Pisteuo: Justin Jenkins' Weblog

This Blog Has Moved

2006-04-20T14:48:00.000-07:00

Dear Readers,

Opted to --- along with many others recently --- move my weblog off blogger and onto my own server. I’m tired of the near weekly downtimes, lack of features and flexibility and another of other aspects of blogger.

I am in the process of completing the change over to wordpress on my domain http://pageofhistory.com I always liked the domain and I wasn’t really doing anything with it --- so now I plan to.

Web: http://pageofhistory.com/blog/
RSS: http://pageofhistory.com/blog/feed/
RSS Comments: http://pageofhistory.com/blog/comments/feed/

I have already moved over all my past posting but haven’t quite finished the new ‘look’ --- I will be editing that over time. I’m also going to take this opportunity to add a number of non-blog related features and resources which I will make available in the coming months.

For example: Koiné character generator.

I will leave the posts on this blog for the time being --- but I will not be updating it at this address! Please change your links and RSS accordingly so you will get any new posts, sorry for the trouble but I promise it will be worth the change!

Thanks,

Justin

Blast from the Past: Blomberg on Blogs

2006-04-19T10:55:00.000-07:00

Jim West and Christopher Heard started the ball rolling commenting on the current death-scare in the “biblioblogging” community. I read about eight different takes on it from bloggers (within a day) so ironically I think proved just how not-dead the community is --- of course, there has been a drop at some level that I can perceive with any number of reasons for that. Edward Cook, Chris Weimer, Eric Welch and others have pointed out differant reasons.

I think they covered the bases pretty well, so on a realated note --- I’d like to draw attention to a post from January on Out of Ur by Dr. Craig Blomberg. I happen to really like Blomberg but I can’t say I fully agree with his comments on blogs, but I’d like to highlight some of what he had to say as I think it might have some relevance to the current “biblioblogging” discussion.

With unprecedented ease of access comes the temptation to “shoot from the hip” and respond with little thought or care for how one comes across.

This I find to be true, including by yours truly --- given how fast you can respond --- and how fast the “buzz” dies down --- there is the temptation to post reactively. This can be overcome by self-control I suppose, but its bound to happen on any level --- the fact that a blog gets out there faster doesn’t mean the ideas wouldn’t have gotten out at some point. It was the same deal with the printing press, and the same arguments were made --- Martin Luther was pretty sharp-tongued himself.

... does the lack of a filter for all but the worst of responses almost inherently set up the readership for having to deal with extremists (in either tone or content) on both sides of a divisive issue?

I actually find dealing with extremists part of the fun, but if you read enough of both sides you can find a center. The “lack of a filter” argument has been used by the “Traditional Media” as well --- and all it really means the bias filters haven’t been applied. What I mean by that is views which don’t comport to the filter are blocked out, while views found expectable are strained through. This however isn’t always a good thing! There are many views the traditional filters stop (again in the case of Luther --- Protestantism) and these views deserve a hearing. It also evens the playing field a bit, ivory town folks and interact with the common layman if that layman can put up a decent argument.

... what messages are we sending when we allow bloggers or those who respond to them to post almost any linguistic utterance at will for all the world to read?

I don’t really know what he means by this, but I pretty much covered my response already. He ends with his classic dry sense of humor ...

But then, you might not be reading these words if it weren’t for a blog site. So am I overreacting?

Yes, I think he was --- however, I’d be interested in Dr. Blomberg’s current opinion, and I’d be very interested in his view on “biblioblogging.”

Tags: Craig Blomberg, Biblioblogging

Attention Young Earthers: Snakes Had Hips!

2006-04-19T09:26:00.000-07:00

It will be interesting to see what happens with Young Earth Creationists get a hold of this ...

Once upon a time, snakes had legs. A new discovery reveals at least one had hips, too.

The newfound fossil could help scientists piece together the murky evolutionary history of snakes. Until now, the prevailing thought was that early snakes were already lacking legs when they slithered out of water and onto land.

That may not be true, however. The newly discovered species, Najash rionegrina, lived around 90 million years ago in Patagonia, Argentina. Scientists unearthed Najash from continental sediments, suggesting it led a life on land.

So these scientists believe that a) snakes may not evolved from marine reptiles but instead terrestrial ones b) they used to have legs, and surely hips.

How long do you think it will take for Young Earths to say this proves the Genesis 3 account? Ha, that should be fun.

The LORD God said to the serpent,

"Because you have done this,
cursed are you above all livestock
and above all beasts of the field;
on your belly you shall go,
and dust you shall eat
all the days of your life.

Gen 3:14

On a side note someone once told me that Gen 3:14 relates to pi 3.14 and therefore pi was actually demonic --- I told him “that’s just circular reasoning” --- he just looked back at me blankly.

Vesuvius and Pompeii Web Resources

2006-04-18T18:21:00.000-07:00

I was recently doing a bit of research concerning the eruption of Vesuvius in 79 A.D. and found some quite nice websites provided by archaeology.org and archaeology.co.uk

Archaeology.org's site, entitled “In Vesuvius' Shadow” features an “Interactive Dig.” Archaeology.co.uk provides a neat “Pompeii Interactive Map” that you can mouse over see various portions of the excavation numbered and photographed.

Tags: Archaeology, Pompeii, Vesuvius

Biola Responds to The Gospel of Judas

2006-04-18T18:01:00.000-07:00

I'm not sure how I missed this but Biola University has posted a sort of Q&A on the Gospel of Judas with Clinton E. Arnold, Professor (Talbot School of Theology) and Chairman of the New Testament department. Its pretty standard stuff, but worth reading.

Here's a sample:

The NGS special gave the impression that there were a variety of competing Christianities in the first century? Is that true?

From the very beginning, there was one Christianity. It began with the teaching of Jesus of Nazareth and became encapsulated and disseminated by the twelve apostles who spent three years with Jesus in his public ministry. This is why the book of Acts says that the early Christians “devoted themselves to the Apostles’ teaching” (Acts 2:42). This good news about Jesus Christ was taken to the Gentile world principally by Paul the Apostle, who was directly commissioned by the resurrected Lord. What Paul proclaimed in his missionary travels was thoroughly consistent with the “good news” that was proclaimed from the very beginning. This is quite evident from what Paul says to the Corinthians: “For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve” (1 Cor 15:3-5). This was the common confession of the church throughout the world at that time. No Gnostic (including the writer of the Gospel of Judas) could have agreed with this statement.

There were variations from this core Christianity that emerged from time-to-time and place-by-place. But it is inaccurate to portray the first century as a time in which there was a buffet table of Christianities that afforded a person a variety of choices.

Tags: Biola, Talbot, Clinton Arnold, Gospel of Judas

Is Part of the Gospel of Judas in an Ohio Vault?

2006-04-18T01:55:00.000-07:00

As I learn more about the recent history of the Gospel of Judas codex it reads like a Dan Brown novel, with intrigue, bankruptcy, documents in bank vaults, exotic locations like Ohio, heck it’s more exciting then the so-called Gospel itself.

The latest chapter of the codex’s history to garner press attention doesn’t take place in some cave in Egypt, but half way around the world in a bank vault in suburban Ohio.

[Y]ou may have heard about the Gospel of Judas, a long-lost manuscript that has been getting international attention. But you haven't heard this: Part of it is in Akron. A portion of the 1,700-year-old treasure is sitting in a bank vault on South Main Street. At least that's what the National Geographic Society says.

As has been somewhat reported already: Ferrini the dealer that owned the codex (bought for 2.5 million) filed for bankruptcy last Septembet and was at least “$4.6 million in debt last year.”

An atternoy in Akron, Ohio named Morris Laatsch “was appointed to catalog and assess Ferrini's possessions.” In 2001 the sale of the codex fell through and “Ferrini supposedly returned the whole codex to its previous owner.”

But according to Haley and National Geographic, which photographed the Akron pieces in February, a significant portion of the gospel remained in Ferrini's possession.

Laatsch says Ferrini has returned everything he was to have bought from the precious owner and denies Nation Geographic’s claims.

“There's more than one series of writings,” Laatsch said. “The Gnostics apparently wrote lots of things. Possibly this could be from this same document. But if the experts do say it is, I guess perhaps you can rely on them or not rely on them.”

Apparently Ferrini has some documents though he’s not saying what exactly.

The delicate fragments are inside a special vault at FirstMerit. Only the bank has the combination to an outer vault, and only Haley has the combination to an inner vault. The Akron fragments are stored in 26 plastic folders, each about the size of half a standard envelope.

The rest of the article tells a bit more about the history and future of the codex which according to the article:

Christian scholars are widely split in regard to the potential religious impact of the discovery. Some believe the name Judas may no longer be synonymous with ``traitor.'' Others say the find will have little impact. But the historical value is unquestioned.

Well I don’t actually know which scholars are widely split, most every one I read, be they liberal or conservative think it has little if any impact on anything other then later Gnostics.

There is a funny story about Ferrari storing the codex in his freezer! Well, can you really blame him? I mean it works for ground beef.

Tags: Press, Gospel of Judas

Theology Lession From Mary J. Blige

2006-04-18T01:17:00.000-07:00

Mary J. Blige says she has found religion, but she makes no apologies for her earthly materialism. In fact, she says God has willed her to wear bling.

“My God is a God who wants me to have things,” the singer tells May’s Blender magazine. “He wants me to bling. He wants me to be the hottest thing on the block. I don’t know what kind of God the rest of y’all are serving, but the God I serve says, ‘Mary, you need to be the hottest thing this year, and I’m gonna make sure you’re doing that’.”

Tags: Quotes, Theology, Bling

Justin Marytr on the Resurrection

2006-04-16T02:05:00.000-07:00

Happy Easter everyone!

I thought it would be appropriate to post a portion from Fragments of the Lost Work of Justin Marytr on the Resurrection the following is from Chapter 9, but Chapter 5 is also quite interesting so I included that as well. You can read more of his material here.

I hope you have a wonderful day!

Chapter IX.-The Resurrection of Christ Proves that the Body Rises.

If He had no need of the flesh, why did He heal it? And what is most forcible of all, He raised the dead. Why? Was it not to show what the resurrection should be? How then did He raise the dead? Their souls or their bodies? Manifestly both. If the resurrection were only spiritual, it was requisite that He, in raising the dead, should show the body lying apart by itself, and the soul living apart by itself. But now He did not do so, but raised the body, confirming in it the promise of life. Why did He rise in the flesh in which He suffered, unless to show the resurrection of the flesh? And wishing to confirm this, when His disciples did not know whether to believe He had truly risen in the body, and were looking upon Him and doubting, He said to them, "Ye have not yet faith, see that it is I; " and He let them handle Him, and showed them the prints of the nails in His hands. And when they were by every kind of proof persuaded that it was Himself, and in the body, they asked Him to eat with them, that they might thus still more accurately ascertain that He had in verity risen bodily; and He did eat honey-comb and fish. And when He had thus shown them that there is truly a resurrection of the flesh, wishing to show them this also, that it is not impossible for flesh to ascend into heaven (as He had said that our dwelling-place is in heaven), "He was taken up into heaven while they beheld," as He was in the flesh. If, therefore, after all that has been said, any one demand demonstration of the resurrection, he is in no respect different from the Sadducees, since the resurrection of the flesh is the power of God, and, being above all reasoning, is established by faith, and seen in works.

Chapter V.-The Resurrection of the Flesh is Not Impossible.

But again, of those who maintain that the flesh has no resurrection, some assert that it is impossible; others that, considering how vile and despicable the flesh is, it is not fit that God should raise it; and others, that it did not at the first receive the promise. First, then, in respect of those who say that it is impossible for God to raise it, it seems to me that I should show that they are ignorant, professing as they do in word that they are believers, yet by their works proving themselves to be unbelieving, even more unbelieving than the unbelievers. For, seeing that all the heathen believe in their idols, and are persuaded that to them all things are possible (as even their poet Homer says, "The gods can do all things, and that easily; "and he added the word "easily" that he might bring out the greatness of the power of the gods), many do seem to be more unbelieving than they. For if the heathen believe in their gods, which are idols ("which have ears, and they hear not; they have eyes, and they see not" ), that they can do all things, though they be but devils, as saith the Scripture, "The gods of the nations axe devils,"8 much more ought we, who hold the right, excellent, and true faith, to believe in our God, since also we have proofs [of His power], first in the creation of the first man, for he was made from the earth by God; and this is sufficient evidence of God's power; and then they who observe things can see how men are generated one by another, and can marvel in a still greater degree that from a little drop of moisture so grand a living creature is formed. And certainly if this were only recorded in a promise, and not seen accomplished, this too would be much more incredible than the other; but it is rendered more credible by accomplishment. But even in the case of the resurrection the Saviour has shown us accomplishments, of which we will in a little speak. But now we are demonstrating that the resurrection of the flesh is possible, asking pardon of the children of the Church if we adduce arguments which seem to be secular and physical:11 first, because to God nothing is secular, not even the world itself, for it is His workmanship; and secondly, because we are conducting our argument so as to meet unbelievers. For if we argued with believers, it were enough to say that we believe; but now we must proceed by demonstrations. The foregoing proofs are indeed quite sufficient to evince the possibility of the resurrection of the flesh; but since these men are exceedingly unbelieving, we will further adduce a more convincing argument still,-an argument drawn not from faith, for they are not within its scope, but from their own mother unbelief,-I mean, of course, from physical reasons. For if by such arguments we prove to them that the resurrection of the flesh is possible, they are certainly worthy of great contempt if they can be persuaded neither by the deliverances of faith nor by the arguments of the world.

Tags: Easter, The Church Fathers, Justin Marytr, Resurrection

Commentary: Gospel of Judas, Scene 2

2006-04-15T01:10:00.000-07:00

The Gospel of Judas

Scence 1 | Scence 2 | Scence 3

Scence 2

In this portion of the Gospel of Judas the disciples have a disturbing vision, and the character of the Gospel becomes unmistakably more Gnostic. Again, a translation has been provided by National Geographic which can be downloaded here, it is the translation I am using.

The translation is broken up unto Scenes; this portion of the commentary will deal with events of Scene 2 of the Gospel of Judas.

Where Did You Go?

The story picks up the next day, and begins to get even stranger.

The next morning, after this happened, Jesus [appeared] to his disciples again. They said to him, “Master, where did you go and what did you do when you left us?”

Jesus said to them, “I went to another great and holy generation.”

According to the canonical Gospels Jesus traveled with his disciples and then often left to go away and pray. Jesus wasn’t however in the habit of leaving and then appearing in the context suggested here. While this might a translation issue, it almost seems like Jesus goes off to wonder the countryside or even heavenly realms then comes back every so often to enlighten his disciples; surely a far less ‘human’ depiction of Jesus.

Of Generations and Aeons

Jesus laughs at his disciples misunderstanding of where he has been then goes on to describe, rather confusingly this “holy generation.” This portion of the text is also quite fragmented; there really isn’t much I can take from it aside from the use of the word ‘aeon.’

Truly [I] say to you, no one born [of] this aeon will see that [generation]

Aeon is a Gnostic term for sure, but perhaps translating it as such unduly mystifies the conversation. Aeon is a Latin word similar to the English word eon, and the Greek word αίών (aion) is used often in different forms in the New Testament (91 times by my count) and in almost every book. It is variously translated, most often as age, world, or forever.

Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age (αἰῶνι) or in the age to come.

Matthew 12:32

Jesus said to them, "The sons of this age (αἰῶνος) marry and are given in marriage, but those who are considered worthy to attain to that age (αἰῶνος) and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage;

Luke 20:34-35

And do not be conformed to this world (αἰῶνι), but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect.

Romans 12:2

[Christ] … who gave Himself for our sins so that He might rescue us from this present evil age (αἰῶνος), according to the will of our God and Father

Galatians 1:4

I’m not sure if the Coptic word is directly equivalent to αίών or not, but assuming so the passage sounds a little less mystic.

Truly [I] say to you, no one born [of] this age will see that [generation]

However, the Epistle to the Hebrews uses this term quite often and has a verse which seemly contradicts Gnostic theology.

Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever (αἰῶνας).

Hebrews 13:8

The Disciple’s Vision

Another day, the disciples relate a vision they have seen, apparently of a temple and twelve priests. This is quite interesting as the canonical Gospel’s don’t recount any visions by the apostles which were interpreted by Jesus. The vision entails priests which offer up sacrifices of their own children and wives, and all sorts of other sins.

And the men who stand [before] the altar invoke your [name]

Early Christian’s worshiped as Jews in the temple and would have likely provided sacrifices, --- however it didn’t take very long for the Christians to be expelled from synagogues and the temple. Further with the destruction of the temple in 70 A.D the sacrificial system ceased to exist, so this is unlikely to be the formal temple.

It is also odd that these sacrifices would be done in the name of Jesus. There was, as far as we know --- never any formal sacrificial system that was preformed in the name of Jesus. What then are we to make of this passage? It is possible that given the salacious aspects of the sacrifices (i.e. human sacrifice) that this is a form of hyperbole pointing out how far off base followers of Jesus (on the view of the author) would become.

This vision greatly troubles the disciples and they can’t say anything else after they explain this to Jesus. So he asks them why this troubled them. Jesus then goes on to somewhat explain the vision, confirming that these sinners are sacrificing in his name and it is a shameful thing. He then startles them by telling them these shameful people are actually the disciples themselves.

