexual in orientation are to remain celibate), but that in practice the policies won't be enforced, allowing instead for "pastoral discretion" on the local and synodal level. In other words, there will be change neither in official policy nor in actual practice. The "Blue Law" approach to moral compromise. That should make everyone happy, after they've spent so much time & money & dragged every single parish through their "churchwide study". An ELCA lay preacher remarked to me, in so many words, that there's potential for a real split on this issue.

Besides grieving for the lack of "Thus saith the LORD" conviction in this decision, I grieve for the death of the ELCA's goal of being a uniting church body, working towards ecumenical reunion of presently-divided Christians. The ELCA formed in 1988 out of the merger of three church bodies. One entire new church body has recently split off from them. If it happens again, they'll be back to pre-1988 conditions. According to stats at www.arda.tm, the ELCA loses, every 2 3/4 years, as many members as my own small church body has. In the last few years the ELCA has had a "concordat" of mutual ministry with the Episcopal Church - USA. I believe, in part, they were hoping that partnering with such a prominent church body, and one that claims apostolic succession, would be a giant step towards church reunification. But the EC-USA is now in "impaired communion" with a number of other Anglican churches, especially in Africa & Asia, which don't approve of their consecrating an openly gay bishop. By extension, it seems that the ELCA's communion would be "impaired" as well. The ELCA belongs to the World Council of Churches, which began as a sincere effort to bring about church reunification, but it seems to be increasingly alienating some of its original members from the Eastern Orthodox communion, who, I believe, sincerely & naively hoped that the WCC would help other Christian churches to become more like the Orthodox Church! Instead the opposite is happening.

When will someone point out that the emperor is wearing no clothes? When will people see that alienating Christians by departing from the the Church's historic teachings is counterproductive to church unity? Someday the "mainline" Protestant churches in the USA will have to merge, not just out of ecumenical concerns, but because they will have lost too many members to sustain all their separate bureaucracies. Meanwhile, I optimistically believe that as Christ's return approaches, true believers in all Christian churches will become increasingly more united - and ominously, false believers will also become more united with one another. I believe a drastic and surprising reshaping of Christian church bodies is coming this century, and it's already starting.

Prayer

2005-01-18T02:35:00.000-08:00

Anyone who reads this, please join with me in praying for "C", a man I've known for a couple years or so, who knows Who the Truth is, but goes back to square one whenever he hits the bottle. He calls me "Preacher Man", and when he's released from incarceration he stops by for conversation, etc., but last evening was more frightening to us than he'd ever been before. I guess we need prayer, too - I haven't gotten much sleep tonight. We're looking forward to a time of refreshing at the pastors' & wives' retreat this week, but we're letting our neighbors know to be on the lookout for him, physically and spiritually.

P.S. - "Cutting edge?"

2005-01-15T17:39:00.000-08:00

BTW, the phrase "cutting edge of the Apocalypse" was coined, as far as I know, by a delightful Orthodox nun I got to know in Indiana. It was her description of the stark inner city situation in which she lived and worked. I write from a much different geographical perspective, as I live in rural Northeastern South Dakota. But signs of the Apocalypse exist here as well, even among the cows.

About this blog

2005-01-15T17:30:00.000-08:00

This blog is intended for the purpose of "uncovering truth, while we still have time." I am a Christian, I happen to be a Lutheran pastor, and also a "perpetual student," currently puttering away at a grad degree in Jewish studies. I have a burning desire to learn more about early Christianity and its origins, and I have lots of other interests, too.

This blog is not a sensationalistic "date-setting" discussion about the End Times. I chose the name because I feel a sense of urgency in my own quest for deeper knowledge of the Truth, and urgency in sharing Truth with others. I write with a sense that this world is passing away, and that, whether by death or by the LORD's return, my time here on this earth will someday come to an end.
The name in the URL, "apocalypse1335" comes from Daniel 12:12, which says "Blessed is the one who waits for and reaches the end of the 1,335 days."