Jesus said to them, “Those you have seen receiving the offerings at the altar—that is who you are. That is the god you serve, and you are those twelve men you have seen. The cattle you have seen brought for sacrifice are the many people you lead astray

It is hard to tell here if the author is trying to paint the disciples as corrupted (maybe soon to be) or if this vision is merely a warning. It is also not completely clear whom the disciples are worshiping here --- given prior statements however we can assume this the ‘lower god’ that created the material world and not the higher ‘true unknowable God.’

Jesus said to them, “Stop struggling with me. Each of you has his own star, and every[body—about 17 lines missing—]

It would be fascinating if we had this whole passage but unfortunately much of it is missing, the idea of each disciple having their own star is unique to the Gospel of Judas and it unclear what Jesus is to be saying here.

Judas Asks More Questions

Judas said to [him, “Rabb]i, what kind of fruit does this generation produce?” Jesus said, “The souls of every human generation will die. When these people, however, have completed the time of the kingdom and the spirit leaves them, their bodies will die but their souls will be alive, and they will be taken up.”

The Gospel of Judas has a much more interactive picture of the twelve, complete with their use of somewhat distinctive Jesus metaphor such as ‘fruit’ in their questions toward him. This is very different from the canonical accounts were figurative language is mostly reserved for Jesus with the disciples often not understanding what he is saying. This dialog also apparently shows a resurrection-less end times. Instead of the body being raised (which on the Gnostic view is a corrupted vessel) the souls are taken up, presumably to heavenly realms.

Judas said, “And what will the rest of the human generations do?”

Jesus said, “It is impossible [44] to sow seed on [rock] and harvest its fruit. [This] is also the way […] the [defiled] generation […] and corruptible Sophia […] the hand that has created mortal people, so that their souls go up to the eternal realms above.

Using a portion of the recognizable parable of the sower, the author draws a description of the ‘defiled generation.’ It is too bad this portion of the manuscript is fragmented since ‘and corruptible Sophia’ is very confusing without any real context.

Sophia

Traditionally for Gnostics, Sophia (Wisdom) sent Christ and they may be at the same level of deity. Sophia birthed the Demiurge (Yahweh, creator god of the corrupted material world) ny mistake. If Sophia sent Jesus, it would be odd for him to call her corrupted --- yet it was her error that brought about Yahweh who created the material world, which is itself, evil. Therefore it is not clear if Jesus is saying Sophia is corrpted or somethig else. If there were any doubt about the Gnostic nature of the Gospel it is quelled here.

After he says of this the text simply tells us that Jesus “departed” which is very uncharacteristic --- while teaching to crowds Jesus came and went, but was almost always with his disciples or alone praying.

Gospel Of Judas Links

Tags: Gospel of Judas, Gnostic, Thoughts

Commentary: Gospel of Judas, Scene 1

2006-04-13T00:01:00.000-07:00

The Gospel of Judas

Scence 1 | Scence 2 | Scence 3

Scence 1

While it seems that everyone and their mom are talking about the Gospel of Judas, I’d like to examine some of the text in a rather relaxed style. This isn’t meant to be any sort of in-depth textual analysis, just some passing thoughts as I read over the translation.

The translation provided by National Geographic can be downloaded here and is the translation I will be using. The translation is broken up unto Scenes and I will be addressing them each in a separate post. So let’s start right at the beginning.

The secret account of the revelation that Jesus spoke in conversation with Judas Iscariot during a week three days before he celebrated Passover.

One needs not read much further to realize the very Gnostic nature of this introduction --- and its very close similarity to the introduction of the Gospel of Thomas:

These are the secret sayings that the living Jesus spoke and Didymos Judas Thomas recorded.

Gospel of Thomas

While it is possible that both of these introductions could have been added later (and therefore tell us little about the author) I think these lines alone provide some interesting insights.

While the two introductions sound similar there is a rather major difference, one claims to relate an account of events involving one particular disciple, while the other claims to record a number of sayings spoken to an unknown amount of disciples (presumably the twelve) over time. In essence one is relating very private and hidden events while the other relates secretive, but not wholly private sayings.

This is a rather useful device to include events and sayings that were not in the oral tradition or memory of witnesses, it is therefore somewhat suspect. However, this doesn’t necessarily mean that the events didn’t happen; John for example uses this device often --- however more for purposes of foreshadowing coming events ---- then to interweave previously unknown events.

Found Among Them as a Child

Often he did not appear to his disciples as himself, but he was found among them as a child.

This is an interesting statement, especially given that it seemly is stated without further description, almost as if the reader already understands this to be not only possible but probable. The canonical Gospels don’t attribute such qualities to Jesus until after his death and resurrection --- even then, Jesus seemly always appears as an adult.

When he [approached] his disciples, [34] gathered together and seated and offering a prayer of thanksgiving over the bread, [he] laughed.

No where in the canonical Gospels, nor the other canonical writings do we ever hear of Jesus laughing, yet in the Gospel of Judas this lacking aspect of Jesus humanity is explored.

They said, “Master, you are […] the son of our god.”

The use of ‘our God’ is rather odd. Presumably the author has the disciples saying “the son of our god” instead of “the son of God” to heighten the idea that the god they are worshiping is different the God Jesus is talking about.

Still, there is a very high Christology here, with the caveat that according to this Gospel the disciples misunderstand Jesus to be the son of their god, but their god isn’t the higher God, as is later somewhat explained.

Angry and Infuriated

When his disciples heard this, they started getting angry and infuriated and began blaspheming against him in their hearts.

Instead of questioning him further or remaining in a dazed confusion at Jesus’ sayings, here we have the disciples getting very angry. This is an extremely different picture of the disciples then any of the four Gospels paint.

The Immortal Realm of Barbelo

While I’m not sure about the exact Coptic word, it would seem here again, a high Christology given that they would not be “blaspheming” against Jesus if he were not in fact on the level of a god.

Judas [said] to him, “I know who you are and where you have come from. You are from the immortal realm of Barbelo. And I am not worthy to utter the name of the one who has sent you.”

Again and again in the canonical Gospels Jesus states that no one knows who he is, nor where he has come from or where he is going --- but here we have Judas stating he knows, even before Jesus’ death and resurrection. In fact the events of the death and resurrection of Jesus are not accounted in the Gospel of Judas, clearly they are not regarded as important as the other Gospel writers do.

Step Away From the Others

“Step away from the others and I shall tell you the mysteries of the kingdom. It is possible for you to reach it, but you will grieve a great deal. [36] For someone else will replace you, in order that the twelve [disciples] may again come to completion with their god.”

This is rather odd passage if the author really is suppose to be Judas. Either we must except that Jesus prophetically tells Judas that he will be replaced, and that perhaps Judas did not really commit suicide or wrote down this account before his suicide. Or instead we must see a reliance on Acts (or the tradition Acts is based on) given that none of the four Gospels record Judas’ replacement.

If we are to assume ‘their god’ is not the God, then apparently the rest of the disciples are to be corrupted in the end, and Jesus knew this would happen. So, in essence Jesus came to earth not for the twelve, but for Judas.

Elsewhere, however it seems that the twelve might be in the ‘generation’ that is saved, so its it hard to tell what the author is trying to say here. From here the Gospel becomes increasing more Gnostic in flavor and I will examine that in upcoming posts.

Comments or thoughts are welcome.

Gospel Of Judas Links

Tags: Gospel of Judas, Gnostic, Thoughts

New Hominid Find Adds Little to Evolution Debate

2006-04-12T16:20:00.000-07:00

Before any of you ID/evolution/creationism/etc haters or lovers get too excited over this story, stop and think for a second.

Fossil discovery fills gap in human evolution

WASHINGTON - The latest fossil unearthed from a human ancestral hot spot in Africa allows scientists to link together the most complete chain of human evolution so far.

The 4.2 million-year-old fossil discovered in northeastern Ethiopia helps scientists fill in the gaps of how human ancestors made the giant leap from one species to another. That’s because the newest fossil, the species Australopithecus anamensis, was found in the region of the Middle Awash — where seven other human-like species spanning nearly 6 million years and three major phases of human development were previously discovered.

This fossil is 4.2 million years old, modern humans came on the scene (at the earliest) 100,000 years ago --- that’s a 4.1 million year differance. In fact, this was not a human fossil at all; it was a hominid, a primate that walked upright. Genetically or physically speaking here we aren’t talking about anything remotely resembling much less scientifically classified as, a human.

What scientists are commenting on is that they believe this hominid links one very old hominid to another one, thus giving a more contiguous chain of evolution to humans, not strictly of humans.

The quote attributed to Berhane Asfaw is very confusing to me, he starts off by saying

“We just found the chain of evolution, the continuity through time,” study co-author and Ethiopian anthropologist Berhane Asfaw said in a phone interview from Addis Ababa.

But then follows up by saying it is evidence of ‘one place.’

“One form evolved to another. This is evidence of evolution in one place through time.”

The second half of the quote is accurate, while seemingly contradicting the first half the quote --- I can only hope he was having a hard time explaining this all to the reporter.

If you keep on reading the article, you’ll see they are even less sure of exactly what this find proves; it is still really a (educated) guessing game.

This particular aspect of media reporting annoys me tremendously, it also does not “fill in the gaps” it actually only filled a gap, and not the gap I’d be most interested in, mainly the gap between the most “advanced” hominids and distinctive, modern, humans.

To be fair, the BBC stated the find correctly:

“Fossil hunters find remains of a probable direct ancestor of humans that lived more than four million years ago.”

Why must we dumb down things so much for Americans?

This really brings little to the table in regards to the ID/evolution/creation/etc debate, especially in the case of humans since really --- we’re not talking about humans here --- we’re talking about assumed evolutionary common ancestors to humans, and not even a very close one at that.

Tags: Press, Fossil, Hominid, Evolution, ID

Rwandan: Appreciate Our Efforts

2006-04-12T00:53:00.000-07:00

ChristianityToday has an interesting article which is of particular interest to me as it concerns Saddleback’s efforts in Rwanda.

As a development professional and human rights advocate with 21 years of field experience, I would like to challenge the thinking of Andrew Paquin expressed in "Politically Driven Injustice: Fixing global poverty requires more than Rick Warren's PEACE plan".

Certainly, the author's concern for global poverty is genuine and one that faithful Christians share. However, the church in Rwanda does not agree with his attitude. While he seems to be concerned with the suffering of African countries and Rwanda particularly, I find that his condescending attitude (with the insinuation that these countries are beyond redemption) is patronizing, to say the least.

Tags: Rwanda, Saddleback, Rick Warren, PEACE Plan

This Has to Be ...

2006-04-12T00:00:00.000-07:00

Now this has to be the worst fake ID I've ever seen, was she even trying?

Multispectral Imaging Reveals Herculaneum Scrolls

2006-04-11T11:41:00.000-07:00

The National Geographic channel has a short video on their website documenting the discovery and deciphering of some ancient scrolls recovered from a Herculaneum villa, which was covered with ash by the eruption of Mount Vesuvius in A.D. 79.

Of interest is the process that was used to read them. Called “multispectral imaging” the process adjusts the light (reflection) spectrums to distinguish the presence of ink even when the paper itself has become so dark it is unreadable. As these scrolls were in a volcanic eruption, they are badly burned and charred --- however using this technology, scientists were able to read these texts as if they were not brunt at all.

This same process has been used elsewhere, notability with some of the less readable Dead Sea scrolls --- and more recently to help authenticate the Gospel of Judas --- in fact the same BYU team that is helping to decipher the Herculaneum scrolls helped authenticate the recently published Gnostic Gospel.

These scrolls however are thought to be mostly Greek philosophic writings.

Tags: National Geographic, Scrolls, Herculaneum, Vesuvius, Gospel of Judas, Archaeology, Technology

James Tabor: Jesus and John 'Twin' Messiahs

2006-04-08T00:25:00.000-07:00

In case you missed it, ABC’s 20/20 ran a story tonight interviewing James Tabor, author of The Jesus Dynasty and a historian with the Religious Studies Department at the University of North Carolina, Charlotte. He has some pretty interesting --- uhm --- ideas. You can read the article here . I recorded it, so for a short time watch the video here.

I’ve selected a few choice quotes.

His conclusions are certain to provoke intense controversy and skepticism among other scholars and followers of the Christian faith. Tabor argues the historical evidence shows that Jesus had a human father, and that he was joined by a fellow messiah.

Tabor stumbled upon a crypt of sorts from the first century where he found ossuaries and “the only example of a burial shroud from the first century.”

In the same tomb, Tabor's group also found an ossuary — a box used to contain the bones of the deceased — that had the name Miriam or Mary inscribed upon it. Tabor also believes the recently discovered ossuary of James, which some scholars have dismissed as a forgery, may have also originated in this tomb.

"There's some circumstantial evidence that the ossuary of James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus, came from this particular tomb," he said. "We have entertained the possibility that this tomb might've been the family tomb of Jesus."

Wow that’s a pretty huge leap unless he’s got some blockbuster information in his book that he’s not sharing --- there absolutely no evidence what so ever that Jesus or anyone associated with him had anything to do with that crypt --- but I don't buy it.

"I'm ready to let the average reader know what we scholars actually discuss. And if it's shocking, it's shocking. You don't have to accept it. Jesus had a father."

Did that mean Tabor does not believe in the Virgin Birth of Jesus?

"I don't," he said. "I think all humans have a human father."

He actually also went on to say “everyone needs two chromosomes.” Well heck Tabor, you got me there. That’s a pretty rock solid case.

Luckily 20/20 also interview D.A. Carson, who responded quite well.

"What Dr. Tabor has done is assumed that the whole thing cannot be," Carson said. "It is a sham and therefore the evidence has to be jiggered, it has to be selectively appealed to in order to take away the evidence of God actually doing something in space, time, history. At that point, no amount of evidence will ever convince him unless he's open to the possibility that Dr. Tabor himself is wrong … and that God has disclosed himself in space, time and history through a man. Namely, Jesus of Nazareth."

Tabor says he is a “pro-Christian” because he wants to get back to the “root” of the faith. There is lots more to Tabor’s theory aside from Jesus was not raised from the dead, was not born a virgin. Based on evidence from the so called “Suba Cave” …

Tabor believes that, contrary to the New Testament, Jesus and John the Baptist were twin Messiahs. He says that early texts anticipated more than one Messiah and that the practice of baptism suggests that they were acting similarly in their respective ministries.

Carson’s reply can be summed up pretty simply: “Its pure Mythology.”

The interview continued over to Nightline but I missed part of it, there is a lot more to be read however --- in this article on the ABC website.

Links

Tags: TV, The Jesus Dynasty, Ossuaries, John the Baptist, James Tabor, D.A. Carson

Judas, Scholarship and the Didache

2006-04-07T15:12:00.000-07:00

There are a lot of great posts today.

Gospel of Judas

Two more nice posts by Rick Mansfield [one] [two] on the [oh so hyped] Gospel of Judas. One particular AP piece quotes Craig Evans, here is the total of his input that the article included.

Craig Evans, a professor at Acadia Divinity College in Nova Scotia, Canada, said New Testament explanations for Judas' betrayal range from money to the influence of Satan.

"Perhaps more now can be said,'' he commented. The document "implies that Judas only did what Jesus wanted him to do.''

Yup, that’s it --- somehow I think he might have had more to say about the matter?

For my part, the “Gospel” starts off with “The secret account of the revelation that Jesus spoke in conversation with Judas Iscariot.” Thisis a huge Gnostic red flag, akin to modern cults or UFO conspiracies --- who all claim “secret knowledge” and documents as well. Why is it that those items are seen as ridiculous, but if an ancient conspiracy group’s documents show up it’s a “revelation”?

Good Biblical Scholarship

Speaking of hyped reporting and spotty scholarship Alan Bandy over at Café Apocalypsis has a new post on “What Constitutes Good Biblical Scholarship?”

Here’s a tidbit of it:

One point that has emerged with crystal clarity is that good scholarship is good scholarship regardless of the individual's faith stance. Mark Goodacre remarked that scholarship should be evaluated on the strengths of it's arguments and not on adherence to a confessional stance (Evan's, likewise, made a similar case). The point is that depth of research, the precision of thought, and the arrangement of the evidence constitutes the marks by which to measure scholarly contributions.

Make sure to check out his whole series of posts on Faith Based Scholarship on his blog.

Didache

Thanks to Chris Tilling for pointing me to Rick Brannan’s new series on the Didache (hear my podcast on Baptism and the Didache) which is looking pretty good so far. He adds this note to his first post:

This is not a critical study -- not by any means. Also, I don't consider the Didache to be on par with Scripture, but I do think the Didache offers insight regarding how Scripture was interpreted, taught and applied in these very early days of the church. This is where my interest lies.

He says he’s not sure when Part 2 will be up, I’m hoping it will be soon.

Tags: Gospel of Judas, Scholarship, Didache

People are Hungry for [Wrong] Information

2006-04-06T23:44:00.000-07:00

NPR had a short segment on the increased interest in religion, specifically the history of Christianity driven by the success of the Da Vinci Code. They talked about the book, counter-books, related history and items like the Gospel of Judas (for which I’d recommend you read Rick Mansfield’s comments --- suffice to say ‘hello it was written 300 years later!’) The host asks about the upcoming National Geographic Channel special and says:

“… producer James Barret says the timing is coincidental but he’s happy to ride the wave of interest.”

Now does anyone really buy that? I mean, come on everyone has known for a while the movie was coming out when it is --- you don’t think anyone at the National Geographic Channel thought about correlating the two? Please! The producer followed up with:

“… the New Testament is really pretty short and the whole sum of what we know about Jesus Christ, really the founder of one of the world’s largest faiths, the sum total of what we know is not that great. People are hungry for information.”

First off, I think Christianity is the largest faith? Second, the “lack” of information shouldn’t cause us to start believing fiction and Gnostic Christian cult’s remaking of events. There are lots of books written by very fine scholars, or more accessible works like The Case for Christ, there is no need to fill this “hole” with rubbish! We do know quite a great deal about Jesus, in fact we know enough to point out how ridiculous those Gnostic Gospels and conspiracy books are.

I do have to say the Gospel of Judas site is quite nice, I wish such a nice site were made for real Christian documents of antiquity.

Tags: TV, National Geographic Channel, Gospel of Judas, Gnostic, Da Vinci Code, Jesus

Risky Art of Squaring Science with Religion

2006-04-06T22:44:00.000-07:00

The LiveScience Blog has a post today titled “The Risky Art of Squaring Science with Religion.”

I think a better way to phrase that would be “The Risky Art of Squaring Naturalism with Religion” that is much more accurate. God transcends Nature; miracles violate Nature that’s what makes them miraculous. Squaring Religion with science will bring mixed results some great --- some just weird theories --- but Naturalism and Religion don’t play well together.

The author goes over three bits of “science” this week, first the “Penguin Jesus Theory” as I’m going to call it --- that I’ve already covered --- for which the study authors have been “getting tons of hate email, as in three per minute.”

I don’t really understand the need for hate mail, the possibility of everything in the study coming together seems so remote, and only explains a portion of the story --- it is hardly anything to get peeved over.

Second he goes over a comment by Bill Nye the Science Guy --- which would frankly only lead me to believe he might have picked up a Bible after Rick Warren convinced him to marry his long time girlfriend in an impromptu service at conference. But that’s a whole other story!

Anyhow apparently Bill had some trouble understanding:

And God made [fashioned] the two great lights—the greater light to rule the day and the lesser light to rule the night—and the stars.

Genesis 1:16

Nye pointed out—and I think he’s got this right—that the Sun is in fact just a star and that the Moon isn’t really a light but rather an object that reflects light. Some folks walked out angry, with one woman exclaiming, “We believe in a God!”

Okay well that’s just silly walking out and all --- this is a simple conceptual problem.

Much like the sun “rising” --- when sun of course doesn’t actually rise --- but everyone knows you’re talking about, since conceptually it seems to be rising, even if in scientific terms that isn’t happening. Of course the same is so for this verse in Genesis but its even more straightforward!

The sun and the moon are the greatest lights in the sky, the sun might be smaller then other stars in the universe --- but it is the greatest light to people on earth! And who cares if the moon is really only reflecting light, so do lighthouses, but we don’t say they really aren’t as they look, come on now.

Not only that but Genesis wasn’t written to precisely fit into modern scientific terms, it was written for ancient Israelites.

The last bit was about some study correlating church attendance with longer life spans, which I actually think might be more to do with churches taking care of their members (supporting them in sickness, bad times, etc.) then anything else.

Tags: Science, Religion, Jesus, Studies, Rick Warren, Bill Nye

Archaeologists to Start Large Dig in Virgina

2006-04-06T01:03:00.000-07:00

Back home in Virginia, archaeologists are set to start a large investigation (about 6,000 acres of forests and fields) to pave the way for a future reservoir. They will be looking for Indian artifacts, but the remaining tribal descendants (and there are very few native people left from Virginia’s past) are putting up a bit of a legal fight.

"Let the poor people rest, let the artifacts rest," said Warren Cook, assistant chief of the Pamunkey Indian Tribe.

"This is not like digging up Aztec remains in Mexico," said David Bailey, a lawyer representing the Mattaponi in its fight against the reservoir. "The tribe is literally 2 miles away, so it's very sensitive."

The government has been trying to work out an agreement with the tribes, including an offer of 1.5 million dollars but the tribes won’t bite.

"We've felt all along that you cannot mitigate this sort of problem," said Upper Mattaponi Chief Ken Adams. "We've been here ... 10,000 years and (Newport News) has been here 400 years and they want us to mitigate? That's impossible."

I find that quote pretty interesting. Given the lack of records and solid evidence we don’t actually know what people groups or tribes lived in that area and for how long --- there really isn’t any way the Chief can claim that. However, ironically, if the investigation were to go through its likely that information would be available.

Archaeologists who surveyed the site of the proposed reservoir in 1996 found --- but did not excavate --- 112 camp sites. Artifacts revealed Indians had lived in the area for 8,000 years.

There really as a lot of Indian history still to be unearthed in the area, hopefully for their sake an agreement can be reached by the tribes. As it is, it seems the investigation will go on either way.

Tags: Archaeology, Virginia

1,500 Year Old Pyramid Found In Mexico, With a Twist

2006-04-05T16:21:00.000-07:00

Near Mexico City archeologists have discovered a 1500 year old, 18-yard tall pyramid beneath the site of a “centuries-old re-enactment of the crucifixion of Christ.”

Built on a hillside by the mysterious Teotihuacan culture, the pyramid was abandoned almost 1,000 years before Catholics began re-enacting the Crucifixion there in the 1800s, unaware they were celebrating one of the holiest moments of their faith on a site originally dedicated to gods of earth, wind and rain.

The Catholic ceremony is still in practice, so given the dual history of the site archeologists are being careful not to disturb either.

"Both the pre-Hispanic structure and the Holy Week rituals are part of our cultural legacy, so we have to look for a way to protect both cultural values," said Sanchez, who, along with archaeologist Miriam Advincula, has been exploring the site since 2004.

This is of course, the sort of thing that happens in the Holy Land all the time history built on top of history, culture on culture, temple on temple. However this one seemed to have been just an ironic coincidence, as the pyramid was abandoned around 800 AD.

Tags: Archaeology, Mexico Pyramid, Catholic, Teotihuacan

Medieval Bishop's Palace Site Located

2006-04-05T14:22:00.000-07:00

The site of what once was a lavish Bishop’s palace has been discovered in Scotland, it was the ‘country’ residence of the Archbishop of Glasgow.

The palace, near to Bishop Loch, was built around the 13th Century but destroyed three centuries later during the reformation.

Mark Roberts, from Headland Archaeology, said: "It's not very often I look at a field and drool with excitement. I could see the moat, which would have been five metres across, and walls five feet thick. We dug a small number of trenches and found lead from the roof, an awful lot of money and even four sets of bronze cauldron legs."

The palace would have had tapestries, furnishings from across the continent and an ornate chapel.

Man, Bishops just don’t live like they used to!

Tags: Archaeology, Medieval, Bishop Palace, Catholic, Reformation

Nobody Knew His Secret Ambition

2006-04-04T19:16:00.000-07:00

David Crowder Band has remade an older Michael W. Smith song called “Secret Ambition” unlike a lot of Christian music, I actually kind of like these lyrics.

Young man up on the hillside
Teaching new ways
Each word winning them over
Each heart a kindled flame
Old men watch from the outside
Guarding their prey
Threatened by the voice of the paragon
Leading their lambs away
Leading them far away

(CHORUS)
Nobody knew His secret ambition
Nobody knew His claim to fame
He broke the old rules steeped in tradition
He tore the Holy Veil away
Questioning those in powerful position
Running to those who called His name
(But) Nobody knew His secret ambition
Was to give His life away

His rage shaking the temple
His word to the wise
His hand healing on the seventh day
His love wearing no disguise
Some say “Death to the radical
He's way out of line”
Some say “Praise be the miracle
God sends a blessed sign
A blessed sign for troubled times”

Tags: Secret Ambition, Song Lyrics

Journal of Paleolimnology: Did Jesus walk on ice?

2006-04-04T15:43:00.000-07:00

Doron Nof, Ian McKeague and Nathan Paldor have published an article in the Journal of Paleolimnology in which they posit that patches of ice have (possibly in the time of Jesus) and can (however, not in modern times due to climate changes) form in Sea of Galilee, patches they suggest might account for the story of Jesus walking on water.

One set of those springs associated with the freezing is situated in Tabgha, an area where many archeological features associated with Jesus Christ have been found. On this basis, it is proposed that the unusual local freezing process might have provided an origin to the story that Christ walked on water. Since the springs ice is relatively small, a person standing or walking on it may appear to an observer situated some distance away to be ‘walking on water’. This is particularly true if it rained after the ice was formed (because rain smoothes out the ice’s surface). Whether this happened or not is an issue for religion scholars, archeologists, anthropologists, and believers to decide on.

This account appears to explain the first sighting of Jesus ‘walking on the water’ however it fails to explain how Peter too, walked on the water --- or how if there was ice --- how those in the boat would not have noticed when the (boat which came very close to Jesus) came into close contact with the ice. I suppose their theory would involve an ‘evolution’ of the story over time. But it is a pretty major detail that Jesus called Peter to also walked on out the water (which he did, then he fell but Jesus did not.) While the ice might not be expected on the Lake, surely after seeing it no one would think this was a miracle, and would be unlikely to pass on the story of Jesus walking on ice.

To be fair, the writers (who have also posited ideas concerning the ‘Flood’ and the parting of the Red Sea) stated:

We hesitate to draw any conclusion regarding the implications of this study to the actual events that took place at Tabgha during the last few (or several) thousand years. Our springs ice calculation may or may not be related to the origin of the account of Christ walking on water. The whole story may have originated in local ancient folklore which happened to be told best in the Christian Bible. It is hoped, however, that archeologists, religion scholars, anthropologists and believers will examine such implications in detail.

A PDF copy of the paper can he downloaded here, or you can read an article on MSNBC concerning the study. It is fairly detailed, and has a number of graphics and mathematic equations. The likely hood of this happing at the just-right time for Jesus to walk on, and the lack of a plausible explanation to the whole account and not just 1/3 of it, troubles me. The Peter issue really wasn't addressed in the slighest in the study, which is too bad --- but an interesting study non the less for Biblical scholars to look over.

Tags: Jesus, Ice, Miracles, Studies

Dead Sea Scroll, Pontius Pilate Stone on Tour

2006-04-04T11:07:00.000-07:00

Thanks to Targuman, I noticed NPR is running an article about a touring exhibit currently in Chicago which includes a Dead Sea Scroll, the ‘Pontius Pilate’ dedicatory stone (literal proof of Pilate, literally in stone,) as well as ossuaries and other items.

What I love about this is the “bringing history alive” aspect, something I try to do in my own home (however with much less precious historical items.) This would be quite an exhibit to see, I can only hope for a west coast tour! The NPR website has some nice pictures with both audio and text.

Tags: Dead Sea Scrolls, Pontius Pilate, Ossuaries

Darrell Bock Series Continues at Ankerberg

2006-04-04T10:33:00.000-07:00

John Ankerberg is still running his video interview series with Darrell Bock entitled “Lost Gospels and Lost Christianities.” Its currently on part 4, you can watch it below.

one | two | three | four

Also of interest is Alan Bandy's interview of Darrell Bock on Faith Based Scholarship.

Tags: Ankerberg, Darrell Bock, Lost Gospels, Christianities

Pisteuo Podcast: Baptism and the Didache

2006-04-04T01:36:00.000-07:00

I had a post partially written up --- but after listening to Chris opted instead to podcast my thoughts.

So here is the first of maybe many, maybe few podcast episodes I shall post in the future. I have put it into a RSS feed so if you wish to subscribe, go ahead I will add any new episodes to that feed if and when they come. The subject I chose to babble on about was the Didache as it relates to Baptism.

You can read the Didache here, or hear a BBC report on it if you’re wanting more to listen more. Feel free to e-mail me or post here with any comments, Cheers.

Download mp3 | Podcast rss

Tags: Podcast, Baptism, Didache

Border's to Sell Sony's New eBook Reader

2006-04-03T17:11:00.000-07:00

This summer Border’s bookstores will begin selling the Sony ‘Reader’ --- an eBook Reader the size of a paperback book.

The gadget, which debuted at the Consumer Electronics Show earlier this year, evokes the visual stability of something printed on overlay. It resembles actual paper and ink, with little flickering.

The high-resolution (SVGA 800x600) electronic-paper display screen supports BBeB Book, PDF and MP3 formats and can also display JPEG images.

The device measures 6.9 inches by 4.9 inches by 0.5 inches and weighs in at just more than half a pound.

In an interesting technical feat the battery life is apparently quite long “equivalent of 7,500 pages turns.” Why is it measured in page turns? Because “there is no rundown on the battery over time. Power is only consumed when a reader turns the page.” So I suppose it works much like a digital clock.

Of particular interest to the blogdom:

“In addition to eBooks, Connect.com will also offer content from blogs, news feeds and online magazines for use with the Sony Reader.”

However, that leads to a good point:

“Consumers will, however, have to be convinced of the gadget's ease on the eyes, as people tired of focusing on a computer screen all day may not be so willing to read another type of screen in their free time.”

The reader will, believe it or not, have an optional cover to “mimic” the cover and spine of an actual book. They will apparently range in price from 299$ to 399$.

I found it funny that sony’s website for the product shows the reader displaying The D* V***i C**e! Oh how I wish it were The Resurrection of the Son of God instead.

Tags: Borders, eBook Reader

At The Tone The Time Will Be 01:02:03 04/05/06

2006-04-03T15:59:00.000-07:00

My mother passed this on to me, kind of neat.

On Wednesday, at two minutes and three seconds after 1:00 in the morning, the time and date will be 01:02:03 04/05/06.

That won't happen again for a thousand years.

Some D* V*i Ce Stuff on MSNBC

2006-04-03T11:50:00.000-07:00

The book and up comming movie has become such anathema to some Christians that I now feel compelled to censure the title itself, but I trust you know what I’m talking about. In case you might have missed it, MSNBC is devoting a whole section to The D* V***i C**e /Holy Blood, Holy Grail type information and what it calls “The Mystery of the Jesus Papers”, it starts off with this introduction.

Author Michael Baigent has captured readers’ imaginations with his non-fiction book “Holy Blood, Holy Grail” in which he claimed Jesus was married. Now, while in a highly-publicized lawsuit with the publishers of “The D* V***I C**e” for copyright infringement, Baigent has an even more controversial premise that challenges much of what we know about Jesus: What if Jesus survived the crucifixion?

Yes an entire section of the website including “on the scene” reporting, videos, snazzy graphic, etc. All based the non-fiction book by Baigent and the based on fact D* V***i C**e.

It is worth a visit, if only to laugh/cry that this much attention is being paid.

Tags: TV, Da Vinci Code, Jesus Papers, Michael Baigent, Holy Grail

You've Got to Have a Real 'Pair' to Do This ...

2006-04-03T10:34:00.000-07:00

I can't even bring myself to state the title of this article without either cracking up or being repulsed. You can decide for yourself.

Blog Links Updated

2006-04-02T18:39:00.000-07:00

I’ve slightly updated my links on the side to better reflect which blogs a currently subscribe to via RSS. Right now Brandon's is the only weblog that wraps ... way to have way too long of a blog name dude (and yes I can call him dude since he also resides in SoCal.)

Crucifixion Medical Study Followup

2006-04-02T17:50:00.000-07:00

Matthew Maslen, one of the authors a study called “Medical theories on the cause of death in crucifixion” commented on my earlier post about the study. After re-reading my comments I realize I came off a bit hard on his cohort Dr. Mitchell --- when really my annoyance was mostly centered on the press coverage. The quotes picked, and some of the content of the quotes were in my mind beyond the scope of the study.

This was based by the apparent focus of the study, the cause of death, not the method. However I’m basing on the press release and the title of the study, so in all fairness --- I may have misconceptions about it, as Matthew pointed out.

That said, if what is in question is the “typical” painting or sculpture of Christ on the cross --- well then I might be in agreement, there is no actual evidence that those icons are in any way accurate (the Gospel accounts simply aren't that detailed --- why would they need to be the readers saw crucifixions all the time.) If however, you are talking about the general concept of crucifixion and the Gospel account --- well then I have a bone to pick. It was therefore the wording and phrasing on the press coverage that irked me, this was not clearly defined.

Have you ever gone back and read something you wrote and thought --- perhaps I could have said that a little better, or in a more generous way? Well I feel that way about what I wrote earlier --- at least in respect to the authors of the study --- but in no way to the press coverage in general. I still feel that was rubbish.

Lastly, I’m glad this sort of study is being done, and I do think it was useful --- I wish more seriousness was paid to the subject --- just without all the questionable press converge.

An article to go along with the image above can be found here.

Tags: Jesus, Crucifixion, Gospels, Icons, Studies

Dodgeball Gone Wild!

2006-04-01T02:07:00.000-08:00

We’ve been know to play a game of dodgeball or two at the college group at Saddleback --- but I’d have to say this has never happened.

LIBERTY, Missouri (AP) -- A youth minister was charged with assault for allegedly knocking down a 16-year-old boy and kicking him in the groin after taking a head shot from the teen in a dodgeball game.

CNN Learns the Pope's Last Request

2006-03-31T20:03:00.000-08:00

In surprising news, the Pope’s last request was to have the Bible read to him. CNN, who was “given rare access to those who saw the pope in his final hours” learned similar astonishing facts about John Paul II. Make sure to check out CNN to learn other things like “the Pope really liked Jesus, but thought Mary was pretty cool too” and “Pope means father.”

Okay on a more serious (?) note, according to a nun that was with the Pope in his final hours.

"Two eyes as his, they were like the eyes of Jesus upon me. They were like two stars. He talked, but I couldn't understand anything besides, 'Thank you' -- it was like he was saying we will see each other again. Such a beautiful thing, so joyous," she said.

Tags: Pope, Catholic, Bible

Geometry and the Image of God

2006-03-30T16:58:00.000-08:00

According to a team of international scientists that studied an isolated group of Amazonian villagers who had no schooling or experience with graphic symbols or maps. Humans are apparently naturally inclined to understand geometry (however in my case not Algebra.) Which leads to the question, is geometry and math in general in the Image of God?

We used two nonverbal tests to probe the conceptual primitives of geometry in the Mundurukú, an isolated Amazonian indigene group. Mundurukú children and adults spontaneously made use of basic geometric concepts such as points, lines, parallelism, or right angles to detect intruders in simple pictures, and they used distance, angle, and sense relationships in geometrical maps to locate hidden objects. Our results provide evidence for geometrical intuitions in the absence of schooling, experience with graphic symbols or maps, or a rich language of geometrical terms.

Tags: Geometry, Image of God, Studies

Prayer Equals Higher Rate of Complications?

2006-03-30T15:29:00.000-08:00

According to one study, perhaps you should stop praying for people that are having heart bypass surgery! Note, see a previous post.

Power of prayer flunks an unusual test
Large study had Christians pray for heart-surgery patients

NEW YORK - In the largest study of its kind, researchers found that having people pray for heart bypass surgery patients had no effect on their recovery. In fact, patients who knew they were being prayed for had a slightly higher rate of complications.

Researchers emphasized that their work can't address whether God exists or answers prayers made on another's behalf. The study can only look for an effect from prayers offered as part of the research, they said.

They also said they had no explanation for the higher complication rate in patients who knew they were being prayed for, in comparison to patients who only knew it was possible prayers were being said for them.

Tags: Prayer, Studies

Crucifixion images 'misleading'?

2006-03-30T13:58:00.000-08:00

I read a very short (in fact only a paragraph) story on The Times today about Crucifixion.

Crucifixion images 'misleading'

Traditional images of the method of crucifixion suffered by Jesus are likely to be wrong, researchers from Imperial College, London, said in a study that casts doubt on both the cause of Jesus’s death and on precisely how he was nailed to the cross. Writing in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, Dr Piers Mitchell and Matthew Maslen point to evidence that victims were nailed through the heels to the sides of the cross and were not nailed through the wrist or forearm.

So I’m thinking --- that’s pretty sparse info --- so I looked into it further and found a slightly longer article here.

"Based on the evidence, we simply do not know how people died during crucifixion," said Dr Mitchell of Imperial College London.

"While there are a number of theories, most have been developed to fit religious beliefs rather than the evidence," he said.

So basically, the study proved absolutely nothing. We already have written accounts of different means of crucifixion even within the Church Tradition; just compare Jesus’ crucifixion with an account of Peter’s. But this study mostly focused on the cause of death, not the method of crucifixion --- however both articles focused on the “traditional images of the method of crucifixion.” This as quoted above apparently has more to do with “religious beliefs” then “evidence.”

Well wait a second there what does he mean by “evidence” anyhow? I suppose he’s referring to “physical evidence” of crucifixions, but we have plenty of written evidence of crucifixions which fully qualifies as evidence. In case the Doc is tempted to question that sort of evidence, I’d ask if he ever reads other doctor’s papers in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine --- if he does, it seems to me he’s willing to take written accounts and documentation, yes even evidence, seriously. In fact, if he then goes on to take suggestions, or methods entailed in those journal papers without first examining the physical effects, one would have to conclude he takes written accounts very seriously indeed. Why not then take the Gospel account seriously?

"The evidence available demonstrates that people were crucified in different postures and affixed to crosses using a variety of means. Victims were not necessarily positioned head up and nailed through the feet from front to back as is the imagery in Christian churches," said Dr Mitchell.

Again, this is an illogical conclusion. The fact that there are a variety of means of crucifixion does not mean that Jesus’ crucifixion could not, or was not conducted in anyway other then was documented in the Gospels. Not only that but it doesn’t make any sense, why would the Gospel writers have depicted anything but a normal crucifixion in 1st century Palestine? Even if you grant a later date for the Gospels you’re still looking at about 70AD for their composition --- a time rip with Roman crucifixions. People in the Roman world knew how Romans crucified, and would have immediately questioned the Gospel account --- but to my knowledge this never happened.

There were rows of perhaps hundreds of crucified men running the span of roman roads toward Jerusalem. In fact Josephus documents many, many crucifixions. Josephus both confirms, and interestingly conflicts with the part of the paper’s speculation.

The review examined the only published archaeological case of crucifixion.

"Archaeological evidence for crucifixion is rare as most people were not buried following death," said Dr Mitchell.

However, according to Josephus (The Wars Of The Jews, Book IV Chapter 5.2):

Nay, they proceeded to that degree of impiety, as to cast away their dead bodies without burial, although the Jews used to take so much care of the burial of men, that they took down those that were condemned and crucified, and buried them before the going down of the sun.

So indeed victims of crucifixion were rarely buried; that is with the notable exception of Jewish victims, so it is possible the bodies are out there, somewhere.

So, disappointingly this study seems to have been waste of time, it didn’t come to any real, useful conclusions. Therefore, why not play up the “silly Christians think Jesus was crucified like they learned in Sunday School” aspect? It’s all “faith” apparently --- but it’s not, its faith founded on well established historical accounts.

Even with the lack of physical evidence, written evidence of crucifixion does not loose its usefulness, and there is no reason to question it based on the possibility that some crucifixions might not have matched Jesus’ methodology. This was a blatant attempt to hop on the Di Vinci code conspiracy-theory-type bandwagon, and its rubbish.

Tags: Jesus, Crucifixion, Gospels, Icons, Studies

"I Have So Often Been Hindered From Coming ..."

2006-03-29T09:59:00.000-08:00

Paul longed to go to Rome for years, but it appears Abdul Rahman has gotten there just hours ago (well made it to Italy at least.) My favorite part of this whole ordeal was early on officials in Afghanistan had this to say.

"We think he could be mad. He is not a normal person. He doesn't talk like a normal person," The AP quoted prosecutor Sarinwal Zamari as saying.

I kind of like that, wouldn’t it be great if more people thought that about us sometimes? If we were that transformed? Then again, he might really be crazy --- I guess we’ll find out.

Dutchman Builds Modern Noah's Ark

2006-03-28T17:34:00.000-08:00

How exciting! In a silly, waste of time and money (US$1.2m) sort of way ...

Dutchman Johan Huibers is building a working replica of Noah's Ark as a testament to his Christian faith.

The 47-year-old from Schagen, 45km (30 miles) north of Amsterdam, plans to set sail in September through the interior waters of the Netherlands.

To quote the maker of the Ark ...

This will speak very much to children ... they'll hear the creak of the wood, smell the smell of the dung

But get this ...

Johan's Ark is a fifth of the size of Noah's and will carry farmyard animals.

Lame. :(

Tags: Noah, Ark, Netherlands

Every Issue is Differant, Even When They Are The Same.

2006-03-28T16:58:00.000-08:00

This is the pinnacle of political relativism and compartmentalization.

As Sen. Russ Feingold urges the Senate to censure President Bush, the alleged misdeed that moved the Wisconsin Democrat to propose censure continues ....

Feingold had to leave early from Tuesday's Senate Judiciary Committee hearing ... he had an appointment at the White House to meet with the man he wants to censure. Just back from Iraq, Feingold was part of a group of senators who went to discuss their findings with President Bush.

Would this meeting be awkward?

“No,” Feingold said as he hustled down a Senate hallway on his way to the White House. “The president and I and others who’ve been involved in government for a while know that each issue is different. And we have an obligation to each other and the country to treat each issue differently.”

(Note: I edited out the unduly biased reporting with “...”)

Essentially Feingold is saying that under his view President Bush illegally conducted wire taps and in fact it’s so severe a breach of presidential authority a censure is required. Yet, that doesn’t have any bearing on other issues, and even on issues that directly deal with the war on terror?

Ridiculous, either Feingold is over-exaggerating the need to censure Bush, he is outright lying, or he is very confused. Was the wire-tapping really that big of a deal? Well then it should have eminence impact on one’s opinion of Bush’s judgment, and it should have a major impact on other matters relating to the ‘war on terror.’

Two Comments on the Immigration Mess

2006-03-27T19:04:00.000-08:00

I found both of these comments to be fairly, well useless.

According to a local Southern California high school student quoted on KFI (who of course skipped school to attend a protest):

“We have every right to be here, you know we are the majority of California, this used to be all our country at one point ... but you know then ... well ... that’s how it is ...” Followed up by another student “We are here for Latinos! We want to be freeeee!”

According President Bush (with his ever so clever wit and loquaciousness) illegal’s role in society should be to fill:

“... jobs Americans are not willing to do.”

Mark Twain and Old Church Nevada

2006-03-26T18:23:00.000-08:00

CARSON CITY, Nev. - In his 20s, Mark Twain was well-known for his carousing at Nevada gold rush saloons, irreverent views of the establishment and a skeptical attitude toward organized religions.

Now, the creator of Huckleberry Finn and Tom Sawyer is getting attention for a little-known good deed: helping the construction of a frontier church in the 1860s.

Aside from that intersting tid bit ... an intersting point is raised ...

Church officials have said restoring the building would cost as much as $5 million, more than double the cost of building a new one, but the National Trust for Historic Preservation and other groups argue it would be a mistake to tear down the humble brick church.

Seems to me this is silly obligation ... why spend $5 million to fix up an old church, why not just move, or perhaps build another building on the same campus like the Falls Church did?

God's Immigration Policy?

2006-03-24T17:38:00.000-08:00

I noticed an interesting quote today on CNN ...

"They're here for the American Dream," said Malissa Greer, 29, who joined 10,000 people in a march through Phoenix, Arizona today. "God created all of us. He's not a God of the United States. He's a God of the world." Across the country, people protested against proposals cracking down on illegal immigrants, with demonstrators in Arizona, California and Georgia staging school walkouts, marches and work stoppages.

While I’m not really sure what God being the God of the ‘whole world’ not just the US has to do with immigration --- I wonder what exactly the Christian response to (frankly illegal) immigration should be. There are a number of passages in Old Testament about the ‘foreigner’ or ‘alien’ in your land and how you should take care of them --- but how does this apply to modern American immigration policy?

How broadly should we apply the following commands?

“There is to be one law and one ordinance for you and for the alien who sojourns with you.”

Numbers15:16

“He executes justice for the orphan and the widow, and shows His love for the alien by giving him food and clothing. So show your love for the alien, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt.”

Deuteronomy 10:18-19

“You shall not pervert the justice due an alien {or} an orphan, nor take a widow's garment in pledge. But you shall remember that you were a slave in Egypt, and that the LORD your God redeemed you from there; therefore I am commanding you to do this thing. When you reap your harvest in your field and have forgotten a sheaf in the field, you shall not go back to get it; it shall be for the alien, for the orphan, and for the widow, in order that the LORD your God may bless you in all the work of your hands. When you beat your olive tree, you shall not go over the boughs again; it shall be for the alien, for the orphan, and for the widow. When you gather the grapes of your vineyard, you shall not go over it again; it shall be for the alien, for the orphan, and for the widow. You shall remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt; therefore I am commanding you to do this thing.”

Deuteronomy 24:17-22

The story of Ruth (who is, after all a foreigner) also comes to mind.

Further, David, in 1 Chronicles 22 is documented using what appears to be the ancient equivalent of modern immigrant day laborers.

Then David said, “Here shall be the house of the Lord God and here the altar of burnt offering for Israel.” David commanded to gather together the resident aliens who were in the land of Israel, and he set stonecutters to prepare dressed stones for building the house of God.

On a side note, God clearly does recognize ‘nations’ so the idea that the whole world is one huge open border just because God created it all is silly.

Researchers Study Prayer's Influence on Healing

2006-03-24T01:16:00.000-08:00

(WASHINGTON POST) - At the Fairfax Community Church in Virginia, the faithful regularly pray for ailing strangers. Same goes at the Adas Israel synagogue in Washington and the Islamic Center of Maryland in Gaithersburg.
In churches, mosques, ashrams, "healing rooms," prayer groups and homes nationwide, millions of Americans offer prayers daily to heal themselves, family, friends, co-workers and even people found through the Internet. Fueled by the upsurge in religious expression in the United States, prayer is the most common complement to mainstream medicine, far outpacing acupuncture, herbs, vitamins and other alternative remedies.

A Church Growth Goal

2006-03-20T12:56:00.000-08:00

Just imagine if the percentage of the American population that used to attend church on Sundays in the Colonial times, did now. We’d have massive attendance --- just take Orange County, Ca --- population 3 million --- take even 75% of that (a higher percentage went to church in the Colonel times) that’s 2.25 million church-goers. Where would we fit all those people?

Now I know that people were basically forced to go to church (so plenty weren’t true disciples,) and they had little choice (basically Church of England or Baptist) but honestly, that’s a goal to strive toward.

Three Years of War

2006-03-20T12:29:00.000-08:00

While it is saddening, as the pundits lament about 3 years of war in Iraq, and 2,000 some casualties --- I ask --- who cares about the nine million children in Africa who have lost a mother to AIDS?

Jesus' Large Crowds

2006-03-20T12:23:00.000-08:00

Here's a part of a post I was reading over at STR ...

Bigger Is Better. That's a quintessentially American motto. I'm not sure it suits the church.

In the age of the mega-church, it seems that it's taken for granted that success is marked by the size of the congregation. Yet, Jesus would have failed that test. The accounts of the crowds Jesus attracted at at the beginning of His ministry. The crowds begin to dwindle and disappear as Jesus work carried on, until there were just a handful of followers left at the cross. He spent the time after His resurrection with his disciples and small band of followers, most of them women. The crowds didn't begin to grow again until Pentecost.

I’ve heard this reaction countless times, and many times from STR ... but who actually thinks that!

I think it’s pretty well known that size doesn’t = healthy, and anyone who thinks that is fooling themselves. I recently read an article about a mega-church that converted a entire old mall to its use, that’s kind of silly --- but so is a 50 person church that hasn’t grown in 10 years, large doesn’t automatically = unhealthy, but surely small doesn’t = healthy either.

The Example of Jesus

But I've thought about, and studied the example of Jesus given --- and it seems a bit off.

Jesus drew huge crowds, and preached them the ‘milk’ of simple sayings and slightly more complex parables. He often then went away to ‘recharge.’ Later he would instruct his own close followers, and then further nurture four in particular. Of those four close associates (Mary, James, Peter and John) only John and Mary apparently ‘stuck’ with him until the end.

The crowds however, did not ‘dissipate’ over time as is implied in the post --- at least if you take the Gospels seriously. The crowds only grew up until a few days before his crucifixion.

The Large Crowd

The healing of Lazarus (near the ‘end’) drew a ‘large crowd’ (John 12:9) --- John puts the Triumphal Entry right before Passover, the other Gospels seem to place it slightly earlier, in either case Jesus still commanded great crowds at that point, enough to cause the priests to say that they couldn’t arrest Jesus two days before Passover ...

“for they said, “Not during the feast, lest there be an uproar from the people.””

How is that a slow dwindling? Seems to me in essence Jesus had a large following right up until the end. However, when he didn’t end up over throwing the Romans as they thought he would --- then they turned on him. They thought were willing to accept his message, but really they couldn’t accept his method. Of course, then a mere 40 days later thousands join their ranks.

The Method of His Message

I’m not saying that their isn’t a point to be gained from Jesus asking more of his disciples overtime (there certainly is;) but I think if you look at the accounts carefully you’ll see the reason people turned away from Jesus wasn’t what he was saying, its what he wasn’t doing. His Kingdom was different then the crowds and even his followers then understood. As Jesus says in John 18:36:

Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world.”

It's All In The Wording

2006-03-17T18:30:00.000-08:00

I found it interesting the way these three articles (which are suppose to be the same AP story) are edited.

The first the story starts off like this ...

Two more women have died after using the abortion pill RU-486, regulators said Friday in a warning that brought renewed calls for pulling the controversial drug from the market.

The organization that provided the pill to the two women said it would immediately stop disregarding the approved instructions for the pill's use.

The second I saw from CNN said this ...

Two more women have died after using the so-called "abortion pill" RU-486, regulators said Friday in a warning that brought renewed calls for pulling the drug combination from the market.

The organization that provided the drugs to the two women said it would start following the approved instructions for their use.

And the third, the San Diego Union-Tribune ...

Two more women have died after using the abortion pill RU-486, federal health regulators said Friday, in warning doctors to watch for a rare but deadly infection implicated in earlier deaths.

At least seven U.S. women have died after taking the pill, sold since 2000. The Food and Drug Administration cannot prove the drug was to blame in any of the cases.

All Three had the by line: ANDREW BRIDGES, Associated Press Writer. It is very interesting how differently a story can be presented.

James 1: Abiding Under Trials

2006-03-16T02:30:00.000-08:00

I’ve been thinking a lot about a certain passage in the Epistle of James lately, namely James 1:12-15. It’s a rather simple concept, but in all honestly a pretty hard act to follow. It’s one of those ‘no duh’ sayings --- but a rather telling one at the same time. The first part goes like this:

“Blessed is the man who remains steadfast under trial, for when he has stood the test he will receive the crown of life, which God has promised to those who love him.” (ESV)

Upon further study however, I’m not sure if I rather like the NASB’s translation of this verse, or the ESV’s.

“Blessed is a man who perseveres under trial; for once he has been approved, he will receive the crown of life which {the Lord} has promised to those who love Him.” (NASB)

James tells us that ‘blessed’ or ‘happy’ is a person who ὑπομένει (hupomeno) --- which comes from the words meno ‘stay, endure, abide’ and hupo ‘under’ hence the translation ‘preserves under.’ The connotation is one of endurance more then preservation, the same word is used in the Gospels, especially in Matthew where it’s put on the lips of Jesus:

“But the one who endures to the end will be saved.”

Matthew 24:13

Of course, interestingly Luke uses the same word to describe the boy Jesus staying behind at the temple in Jerusalem (Luke 2:43) and Paul uses the exact same word in 1 Corinthians:

“Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.”

1 Corinthians 13:7

I like the word also in its ‘abide’ concept, like ‘abiding in the vine’ of John’s Gospel.

It’s the word πειρασμόν which gets you. Both translate this word as ‘trail’ but it is translated elsewhere as ‘temptation’ --- especially in the Gospels --- where it’s used in the Lord’s prayer in Matthew 6: “And lead us not into temptation …” and also in Gethsemane on the night of Jesus’ betrayal:

“Watch and pray that you may not enter into temptation. The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.”

Mark 14:38

In the next verse the idea is clarified directly as being temptation.

I like the word picture brought up by the next portion “for once he has been approved (δόκιμος) …” Similar to the word we transliterate as ‘dogma’ --- δόκιμος is a banking-type term which means ‘approved’ much like a ‘seal of approval’ on a businessman’s operation. It’s legit, by the books, in right standing.

I think we can relate this to some processes we have to go through in the modern world --- like a lengthy loan process, a top secret security clearance (which believe it or not --- I’ve been through) or even a seminary or PhD process. It’s a long, draw out, hard, costly, but in the end you are ‘official’ so to speak. In that sense I like the NASB’s rendering better.

After that approval process we’ll receive the ‘crown of life’ or more literally the στέφανον ‘wreath’ the same type of wreath given to the winner of a race, a reward. This metaphorically lends itself to the idea of everlasting glory, or in essence everlasting life. It’s the same word used to describe the crown of thorns placed on Jesus’ head during his crucifixion --- but this crown is one of life, not of death.

Perhaps I’ll pick up on the next two verses tomorrow.

Who Actually Reads This Stuff?

2006-03-15T15:34:00.000-08:00

The NYTimes published an article today entitled “Religious Broadcaster Gets Rich Contract for Next Book” while I think that’s a bit of an unfair headline, what do you expect from the Times?

Multimillion-dollar book deals are usually the realm of presidents, popes and Federal Reserve chairmen, plus the occasional mega-best-selling novelist like James Patterson or Michael Crichton.

Add to that list Joel Osteen, the pastor of Lakewood Church in Houston, one of the nation's largest congregations, and the author of "Your Best Life Now: 7 Steps to Living at Your Full Potential."

I have to say I personally dislike Osteen, perhaps its his twangy accent, his shockingly white teeth, or his bland message, but I just don’t like the guy much.

Mr. Osteen, a television evangelist, has signed a book deal with Free Press, an imprint of Simon & Schuster, that publishing insiders say is potentially one of the richest for a nonfiction book and could bring the author more than $10 million.

The contract does not adhere to usual format, with the author receiving an advance on future royalties and the royalty rate set at 15 percent of the cover price of each book sold. Rather, the Osteen contract is known in the industry as a co-publishing agreement, with the author receiving a smaller advance — perhaps $1 million to $2 million — but then being entitled to receive 50 percent of the publisher's profit on sales.

It seems that the $10 million number is pretty guestimated, but even so is appropriate for a pastor do make that much money off a book deal? I suppose his sales impact his deal (and his sales were quite good) but of course Rick Warren (who has yet to write a new book) has sold many, many more books then Osteen. It would be interesting to see how much Warren would be offered, and how much he’d take.

There is a slight glimmer of hope here (if you ignore the ‘prosperity Gospel’ part of it) ...

Given the success of "Your Best Life," Mr. Osteen last year gave up his $200,000 salary from his church. His teachings emphasize that consistent tithing — the giving of 10 percent of a person's income to the church — brings even greater rewards, both spiritual and otherwise.

Of course again, Rick Warren gives away something like 90% of his income and calls himself a ‘reverse tither.’ One wonders how much Osteen plans to give away and what his plans for this book deal will be. I’ll reserve my judgment for the future.

Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure: The Musical

2006-03-15T14:33:00.000-08:00

So I’m reading Dr. Bird’s weblog today ... and I catch this ...

Bloggers who remind me of musicals and plays:
...
...
Justin Jenkins - Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure: The Musical
...
...

Click on the link above to check out his other funny comparisons. I’m not sure what thinking is on that, but I had no idea that there was a 'Bill and Ted' musical --- not only that but you can listen to it here.

Here’s a line from it ...

From Aristotle, to William Tell.
JFK and Galileo, Alexander, Graham Bell.
They had ambition, they kept the faith,
That one day they'd shape our lives,
Make this world a better place.
You can change tomorrow ...
With one foot in the future.
One foot in the past.

I rather like that in a cheesy/90s sort of way.

I Want My SoBe Lean

2006-03-15T14:23:00.000-08:00

A random aside, I’ve been drinking and liking for a while now a drink made by SoBe called “SoBe LEAN Energy” it’s a citrus-like drink (the golden coloured one to the right) with about 12 calories per 20 oz and no sugar. It’s wonderful, and I drink a lot of them ...

However, as of late I have been finding it increasingly harder to obtain bottles --- I went to three stores in the last two days and every one there was a gapping hole were this drink should be in the drink section of the store. There were plenty of the other SoBe flavors --- but I could only find one bottle out of the stock of all those stores. I asked an attendant and he said they can’t keep it stocked, it flies off the shelves.

So I’m rather bitter, it’s a bit like a band/song you really like that gets picked up on the radio and suddenly their concerts are sold out and everyone else thinks they ‘heard of them first.’

Well for the record I found about this drink first, and I want SoBe to send me a case for the free advertisement!

A Sudden Case of Religious Sensitivity

2006-03-14T14:09:00.000-08:00

I heard about this yesterday and found the statements pretty interesting ...

Singer Isaac Hayes is to stop providing the voice for a character in cartoon South Park because he objects to its "inappropriate ridicule" of religion. Hayes, 63, who is the voice of the lustful Chef, has been a regular on the show since its US TV debut in 1997.

But co-creator Matt Stone said Hayes had "never had a problem" until the Scientology Church, to which Hayes belongs, was parodied. The show was insensitive to "personal spiritual beliefs", said Hayes.

"There is a place in this world for satire but there is a time when satire ends and intolerance and bigotry toward religious beliefs begins," he said.

Co-creator Stone said Hayes would be released from his contract and had the best wishes of the South Park team. Stone said: "In 10 years and over 150 episodes of South Park, Isaac never had a problem with the show making fun of Christians, Muslim, Mormons or Jews.

"He got a sudden case of religious sensitivity when it was his religion featured on the show."

I have to say the episode that most likely prompted this was hilarious (if a bit unkind,) and South Park is rarely ‘sensitive’ so I’m not sure what Isaac was smoking. Matt is exactly right, he’s being hypocritical.

The episode was very critical of Scientology but how it was guilty of ‘intolerance and bigotry’ I’m not sure. Why should the creators of South Park be ‘sensitive’ to some thing they don’t believe? As Christians we should be sensitive, and not engage in bigotry (that sure doesn’t mean we can’t disagree,) but the creators of South Park can’t be held the to same standard.

Archaeologists Find Ancient Israeli Tunnels

2006-03-13T16:31:00.000-08:00

JERUSALEM - Underground chambers and tunnels used during a Jewish revolt against the Romans nearly 2,000 years ago have been uncovered in northern Israel, archaeologists said Monday.

The Jews laid in supplies and were preparing to hide from the Romans during their revolt in A.D. 66-70, the experts said. The pits, which are linked by short tunnels, would have served as a concealed subterranean home.

Yardenna Alexandre of the Israel Antiquities Authority said the find shows the ancient Jews planned and prepared for the uprising, contrary to the common perception that the revolt began spontaneously.

Darrell Bock on 'Lost Christianities'

2006-03-13T16:15:00.000-08:00

John Ankerberg is currently in a series on his TV show discussing ‘missing gospels and lost christianities’ with Darrell Bock (see his upcomming book Missing Gospels.) You can watch it here.

WHAT ABOUT THE MISSING GOSPELS AND LOST CHRISTIANITIES?

With guest, Dr. Darrell Bock, professor, Dallas Theological Seminary

What about the new ‘missing’ gospels? Is the traditional Christianity we were taught true Christianity? What evidence shows the new views are wrong? What about the alternative Christianities that archaeologists have discovered? What do The Da Vinci Code and other popular literature teach about Jesus?

Happy Tu B'Shevat

2006-02-13T14:01:00.000-08:00

To my Jewish friends ... Happy Tu B'Shevat (ט"ו בשבט) ... enjoy some California Raisins!

N.T.'s Remarks to the House of Lords Feb 9th

2006-02-13T11:28:00.000-08:00

N.T. Wright made a speech in the House of Lords in England in response to both the Danish cartoons and England’s recent religious hatred legislation. I think he made some great points.

In fact, I rather liked his speech and have re-posted it on my weblog. He makes an intersting twist of "global climate change" speaking instead of a moral climate change.

Click "[Read the Rest...]" if you'd like to see it.

The Lord Bishop of Durham (N.T. Wright)

My Lords, I, too, am grateful to the noble Baroness, Lady Knight, for the opportunity to address some urgent issues. I think it would be a mistake to confine our attention today to the Danish cartoons and their aftermath, regrettable though all that is, or indeed to the recent court cases. These fall within a larger moral and social landscape. We are faced with moral climate change, which is comparable to other forms of climate change and equally dangerous.

The 1960s swept away the old moral certainties, but getting rid of them has not made us happier or safer. Hence, the invention of new quasi-moralities out of bits and pieces of moral rhetoric; the increasingly shrill language of rights; the glorification of victimhood, which enables anyone with hurt feelings to claim high moral ground; and the invention of various "identities," which demand not only protection, but immunity from all critique. It was this messy but potent combination of neo-moralities that generated the religious hatred legislation, of which your noble Lordships, rightly in my opinion, took a dim view recently.

It is not just the invention of new moralities that should concern us; it is the attempt to enforce them—to enforce, that is, newly invented standards that, in some cases, are the exact opposite of the old ones. How else can we explain the attempted ejection of protestors, whether from a party conference or even, yes, from Parliament Square? How else can we explain the anxiety not only of religious leaders but also of comedians when faced with the proposed religious hatred legislation? How else can we explain the police investigation of religious leaders, such as my colleague the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Chester or the chair of the Muslim Council of Britain for making moderate and considered statements about homosexual practice? As the crimes in question have to do not with actions but with ideas and beliefs, what we are seeing is thought crime. People in my diocese have told me that they are now frightened to express their opinions down at the pub on matters of considerable public interest today for fear of being reported, investigated and perhaps even charged. I did not think that I would see such a thing in this country in my lifetime. The word for it is tyranny—sudden moral climate change enforced by thought police.

The answer cannot be simply to repeat the old 18th century slogans of "tolerance" or "freedom of speech", as if they were straightforward concepts that would commend themselves and restore everything to sanity very easily. They are not. The Enlightenment modernism, where those concepts find their natural home, is busy crumbling under the post-modern critique. Let us not fool ourselves—that is where we are culturally. In that climate, tolerance and freedom are reduced to mere licence and then are quietly redefined so that we will not any longer tolerate dissent from the new party lines that emerge. Intolerant tolerance is one of the greatest obstacles to genuine freedom of speech.

Whose freedom are we talking about anyway? Notoriously, the freedom of my fist ends where the freedom of your nose begins. Similarly, the freedom of my speech has always been curtailed by the freedom of your honour, as the laws of slander and libel have always recognised. Part of the problem of freedom of speech is that it is often the media that are most in favour of it, although they themselves often cheerfully censor information that cuts against editorial policy.

Freedom of speech is useless if it is only selectively enjoyed and if it is not combined with appropriate responsibility. It needs to be set within a larger context of social and cultural wisdom. We have to find a way through the post-modern morass, not to go back to the Enlightenment modernism—we cannot do that—but in order to go out the other side into the construction of a new world of civility and mature public discourse. For that, freedom of speech has to be reciprocal. It needs the disciplines of interaction, of patient listening and attention.

To that end, we must take the religious dimension seriously as part of the whole and not wave it away as dangerous or irrelevant, as some these days are inclined to do. The increasingly shrill attempts to banish religion from public life are, I believe, self-defeating. Rather, we in the Church are committed as a matter of urgency to working on public issues with the other great households of faith. I mention particularly the new Christian-Muslim Forum, launched just last week, to stand alongside the Council for Christians and Jews, the Three Faiths Forum and similar bodies.

In these initiatives, tolerance is not the point. I can tolerate someone standing on the other side of the street; I do not need to engage with them. Tolerance all too easily supposes that all religions are basically the same and that they can all be discounted for purposes of public life. Thanks to the 18th century, that is what many people still believe. But tolerance is a parody of something deeper, richer and more costly for which we must work—a genuine and reciprocal freedom. It is a freedom properly contextualised within a wise responsibility. It is freedom not to be gratuitously rude or offensive—I totally agree with what the noble

Baroness, Lady Falkner, said about that—especially to those who are already in danger on the margins of society, but freedom to speak the truth as we see it while simultaneously paying great attention to listening to the truth as others see and speak it and to work forwards together from there. That is so in matters of religion; it is so in matters of public policy; it is so in matters of sexual morality; and it is so in areas where all those issues and others rightly overlap and interlock. It is precisely that sort of wise, responsible freedom that is at risk if honestly held beliefs, clearly and respectfully expressed, are likely to get you into trouble with the law. We must learn fresh wisdom before the moral climate changes irreversibly and the sea rises to engulf the moral lowlands where we presently live.

Evangelical Climate Initiative

2006-02-11T01:58:00.000-08:00

Rick Warren has been getting flak from some “Conservatives” for “siding” with “Liberals” and signing the so called Evangelical Climate Initiative. I don’t care to respond directly to such criticisms, especially since they tend to fall into crazy notions of Warren “not preaching the Gospel” or a “one world apostate through the UN” and yada, yada, yada.

It’s hard not to let those critics hurt me, not only because I know as Rick as a committed follower of Jesus (wanting nothing more then the Kingdom of the Lord) but because it aggravates me when Christians spend their time fighting each other. Discussion is of course, healthy, but not fighting due to slight differences theology, or tactics, or church style, things that when you step back and look --- don’t matter nearly as much as they might think. I’m guilty of this at times, and humbly ask God for forgiveness when I find myself doing so.

That said I’m not totally in agreement with the general “Liberal” idea of “Global Warming” and how much over all affect we have on climate change. Nor do I necessarily agree as to the extent of the possible ramifications of climate change.

However I think there is absolutely no doubt we are polluting our air, water, land etc. We are not being good stewards of Creation. We in the west have been doing a better job as of late of controlling our pollution however, and this is a good start. We as American Christians have been (for the most part) absent from any environmental issues --- it’s almost as if the issue is too polluted by secular liberals. This needs to stop.

As the front page of the statement’s website says:

The same love for God and neighbor that compels us to preach salvation through Jesus Christ, protect the unborn, preserve the family and the sanctity of marriage, and take the whole Gospel to a hurting world, also compels us to recognize that human-induced climate change is a serious Christian issue requiring action now.

I couldn’t agree more, there might be some disagreement about what action(s) we should take --- but the general idea is noble. There are some immediate issues that are more pressing then pollution, or climate change --- but that doesn’t mean we should ignore it.

What we need to get across is not that we are “adapting” to the values and issues of secular liberals --- but rather point out how the Christian Worldview already addresses these issues --- those same liberals might be surprised to hear that.

N.T. Wright: POW! ZING!

2006-02-08T16:20:00.000-08:00

Brilliant. c/o http://worldofsven.co.uk/theology/

Church of England: "We are Sorry"

2006-02-08T14:15:00.000-08:00

The Church of England has officially “apologized” for the slave trade. According to Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams it was “necessary.” This might come off wrong, but was it really so?

Debating the motion, Rev Simon Bessant, from Pleckgate, Blackburn, described the Church's involvement in the trade, saying, "We were at the heart of it."

Perhaps Bessant forgot that the “Church” was also at the heart of abolition movements. One needs to look no further then Englishman William Wilberforce for examples of Christians at the front line of abolition. Does that mean there were not moral failures by Christians over time? Of course there were, but how the Church was at the “heart” of the heartless practice of slavery, I still don’t’ understand. I suppose Bessant is referring to Church of England being in the heart of the matter, not the Christian Church in general. But remarks from Rowan Williams would seem to confuse that.

He said: "The body of Christ is not just a body that exists at any one time, it exists across history and we therefore share the shame and the sinfulness of our predecessors and part of what we can do, with them and for them in the body of Christ, is prayer for acknowledgement of the failure that is part of us not just of some distant 'them'."

How do we have the right, much less the responsibility to apologies for certain Christian’s actions? Actions mind you in volition of the “Law of Christ” --- certainly putting horrible burdens on others, and not loving your brother as yourself --- in no way fulfills the law of Christ.

It’s not our place, we weren’t the offending party. We can however recognize the appalling practice, and keep it from ever resurfacing again (or even better do more to stop the current sex-slave trades around the world.) Why don’t they focus on (and act! not just talk about) that real, and present problem?

Handwritten Bibles Back En Vogue?

2006-02-06T00:42:00.000-08:00

Apparently handwritten Bibles are the new in thing, just don’t expect to get one anytime soon.

Calligrapher and Queen's scribe Donald Jackson is producing the first handwritten Bible since the invention of the printing press.

Mr. Jackson, based in Monmouthshire, is five years into the eight-year, £2m project commissioned by Benedictine monks in the United States.

Mr. Jackson, scribe to the Crown Office since 1964, uses hand-carved goose quills to write on calfskin parchment. Finished pages are gilded with 24-carat gold leaf and bound in leather and Welsh oak.

While it’s a gross overstatement to claim this to be first handwritten Bible since the invention of the printing press, its still quite interesting. By the way if you’re wondering what translation will be used, apparently it’s the NRSV.

Jackson’s handwritten Bible has shown up in Omaha ... and in other news a man named Sunil Joseph has completed a huge “mammoth” Bible.

More on the Mohammed Cartoon Fiasco

2006-02-05T23:58:00.000-08:00

Melinda over at STR makes a good point ...

I still question the judgment of the editors for publishing the cartoons it seems in an effort to offend Muslims ..

Indeed, the initial publishing seems to have been to ‘make a statement’ which wasn’t really necessary --- however the response is morally reprehensible.

BEIRUT, Lebanon (CNN) -- Thousands of protesters packed the streets of Beirut on Sunday, some clashing with security forces and setting the Danish Consulate on fire in anger over cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammed.

The protests soon escalated into fights between Muslims and Christians, and some protesters threw rocks at a Maronite Catholic church, bringing back memories of the civil war that once gripped the capital.

The violence came one day after protesters in neighboring Damascus, Syria, torched the Norwegian Embassy and the Danish Embassy, furious that newspapers in both nations had published images banned under Islamic law.

In other news, Chris Heard has reconsidered his stance on the whole ‘Mohammed’ cartoon fiasco. He ends with this ...

It irks me to no end when uninformed individuals take some phenomenon from within one slice of Christendom and inaccurately generalize that phenomenon to all of Christianity. I would hate for anyone to judge my beliefs by the statements of Pat Robertson or Al Mohler. Yet here I stand self-convicted of the same thing: treating a genuine tradition within Islam as if it characterized all of Islam, which I now understand it doesn't. Mea culpa

Chris, I couldn’t agree more --- I still like my own cartoon however.

Being Hilariously Generous

2006-02-05T23:36:00.000-08:00

The Pastor at church tonight made an interesting play on a verse I already thought I knew well, 2 Corinthians 9:7.

“Each one must give as he has made up his mind, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.”

I hadn’t really thought about before, but --- he challenged us to “commit to be Hilariously Generous.” He bases this idea off the end of that verse above, in Greek it is:

ἱλαρὸν γὰρ δότην ἀγαπᾷ ὁ θεός

For a cheerful giver, God loves.

The Greek word here for cheerful is ἱλαρὸν or hilaros (obviously the root of our word hilarious.) Paul is saying here that we should be giving out of our gladness to give, not out of guilt.

It’s a bit like Herod, after being pleased by Herodias’s daughter’s dance (Mark 6:21-29) exclaims: “Ask me for whatever you wish, and I will give it to you … up to half of my kingdom.” Out of his joy and in a state of cheerfulness he is glad to give. Of course, in this case the request was an ominous one, and his cheerfulness didn’t last for long.

Mohammad Cartoon, Meet Jesus Cartoon

2006-02-02T23:19:00.000-08:00

While personally I think this whole matter bloody silly --- apparently CNN (an American network, mind you) has been showing the so called “Mohammad” cartoons on the air in pixilated form, exactly how Al Jazeera has been showing them --- CNN says they are doing this “as to not offend viewers.” Amazing given they wouldn’t think twice about offending Christians.

To make their point all the more ridiculous --- Palestinian gunmen shut down the EU office in Gaza and made threats to kidnap or shell Europeans.

I thought I’d be fair to my Muslim friends and post a cartoon of Jesus.

Or for CNN ...

Review and Comparison of the "Twelve" Healings

2006-02-01T17:44:00.000-08:00

In a discussion on the merits of Marc Zvi Brettler’s view on myth equaling truth --- someone posted a few comments, I wish to respond to the following.

I still am not on board with you. I believe something can be true, but not historicially true.

For example, Mark 5 and 6 has the accounts of a woman with a hemmorage for 12 years, the healing of a girl, and the sending out of the 12. In Luke 8 and 9 we have the same accounts. In this gospel we have a 12 year old girl, a woman with a hemmorage for 12 years, and the sending out of the 12.

The number 12 is significant. A 12 year old is not an adult, while a 13 year old has different rights/responsibilities. 12 represents a sense of unity in diversity, as in the 12 tribes equalling 1 Israel. When Jesus sends out the 12, he is asking them to preach the gospel and to heal, so he is actually saying to do what he has just done; to bring physical and spiritual restoration.

I doubt that there was an historically 12 year old girl (Lk added the age to make a literary statement, neither Mt or Mk have it), but it expresses a spiritual truth that Jesus brought life and restoration that are related to the meaning of the number 12. So to say that the girl is 12 is meaningfully true (not a metaphor), even if there was never a little girl, or if the girl was 8.

First off thanks for the dialog, I do get the general point of what you’re getting at, but I still don’t tract with the idea of something being true, that in fact isn’t. Perhaps we have an irreconcilable difference in our definition of ‘truth’ but in response to your example...

If Luke were making up the fact that the girl was 12 to make a literary statement then it would not be true, it might be a literary device, but it’s not true if the girl was in fact 8.

There are other occasions where Jesus says things that fit much more nicely into the idea of metaphor however. Also, the Gospel of John presents a lot of interesting ‘quandaries’ --- however I believe a lot of these can be resolve with careful study and understanding of 1st century writing. That said, I believe you are incorrect in your assessment of this account, perhaps we need to take closer look at the parallel accounts in Mark, Luke and Matthew.

Mark

In Mark 5:21-43 we have a fairly detailed account of plea by a synagogue ruler named Jairus to heal his sick daughter, a healing of a woman with a “discharge of blood for twelve years” then the healing of Jairus’ daughter.

Then came one of the rulers of the synagogue, Jairus by name, and seeing him, he fell at his feet and implored him earnestly, saying, “My little daughter is at the point of death. Come and lay your hands on her, so that she may be made well and live.”

Mark 5:22-23

And they laughed at him. But he put them all outside and took the child's father and mother and those who were with him and went in where the child was. Taking her by the hand he said to her, “Talitha cumi,” which means, “Little girl, I say to you, arise.” And immediately the girl got up and began walking (for she was twelve years of age), and they were immediately overcome with amazement.

Mark 5:40-42

Mark states that the girl was twelve to seemly explain why she was able to get up and walk, in other words she was not an infant, or a small child.

Luke

Luke records essentially the exact same account, Jairus pleading with Jesus to heal his daughter who Luke tells us was “about twelve years,” Jesus then making his way though a crowd to get to Jairus’s house, during which a woman that had been unclean (for 12 years with a “discharge”) touched Jesus’ garment (Luke and Matthew add the detail of the “fridge”) and is healed as a result. Then Jesus goes to Jairus’s house and heals his daughter.

And there came a man named Jairus, who was a ruler of the synagogue. And falling at Jesus' feet, he implored him to come to his house, for he had an only daughter, about twelve years of age, and she was dying.

Luke 8:41-42

And they laughed at him, knowing that she was dead. But taking her by the hand he called, saying, “Child, arise.” And her spirit returned, and she got up at once. And he directed that something should be given her to eat.

Luke 8:53-55

Matthew

Matthew has a very condensed account of the same incident; he merely states that a “ruler” came and that he had a “daughter.” Jesus agrees to go, and on the way a woman with a discharge for 12 years) touches the fridge of Jesus’ garment and is healed (Matthew omits that she’d spent her life’s savings on physicians as Mark and Luke inform us.) Jesus then goes the ruler’s house to heal his daughter.

While he was saying these things to them, behold, a ruler came in and knelt before him, saying, “My daughter has just died, but come and lay your hand on her, and she will live.”

Matthew 9:18

And when Jesus came to the ruler's house and saw the flute players and the crowd making a commotion, he said, “Go away, for the girl is not dead but sleeping.” And they laughed at him. But when the crowd had been put outside, he went in and took her by the hand, and the girl arose.

Matthew 9:23-25

Conclusions

The accounts are actually quite similar, the details don’t contradict each other and have many of the same particulars, like the crowd making a “commotion” or weeping, and their laughter at Jesus’ statement. Jesus takes the girl by the hand (Jesus, who was recently touched by an unclean person, making him unclean) in all three accounts, and she is raised.

It would seem all the accounts agree in great detail, in fact in many ways we have “triple” verification of these events which would lead me to believe this was very likely based on actual historical events, even if you are quite critical of the text.

BBC Radio 4's Religion and Ethics Programs

2006-02-01T12:02:00.000-08:00

I was pursuing BBC Radio 4’s Religion and Ethics section and found a few notable programs.

Before the “In the Footsteps of Jesus” series aired there was...

In the Footsteps of Muhammad

In the Footsteps of Moses

First Christian Document? (About the ‘Didache’)

Who Killed Christianity? (An on going series ... “Dr David Starkey argues that five major Christian figures distorted the Christian faith as envisaged by Jesus.”)

Mandatory Minimum Sentence, "Unbiblical"?

2006-02-01T11:07:00.000-08:00

Pat Nolan President, Justice Fellowship (a wing of sorts of Chuck Colon’s Prison Fellowship) has written a piece called “Mandatory Minimums: Unjust and Unbiblical” where he discusses the injustice of some US mandatory sentencing laws.

Weldon Angelos, a 28 year old music executive and father of two young children was convicted of selling small amounts of marijuana three times for a few hundred dollars each time. He was sentenced to 55 years in prison.

Angelos will serve what is essentially a life sentence for selling a small amount of pot.

This sentence is far longer than if he had been convicted of second degree murder, hijacking, kidnapping, rape or aggravated assault.

In the same courtroom on the same day, another defendant was convicted of bludgeoning an elderly woman to death with a log. He was sentenced to 25 years.

How did a relatively minor crime merit a sentence more than twice that of a vicious crime? Federal mandatory minimum sentences impose long prison terms for a small number of crimes, mostly drug offenses. The killing of the elderly woman was not covered by a mandatory sentence.

I think he makes some great points.

Video: What Eould Jesus Eat?

2006-02-01T10:48:00.000-08:00

CNN's Heidi Collins takes a look at efforts to lose weight that rely on the Bible as well as nutrition.

Someone in the video makes a good point about no matter how much your eat, you'll never be satisfied. But as someone else notes, your weightless isn’t a measure of your salvation.

There really isn't much else to do with the Bible here, nothing about eating honey and locust!

Galatians: We Must Not Rebuild!

2006-02-01T01:35:00.000-08:00

Paul uses demolition imagery in regards to the Law many times throughout his letters and Galatians is no exception. For Paul the very structure of Religion has been laid waste and opened up to freedom through Christ.

“For if I rebuild what I tore down, I prove myself to be a transgressor. For through the law I died to the law, so that I might live to God. I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. I do not nullify the grace of God, for if justification were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose.”

Galatians 2:18-21

It’s as if today, peace were declared in the Middle East; the walls running the border of Palestine and Israel have been rigged with pyrotechnics and blown up. Bulldozers have come along and swept away ruins leaving freedom, openness and the beauty of God’s Creation restored in its place.

Who is Paul then, or anyone for that matter to rebuild that wall? It would only seek to prove the demolition was pointless to start off with, and once again crowd the landscape, divide the people, and obscure God’s true purpose.

For Paul, Christ has torn down the walls and buildings that divide us, from God and from man, as he states it in Ephesians:

“But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility by abolishing the law of commandments and ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility.”

Ephesians 2:13-16

Rebuilding the wall would in fact, nullify Christ’s sacrifice which attained the peace that brought it down. Paul refuses to let the wall be rebuilt, not even a single block --- for even a single block can become a stumbling one. If you set out one brick you must build the whole wall, but no matter how high it is built, it will justify anyone.

In Paul’s view we must move on, we must replace our walls of security with Christ’s security, and suspend our attempts at justification in light of God’s Grace through Christ Jesus. By faith, the walls have come tumbling down.

“Violence shall no more be heard in your land, devastation or destruction within your borders; you shall call your walls Salvation, and your gates Praise.” Isaiah 60:18

NPR Interviews Marc Zvi Brettler

2006-01-31T18:00:00.000-08:00

NPR recently aired an interview (archived version available) with Marc Zvi Brettler, author of How to Read the Bible and a professor of biblical literature, chair of the Department of Near Eastern and Judaic Studies at Brandeis University.

It’s quite interesting to hear his views, however I think he’s frankly unduly critical of not only the text, but of others. For example he talks about being annoyed by people saying “the Bible” says ... since he believes they are picking out a particular point, and ignoring what the rest of the Bible (something he views more as an anthology then a complete unified work) says.

I think that’s unfair, it maybe the case that someone is quite justified in saying that statement as long as they are not simply “reading a bible verse” but instead bringing together their knowledge of the texts and forming a balanced view, or in the case of some things simply stating what is clearly in the text to start off with. Its funny how quick Brettler is to tell us what the Bible is, or is saying --- or that it “says nowhere in the Bible” --- yet is annoyed when others do essentially the same thing. He then sort of contradicts himself toward the end, and basically says no one can say what the Bible says.

I get the feeling he’s playing the ‘feminism’ card far too much to get some traction (however he is further led in questioning by the host.) For example, Brettler talks about viewing the Gen 1 and 2 as separate accounts, seeing major differences in there construction, and a different “order” of Creation (mainly in respect to when man and woman are created.)

He points out Gen 3:16

To the woman he said, “I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children. Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you.”

Somehow Brettler seems to have forgotten Gen 2:24 “Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.”

While I argree they are differant accounts, I don't know that they are differant events so to speak. It's clear that the Gen 1 Creation account as a condensed one, while the Gen 2 account a more detailed. He especially argues they are not the same picture of God due to the differences in “details” so to speak --- of course there simply aren’t many details in the Gen 1 account so his argument really falls flat to me.

Brettler gives his views on Intelligent Design, of which I’m frankly a little confused about his view on ‘Myths’ as being true, but not literally true. He gives an example, but it’s not very strong.

The host was pretty ignorant of concept of ‘the Law’ so Brettler speaks a lot about the Ten Commandments, and gives some interesting thoughts on how to view the commands on coveting (is it a sin to think those thoughts, or to act on them?) Clearly, on Jesus’ view --- many Jews of that day understood the commands to merely be acting, while Jesus states a thought alone can be sinful.

In any case its interesting to get Brettler’s perspective, its worth a listen.

Galatians: God's Aid for Jerusalem via Gentiles

2006-01-30T00:23:00.000-08:00

“The meek shall obtain fresh joy in the Lord, and the poor among mankind shall exult in the Holy One of Israel.” Isaiah 29:19

Paul Goes up to Jerusalem

In my study of Galatians one simple line of Paul’s letter stuck a cord, in comes when Paul relates a visit to Jerusalem where he meets with the leaders of the church there.

“Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along with me. I went up because of a revelation ... and when James and Cephas and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given to me, they gave the right hand of fellowship to Barnabas and me, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. Only, they asked us to remember the poor, the very thing I was eager to do.”

Galatians 2:1-2, 9-10

There is some debate [1] over the actual occasion of this visit , some scholars contend this is the trip in Acts 15:4-5 the so called “Jerusalem Counsel” visit, while others maintain is it the “famine-relief” visit of Acts 11:30.

Acts does not record any visits in which Paul bought along Titus, but it seems most likely this is the “famine-relief” visit. The fact that Paul states he went up by ‘revelation’ would fit the circumstances of Acts 11 where a prophet named Agabus “stood up and foretold by the Spirit that there would be a great famine over all the world ...” Further, Paul relates that after meeting with the leader in private that: “only, they asked us to the remember the poor”, while in the visit of Acts 15 seems to have been a public matter, and a more extensive list of requirements for Gentiles was given in letter form.

There is of course the possibility that Luke, when composing his concise history in Acts, left out some visits by Paul which lay outside the scope of his narrative. It could also be the case that Paul didn’t feel the visit of Acts 11 was worth mentioning, however as Cole [2] points out this would weaken Paul’s argument and the Judaizers would quickly point out this inconsistency.

Who Exactly, are ‘the poor’?

Further debate focuses on whether ‘the poor’ represent God’s ‘poor’ (so not necessarily economically so) or simply the poor and disadvantaged of Jerusalem (which would lend support the assumption of the Acts 11 visitation.)

In either respect what struck me is that God was now using Paul’s Gentile churches to bless His poor. Paul speaks a number of times of collections he has gathered for the ‘saints of Jerusalem’ [3] and indeed says “For if the Gentiles have come to share in their spiritual blessings, they ought also to be of service to them in material blessings.” Again, as Cole describes it Jerusalem was a “bloated religious capitol, crammed with hungry, unproductive mouths which seems to have had little true economic basis for its existence.” Coupled with the fact that the Gospel was readily embraced by the ‘poor’ not the rich, it is likely the Jerusalem church was very poor indeed. While there was, early on, a sort of ‘social experiment’ in common living, and the occasional local aided the poor of the church, the noted giving [4] was by “Barnabas ... a native of Cyprus.” The wealth of the Gentile cities was surly greater then that of Jerusalem, and even more so compared with the Jerusalem church.

Closing Thoughts

This does bring forth an interesting question --- could the decision(s) of the Jerusalem counsel have been influenced in any way by the ‘pouring out’ of aid upon the Jerusalem church? Could in fact, have they relaxed their conditions (namely circumcision) on Gentiles based in some part on a fear of losing, or lessening this aid?

In any respect the ‘pillars’ of the Jerusalem church (even the stickler James) endorsed Paul’s Gospel as genuine, and seemingly they would not have done so based solely on perceived loss of income. Ironically, the money that originally these Gentile converts may have meant for ‘evil’ --- God is now using for ‘good’ and the relief of His poor.

[1] See William M. Ramsy, Historical Commentary on Galatians, Chapter 18 “The Second Visit to Jerusalem”, for a lenghtly (if dated) discussion.

[2] R. Alan Cole, Galatians The Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Second Edition (Eerdmans Publishing Co. 1989)

[3] See Romans 15:24-27, 1 Corinthians 16, 2 Corinthians 9:1

[4] It is of interest that the giving which is singled out was by a ‘over-seas’ Jew as Cole notes. This doesn’t necessarily mean there wasn’t great giving by native sons, and this may have been merely a contrast with Ananias & Sapphira’s deceitful giving in Acts 5. However, in either case it is conspicuously missing from the text, coupled with the events in Acts 5 and the statement in verse 6 “And great fear came upon the whole church and upon all who heard of these things.” It is unlikely that if the church members were truly giving ‘all they had’ that a great fear (and perhaps guilt) would come upon them. See Acts 4:32-37

Of Lightning Flashes, Parables and Lamp-stands

2006-01-26T23:46:00.000-08:00

Have you ever been in a thunderstorm and experienced the effect of lightning flashing and, for a split second, everything is illuminated? You can see that which was concealed by darkness around you.

If you’re weird like me you might have artificially recreated this effect in a dark bedroom by flicking the light on and off quickly. The interesting effect there is the image is often times burned in your brain for a short while enabling you to get around and avoid obstacles even though darkness has once again enveloped everything --- you remember what the room was like in the light, and can in effect see through the darkness.

Sometimes I get those little flashes from God, making everything clearer, exposing wonderful things --- or sometimes stuff I’d rather have been left in the dark. Those moments help me get around in the dim times of life by remembering what it looked like in the light.

Jesus talked about this concept to, although in a slightly different manor --- in fact it seemed to be one of Jesus’ favorite analogies.

In Mark 4:21-25 Jesus appears to be answering an (unstated) question from His disciples in regards to His use parables (this can be implied from Luke 8:9-15.) Jesus seeks to convey that although the parables are less direct and mysterious at times that “… nothing is hidden except to be made manifest; nor is anything secret except to come to light.” The Amplified Bible translates the verse like this …

[Things are hidden temporarily only as a means to revelation.] For there is nothing hidden except to be revealed, nor is anything [temporarily] kept secret except in order that it may be made known.

In other words, Jesus isn’t telling His disciples parables to deliberately obscure the Truth --- quite the opposite. While it might be temporally hidden, or hard to see, the end result is to illuminate whole the truth, not hide it. This is paralleled, and heightened by the “messianic” mystery of Jesus’ own identity.

But Jesus wouldn’t be lighting a lamp of parables just to place them under a bowl (which would extinguish the flame) or hide them under a bed or couch where they would be useless. No, just as the lamp lit and put on the stand illuminates the room --- parables shed light and illuminate the words of Jesus.

Oh That's Nice Kanye ...

2006-01-24T17:18:00.000-08:00

NEW YORK (AP) -- Kanye West, with a crown of thorns atop his head, poses as Jesus Christ on the cover of the upcoming issue of Rolling Stone. The outspoken rapper defends his brash attitude inside the magazine's pages, on newsstands Friday. He is also pictured posing as Muhammad Ali.

"In America, they want you to accomplish these great feats, to pull off these David Copperfield-type stunts," he says. "You want me to be great, but you don't ever want me to say I'm great?"

Why should Kanye be so concerned with what "America" wants (which he is right in some ways)? Why not care what Jesus wants? And if he's modeling Jesus ...

The greatest among you shall be your servant. Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.

Luke 22:27

For who is the greater, one who reclines at table or one who serves? Is it not the one who reclines at table? But I am among you as the one who serves.

Matthew 23:11-12

I am aware that Jesus said He was greater then the Temple, Jonah, Solomon, and Abraham --- but unless Kanye thinks he's God, we've still got a problem. If you are truly great you won't have to go around telling people you are, and no one asked you Kanye.

What if "Roe" was an Unborn Child?

2006-01-23T19:07:00.000-08:00

Isn't a tad bit ironic this person wants to “save” a court decision more then they’d want to save --- another person? Though I suppose people wanted the Dred Scott decision to stand --- so people would still be considered property.

Bolivia's New President Seeks Blessing From gods

2006-01-21T02:10:00.000-08:00

TIAWANACU, Bolivia (AP) -- In the ancient temple of a lost civilization far from the Government Palace, a barefoot Evo Morales will ask Andean gods for help and guidance Saturday on the eve of his inauguration as Bolivia's first Indian president.

Tens of thousands of people are expected to converge on the archaeological remains of the Tiawanacu civilization that flourished around 5,000 B.C. near the shores of Lake Titicaca, 65 kilometers (40 miles) outside of La Paz.

There, Morales, a U.S. critic who won by a landslide on a leftist platform, will be blessed by Indian priests who consider themselves inheritors of this pre-Incan culture, which had no written language and disappeared mysteriously.

-------------

My guidance? Ditch the sweater.

Hidden Things That You Have Not Known

2006-01-20T19:01:00.000-08:00

I couldn’t remember when Darwin published his landmark book “On the Origin of Species...”so I looked it up on Wiki. I read a little more into the article and noticed this interesting section.

Charles Darwin came from a Nonconformist background. Though several members of his family were Freethinkers, openly lacking conventional religious beliefs, he did not initially doubt the literal truth of the Bible. He attended a Church of England school, then at Cambridge studied Anglican theology to become a clergyman and was fully convinced by William Paley's teleological argument that design in nature proved the existence of God.

However, his beliefs began to shift during his time on board HMS Beagle. He questioned what he saw—wondering, for example, at beautiful deep-ocean creatures created where no one could see them, and shuddering at the sight of a wasp paralyzing caterpillars as live food for its eggs; he saw the latter as contradicting Paley's vision of beneficent design. While on the Beagle Darwin was quite orthodox and would quote the Bible as an authority on morality, but had come to see the history in the Old Testament as being false and untrustworthy.

I already knew a lot of that about Darwin, but what interested me there was that Darwin couldn’t figure out why a Designer of sorts would create ‘beautiful deep-ocean creatures’ where ‘no one could see them.’ This apparently wouldn’t make sense --- why would God create things (for humans to see and enjoy) where no one could see them?

Seems to me there is a very fundamental flaw in this logic, and I’ve heard it used by others in the past as well. First off, clearly someone has seen these creatures or else we wouldn’t know about them. So when someone sees them is not so much the issue, which leads me to my second point. The mere fact that we know about such creatures drives our imagination and ingenuity, our creativity --- and this is exactly what God had planned.

No matter if you accept Intelligent Design, or Evolution if you believe in the Christian God then you must conclude Creation is purposeful --- that God knows and shaped His Creation.

“You have heard; now see all this; and will you not declare it? From this time forth I announce to you new things, hidden things that you have not known.”

Isaiah 48:6

There are many mysteries still out there, new species, new planets, new stars, and new advances in knowledge --- there is so much out there God wants us to see and learn. Now that we have submarines that can travel deep below the sea we’re beginning to encounter the deep-sea creatures Darwin was so perplexed about, someone is seeing them and enjoying them. And there are many, many new things for us to enjoy ...

“Oh sing to the Lord a new song, for he has done marvelous things!”

Psalm 98:1

My Theo-Bookcase

2006-01-19T00:05:00.000-08:00

I’ve pretty much run out of room in my Theo-Bookcase which was at first designed to hold all my theological and biblical books --- but as it turns out they sort of end up in piles all over my room as well, so there’s really at least two or so more bookcase’s worth.

I have a whole bunch of books back in Virginia too, so at some point I'm going to have to put my whole Library together.

Anyhow, I’ve added a little section at the top of it to house a number of older books --- in fact none of them were printed later then the 1890s --- its pretty much 80% ‘for looks’ and the rest for casual reference or fun.

There are some old ones on the top shelf there now too --- including that really big book which is the Gospels through Romans with commentary and study notes by Adam Clarke from 1818.

Changes in 2 Thessalonians 2:13

2006-01-18T14:55:00.000-08:00

There are many, many copies of the New Testament writings which are commonly referred to as ‘manuscripts.’ These manuscripts often have minor differences and there is a whole field of study that compares these differences or variants (mostly as simple as a misspelling --- sometimes as major as a different verse order or wording.) Given the vast number of copies we have, we can construct a very accurate ‘originals’ which out actually having the originals.

I was pursing 2nd Thessalonians in my ESV Bible, and noticed they translated (or more accurately, selected the variant) of 2 Thessalonians 2:13 as follows:

But we ought always to give thanks to God for you, brothers beloved by the Lord, because God chose you as the firstfruits [1] to be saved, through sanctification by the Spirit and belief in the truth.

[1] Some manuscripts chose you from the beginning

The NIV and NASB do the opposite:

But we ought always to thank God for you, brothers loved by the Lord, because from the beginning God chose you [1] to be saved through the sanctifying work of the Spirit and through belief in the truth. (NIV)

[1] Some manuscripts because God chose you as his firstfruits

But we should always give thanks to God for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God has chosen you [1] from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth. (NASB)

[1] One early ms reads first fruits

While the TNIV opts for the ESV’s choice of the apparently (earlier?) manuscript:

But we ought always to thank God for you, brothers and sisters loved by the Lord, because God chose you as firstfruits to be saved through the sanctifying work of the Spirit and through belief in the truth. (TNIV)

Apparently an early manuscript has the ESV/TNIV wording of the passage while other later manuscripts preserved the NASB/NIV wording. Why would a scribe make this change? Was this a deliberate change to fit the theology of the scribe or a less subtle attempt at clarifying the verse?

The Gospels and Biographies of Abraham Lincoln

2006-01-16T16:06:00.000-08:00

This isn’t a perfect anecdote, but I’ll share it none the less.

I've read a number of Biographies on Abraham Lincoln, the earliest from the late 1800s down to about 2004. It's not always the case, but if I took four common examples, lined them up on my bookshelf in chronological order you'd notice something very quickly. Each is successively larger; this is because the biographies became successively more in-depth. Each one contained more events (or different ones,) and more explanations then the earlier ones.

Should I therefore conclude that newer biographies were made up? Clearly Lincoln is hailed as more and more important a President who's legacy grows larger in each one --- therefore it must be made up!

Well of course not, as time went by more things were learned, more connections made, and more things needed to be explained as the context and time spanned further apart. I view the Gospels in much the same light.

Jesus as God, in Mark?

2006-01-16T14:19:00.000-08:00

Michael Bird posted a quote about "Jesus as God" which sparked a little disscusion in the comments. It's nothing new, however I kept all my points tied to Mark's Gospel alone (instead of arguing from John or elsewhere where it would be easier.) Here's how it began.

Where's the God stuff in the synoptics? And in what sense? In Mark, for instance, I can't think of anything that isn't paralleled in Judaism at the time. John is a different matter but that should say something about the development of tradition.

No “God” stuff in Mark? Off the top of my head ... I can think of two rather weird things for a Jew to do ...

Mark 2:1-2:12, with the healing of the Paralytic...

“My son, your sins are forgiven.” Now some of the scribes were sitting there, questioning in their hearts, “Why does this man speak like that? He is blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?”

Also during Jesus’ trial in Mark 14:61-64...

But he remained silent and made no answer. Again the high priest asked him, “Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?” And Jesus said, “I am, and you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.” And the high priest tore his garments and said, “What further witnesses do we need? You have heard his blasphemy. What is your decision?” And they all condemned him as deserving death.

Why were they so upset at that? These two examples alone --- I don’t think were “paralleled in Judaism at the time.”

I'm not convinced the dispute in Mk 2.1-12 is about sins being forgiven but let's asume it is. As Steph suggested there is a passive form here, i.e. 'your sins have been forgiven by...' Let me add a couple more points.

1. None of the texts you cite mention Jesus as God.

I never claimed those texts mention directly Jesus as God (not so much the point): merely that they were "rather weird things for a Jew to do"--- you stated there was nothing "that isn't paralleled in Judaism at the time." Who else is claiming to personally forgive sins in Judaism at the time?

2. People could get in trouble for blasphemy without claiming to be God. See for example the debate between Sadducees and a certan Pharisee over the legitimacy of a high priest in Josephus.

True, people could get in trouble for blasphemy without claiming to be God, yet clearly the text says "Who can forgive sins but God alone." Clearly Mark (at the least) is saying that the Jewish leaders felt he was co-opting something only God could do. You might argue Jesus wasn't saying he forgave the man's sins, that it was merely passive. But that's simply not what happens. See 8-10:

And immediately Jesus, perceiving in his spirit that they thus questioned within themselves, said to them, "Why do you question these things in your hearts? Which is easier, to say to the paralytic, 'Your sins are forgiven,' or to say, 'Rise, take up your bed and walk'? But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins" …

So is Jesus the Son of Man? Or is he just saying the sins are forgiven by some other entity? And why is he saying this entity has authority to do something that only God has to do?

3. Jews could get upset and engage in deadly intra-Jewish disputes without claims of being God. There are disputes in Judaism about the authority of an individual do do certain things.

The debate here, about forgiving sins, is something that has always been the prerogative of God --- and as far as I know, alien to Judaism. Other disputes on authority are not very relevant.

4. Is there not some significance that there is no mention in Mark's gospel of Jews being angry because he makes himself equal with God like in John's gospel?

Given the context, length, and style of Mark's gospel differs so much from John's --- no I would not be surprised if they contained different events, or focused on different events. This does not logically conclude said events didn't actually happen. Even so, clearly the Jews are getting angry at Jesus making himself (at least in some part) equal with God! No matter how you spin it these Jews understood Jesus to be taking on the sole prerogative of God to forgive sins, and called that blasphemy.

For me those disputes are about Jesus' authority and whether it is legitimate. They have nothing to do with Jesus being God. If they did they would have said so like John's gospel.

While this dispute about Jesus' authority (in matters that only God had authority) in Mark is left somewhat ambiguous --- in John another one is clarified. It does not follow John made up his clarifications, since they don't contradict the incident in the first place. If Mark was clearer as to these only being simple authoritative debates, and John claimed they were solely Divinity debates --- you'd have a point, yet that is not the case.

And let's not forget that there was a range of meanings for the term 'Son of God' in early Judaism. John's gospel seems to go beyond just about everything but I can't see Johannine type claims mentioned in Mark.

There were a lot of meanings for 'Son of God' --- yet don't you find it the least bit odd that in Mark 1:9-11:

In those days Jesus came from Nazareth in Galilee and was baptized by John in the Jordan. Immediately coming up out of the water, He saw the heavens opening, and the Spirit like a dove descending upon Him; and a voice came out of the heavens: "You are My beloved Son, in You I am well-pleased."

If this was just the generic son of God title, why does Mark have it coming from a voice in the heavens?

In the parable of the Vine-growers Jesus talks about a son being sent by his father the master --- if God is the master, who is the Son? Is this just ‘any’ son of the master? No, clearly it’s a personal, distinctive son. What about the exchange in Mark 12:35-37 about Psalm 110:

"...David himself calls Him 'Lord'; so in what sense is He his son?"

Further, the Centurion at Jesus' death (Mark 15:39) calls him the Son of God, or a son of a god/gods. Are we to believe this centurion understood this phrase in a Jewish fashion? No I think it's clear what Mark is doing here; he's using the very words of a Gentile to proclaim Jesus as the Son of God just as he does in Mark 1:1 ... (even if the Centurion doesn't mean it in a Christian sense) ... Mark does. Why else include it?

MLK: Some Mighty Precious Values

2006-01-16T11:30:00.000-08:00

Today, I’d like to bring to attention once again one of my favorite sermons by the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. --- which I posted last year.

Here’s a tidbit from the end of it:

My friends, all I'm trying to say is that if we are to go forward today, we've got to go back and rediscover some mighty precious values that we've left behind. That's the only way that we would be able to make of our world a better world, and to make of this world what God wants it to be and the real purpose and meaning of it. The only way we can do it is to go back and rediscover some mighty precious values that we've left behind.

I’m frankly dismayed at many of the comments in the news about King, and how King would have thought about this or that, it’s just plain annoying to hear people talk about King --- when they seem to know little about him. Futher, he’s rarely referred to “Rev” but mostly “Dr.” as if to distance him from the faith which lead him --- and that I would think would sadden Martin a great deal.

Galatians: Paul’s Surprise, and Who’s to Blame?

2006-01-11T17:01:00.000-08:00

In a rather simple manor I’d summarize Paul’s missionary philosophy as traveling to an area, teaching, seeking out a local leader, establishing a local church with that leader as pastor, then moving on to another area. After this Paul often followed up with a letter, frequently sending help in the form of an experienced Christian to assist the pastor and church that had been established.

Most of Paul’s letters followed a typical 1st Century style, he would often ‘break the bad news’ to the receipts in a ‘nice’ way. He introduced himself, praised God for them, praised aspects of their church, then went on to point out, suddenly at first, then in more direct terms the ‘real reason’ he was writing or more simply, his critiques.

Paul however abandons this style in Galatians; instead he quickly gets to the point, almost raving about how astonished he is at their adoption of ‘another Gospel.’ You might just say that the Galatians who are after all still Christian ‘toddlers’ were left to fend on their own and were lead astray by another group of ‘missionaries’ who had some mixed up theology.

How then should we evaluate Paul’s style of missions? Should we copy Paul’s technique even with its apparent flaws --- in the light of the Galatians’ straying? Should Paul have helped the Galatians grow more ‘in Christ’ before he left? Or can we not fault Paul so much as the Galatians themselves --- based on Paul’s surprised reaction; he seems to have thought this would not (and should not) have happened. Was Paul being too confident? Should we view this as an example of a flawed mission? Or should we see this as an ever-present, and statistical eventually --- you can’t ‘win them all’ so to speak?

It seems as if Paul views this ‘trouble’ as only a temporary set back, that the Galatians are “deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ” --- yet if they were called in Christ, they are still called in Christ. Even so should Paul’s surprise be viewed as a failure on his part, or the Galatians? How should Paul’s letter to the Galatians affect our technique, and our view in respect to modern missions?

Some Neat 'Old' Stuff for Christmas

2006-01-10T16:09:00.000-08:00

I got a number of “old” things for Christmas this year, I don’t mean hand-me-downs or re-gifts I mean antiquities. Jessica joked that I was ‘such a nerd’ to be so exicted over a ‘bunch of old stuff.’

Along with a number of old Bibles and Christian books (1800s-1930s which I will document here later.) I got a number of coins which are historically relevant to the New Testament. A batch of them is still in the mail apparently (which includes a Pontius Pilate coin) but I thought I’d share a few here.

(Herod) Agrippa I (37-44 A.D.)

This is the Agrippa of Book of Acts who (among many other things) put James to death.

This is the type of coin (however we can’t know the exact type) mentioned in Mark 12:42 (Also see: Luke 21:2)

‘And a poor widow came and put in two small copper coins, which make a penny.’

Year Two of the Jewish Revolt (67/68 A.D.)

These coins were minted within Israel during the Jewish uprising in defiance of the Roman rule (all this before the fall of Jerusalem of course.)

Vespasian Denarius (69-79 A.D.)

This is a silver Denarius baring the image of Vespasian, in 66 AD before he was emperor he was the patron of Flavius Josephus, and quelled the Jewish uprising in Judea. He was emperor during the eventual sack of Jerusalem by his son Titus.

A Denarius was generally a day’s wage for a common laborer and is mentioned of course throughout the Gospels but notability in Matthew 22

“Show me the coin for the tax.” And they brought him a denarius. And Jesus said to them, “Whose likeness and inscription is this?”

Constantine I

This has nothing to do with the New Testament, but does have a lot to do with the eventual Christianization of the Roman Empire.

Old NASB vs. New NASB

2006-01-10T10:55:00.000-08:00

Recently at a dinner party I got into a brief discussion about Bible translations --- someone mentioned how their childhood Bible was the ‘something something American Standard’ --- then someone else mentioned how that must been the ‘NASB’ and how they liked that translation.

Well I like it too, but actually I don't like the NASB that could have been the person's childhood bible, I didn't say that --- but I explained how it was a bit dry of a translation --- and explained that this was in fact due to it being very literal.

Thing is, I don’t actually think the childhood bible they had was the NASB, I actually think it was the ASV (American Standard Version 1901) --- but anyhow.

I went on to say how the Updated NASB (1995) was a much more ‘digestible’ translation --- the people around me chuckled like only I would notice a difference between an ‘updated’ translation and an original. I admit I would tend to be more picky then the average person, but really there is quite a difference!

Here’s a quick example.

Luke 12:22-26

Updated NASB	NASB
22 And He said to His disciples, "For this reason I say to you, do not worry about your life, as to what you will eat; nor for your body, as to what you will put on.	22 And He said to His disciples, "For this reason I say to you, do not be anxious for your life, as to what you shall eat; nor for your body, as to what you shall put on.
23 "For life is more than food, and the body more than clothing.	23 "For life is more than food, and the body than clothing.
24 "Consider the ravens, for they neither sow nor reap; they have no storeroom nor barn, and yet God feeds them; how much more valuable you are than the birds!	24 "Consider the ravens, for they neither sow nor reap; and they have no storeroom nor barn; and yet God feeds them; how much more valuable you are than the birds!
25 "And which of you by worrying can add a single hour to his life's span?	25 "And which of you by being anxious can add a single cubit to his life's span?
26 "If then you cannot do even a very little thing, why do you worry about other matters?	26 "If then you cannot do even a very little thing, why are you anxious about other matters?

Once Again It's Time for "What Art is Not"

2006-01-06T17:39:00.000-08:00

After a brief blogging hiatus while I was visiting home for the holidays --- I bring you another segment of “What Art is Not.”

Today’s selection is a piece called “Fountain” which was “made” “by” Marcel Duchamp (that is if you consider singing your name on a urinal and presenting as a piece actually making something.)

Ladies and Gentlemen I submit that this is not art. I don’t really care how liberal your idea of art is --- painting your name and a date on a toilet is not anything remotely resembling art.

In 2004 this toilet received the distinction of being named the “most influential modern art work of all time.” Yes, that’s right --- I’m not joking --- it beat out Warhol, Picasso and Matisse!

Duchamp shocked the art establishment when he took the urinal, signed it and put it on display in 1917.

“The choice of Duchamp's Fountain as the most influential work of modern art ahead of works by Picasso and Matisse comes as a bit of a shock,” said art expert Simon Wilson.

“But it reflects the dynamic nature of art today and the idea that the creative process that goes into a work of art is the most important thing - the work itself can be made of anything and can take any form.”

What exactly was the creative process of taking a toilet and signing your name on it? How can you even say that’s creative? If the creative process is what most matters this item shouldn’t have even made the list.

I think I had heard about “Fountain” before, but it was recently brought to my attention when:

A 77-year-old Frenchman has spent a night in custody in Paris after attacking a plain porcelain urinal considered to be a major artwork.

Of course, what he actually attacked was a replica (“believed to be worth some 3m euros”) of the original 1917 piece that sold for “disappointing” 1.2 million in 2002. Amazingly:

Police said the man had urinated on the same piece at an exhibition in Nimes, southern France, in 1993 … the man claimed the hammer attack was a work of performance art that Marcel Duchamp himself would have appreciated.

So even the smashing of a the toilet … is art? I think I should get into the business.

Rabbi 'Loves Christmas'

2005-12-22T10:15:00.000-08:00

I'm waiting to get on my plane, and caught this article. Sort of interesting, I don't have time to deconsturct it --- but here's a sample.

I also love the baby Jesus. I don't love him as my Messiah, but I love him as the Messiah for my Christian friends, and I love their story. I love that, just like God appeared to Moses in a humble bush, the Christian Messiah was born in a humble manger. I love that both his birth and his death—and of course his resurrection for my Christian friends—are the objects of their two greatest holidays.

Of Virgins and Zygotes ...

2005-12-21T16:50:00.000-08:00

In Matthews 1:20 an Angel comes to Joseph and tells him [1] not to divorce Mary (who has been found to be pregnant before their marriage), because:

In the Greek:

“... τὸ γὰρ ἐν αὐτῇ γεννηθὲν ἐκ πνεύματός ...”

Literally:

“... for that [which is] in she [is] born by [the] Sprit ...”

If we believe God was incarnated in Jesus, was it from the moment of conception that He became incarnate, or was there a certain point where this happened. Did God in fact reduce himself into an embryo? If there is another point at which human life “begins” when is that?

It would seem that if Jesus was formed into Mary at conception --- then the soul, life, etc begins at conception. Therefore, did He become incarnate at the point Jesus’ zygote was conceived?

How then, should this inform our morality on matters of destructive embryonic stem cell research, and abortion?

[1] But as he considered these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not fear to take Mary as your wife, for that which is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. (ESV)
Matthew 1:20

Discovery Channel Christmas Eve Event

2005-12-20T12:52:00.000-08:00

On Christmas Eve Discovery Channel will air a number of specials on Jesus. If you’ve got nothing better to do --- why not plop yourself in front of the TV for bit? There is one that looks quite intesting, a three part series on the miracles of Jesus hosted by a 'Christian illusionist.'

Miracles of Jesus (Three Part Series)
Christian illusionist Brock Gill journeys to the Holy Land to investigate the miracles of Jesus - did he use hypnosis, magic tricks, or were they real miracles? Using drama, CGI and time-slice we will recreate the miracles of Jesus.

The Mission
Learn how Jesus carried out his ministry as a healer and exorcist and how his taste for parties with undesirable guests became an attack on religious authorities. Follow him to Jerusalem and see how dangerous it was for him during the Passover Festival.

The Early Years
Explore the strange fables that surround Jesus' birth. Follow the childhood and early adult years of Jesus using a first century living museum newly opened in Nazareth. Find out why Jesus began his mission and why he chose to live his life the way

The Last Days
Look at the last days of Jesus' life: the Last Supper; the Mount of Olives where he prayed and sweat blood; and the trial where he is condemned for blasphemy. Explore what may have accounted for his resurrection and find out what he may have looked like.

King Herod: Madman or Murderer?
Herod's role in the birth of Jesus is fleeting. In a fit of anger over the purported birth of the "King of the Jews," texts say that he ordered the slaughter of all boys in Bethlehem who were two years old and younger. Scholars examine recent evidence.

The Real Mary Magdalene
As a reformed prostitute, Mary Magdalene has become an icon for the virtues of forgiveness. Experts peel away the layers of mistaken identity and explore the role of women in Mary's lifetime to show that she may not have been a prostitute at all.

Hugh Ross on the Christmas Star

2005-12-20T12:28:00.000-08:00

Astronomer (and all around smart guy) Hugh Ross wrote a little piece about the “Christmas Star” a while back. I’ve read it before but for those of you that haven’t had the chance --- check it out. It’s pretty short and “understandable” to the layman.

Of course Hugh is coming from the school of thought that the story isn’t a fairy tale, unlike Lüdemann.

For centuries scholars and laymen alike have speculated on the nature of the star that led the wise men from the east to seek out the Messiah that had come to the Jews. The only reliable account of this event is found in Matthew 2 of the Bible. Three controversial questions arise out of a study of this text:

1. Were the wise men led by astrology?
2. What was the Christmas star?
3. How did the star guide the wise men to the place where the child was?

Court: PA Schools Cannot Mention ID

2005-12-20T12:04:00.000-08:00

A Pennsylvania school district cannot mention the concept of intelligent design in its biology classes, a federal judge has ruled. "We have concluded that it is not [science], and moreover that ID cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents," said U.S. District Judge John Jones. Intelligent design supporters argue the theory of evolution cannot fully explain complex life forms.

Instead of taking their time to figure out, research, and build up ID --- certain [Christian] groups rushed it onto the scene, and the end result? It has been banned from even being mentioned.

"To be sure, Darwin's theory of evolution is imperfect. However, the fact that a scientific theory cannot yet render an explanation on every point should not be used as a pretext to thrust an untestable alternative hypothesis grounded in religion into the science classroom or to misrepresent well-established scientific propositions," Jones writes.

Iran Bans Western Music

2005-12-19T22:24:00.000-08:00

Hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has banned Western music from Iran's radio and TV stations, reviving one of the harshest cultural decrees from the early days of the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

Songs such as George Michael's "Careless Whisper," Eric Clapton's "Rush" and the Eagles' "Hotel California" have regularly accompanied Iranian broadcasts, as do tunes by saxophonist Kenny G.

Perhaps the most intersting part of this was the CNN "quick poll" on the side of the story. Just for the record --- I voted for Kenny G.

Quick Bit of Shopping

2005-12-19T21:38:00.000-08:00

I just stopped by the local Christian bookstore to take a look around before I leave for Virginia on Thursday. Even though I plan to leave most of my Christmas shopping until the 23rd (and hence I don’t have to pack many gifts) I picked up a few things (mostly for me) anyhow.

Handel’s Messiah 2 CD Set

What’s a music collection without this gem? And it was on sale too.

Tooth & Nail “Happy Christmas” Vol. 4

Some of my favorite artists: Switchfoot, Emery, Anberlin, Mae, Number One Gun all singing Christmas songs!

The Message Remix

I got two copies of this for my young siblings --- hopefully this will inspire them to crack open a bible (well its sort of the bible) more often. I am betting they won't read this blog before Christmas. I wonder what my parents will think of me getting them the Message --- I’m not sure how well it’s accepted at church back home. I doubt they’ll care.

The Barbarian Way

Even though I pre-reviewed this ages ago, I plan to read it on the plane since it’s fairly short. I used to be in the Pasadena area pretty often and got to check out a sermon every so often from Erwin at Mosaic but lately I’ve had to settle with their podcast.

"Ridiculous Attacks On CHRISTmas!!!!" Ugh.

2005-12-19T15:22:00.000-08:00

I was forwarded this story in an e-mail at work this morning. Here are some juicy tidbits:

The conservative group Concerned Women for American issued a "naughty and nice" list, ranking more than 40 retailers in their use of "Christmas." Macy's, Dillard's, Sears and Hobby Lobby made the "nice" list, while Kmart, Home Depot, Kohl's and Old Navy made the "naughty" list. Wal-Mart, Lowe's and Target were on the "somewhat nice, somewhat naughty list." (The entire list can be viewed online at www.cwfa.org).

Wow, naughty and nice list, uhm yeah I don’t even know what to say.

Mike Johnson, an attorney with the conservative legal group Alliance Defense Fund, said consumers can affect change at stores without the help of a lawyer.

No way, a lawyer insists that you don't need a lawyer to affect change? Wow.

"It's political correctness run amok, and in some of these situations it's really a political remedy more than a legal one," he told Baptist Press. "... We take our consumer dollars elsewhere, and that's how we solve those problems.... When people are willing to stand up against these ridiculous attacks, they can affect sometimes immediate change."

Wait, so who's mounting the ridiculous attacks again?

Mathew Staver, president of the conservative legal group Liberty Counsel, said he has seen more people take a stand for Christmas this year than in past years. Liberty Counsel, he said, was contacted by one Wal-Mart customer who planned on returning roughly $1,000 in purchases after hearing a cashier tell someone in line, "I can't greet you back with 'Merry Christmas' because I've been told I would be fired."

"A year ago people wouldn't have stood up like that, but this year they are," Staver said.

Ugh. Is it phrase silly? Yes, but really who cares that much? I also doubt they actually will return their $1,000 in purchases.

Get over it people! Why don’t you just say Merry Christmas, and try to help others to have one --- instead of getting all pissed off they don’t respond with the exact phrase you prefer.

Acts 12: It's His Angel!

2005-12-19T00:56:00.000-08:00

I was listening to Acts last night, and noticed a little detail that sparked my curiosity. In Acts 12, James has just been killed and Peter has been imprisoned, a group of followers are praying for his release --- but given the recent execution of James, it’s likely they expected the worse. However, little known to them Peter has just been miraculously freed from prison:

When he realized this, he went to the house of Mary, the mother of John whose other name was Mark, where many were gathered together and were praying. And when he knocked at the door of the gateway, a servant girl named Rhoda came to answer. Recognizing Peter's voice, in her joy she did not open the gate but ran in and reported that Peter was standing at the gate. They said to her, “You are out of your mind.” But she kept insisting that it was so, and they kept saying, “It is his angel!” But Peter continued knocking, and when they opened, they saw him and were amazed.

Acts 12:12-16

What peaked my interest was that, instead of thinking Peter was knocking (who surely was not released so quickly) they comment first that the girl is crazy, then that it must be Peter’s “angel.” That reminded me of the “Sunday School” understanding that when you die you will go to Heaven and become an angel; this of course isn’t attested to in the Scriptures.

However, what to make of this verse then? Why would Peter’s angel have the same voice as Peter? According to I. Howard Marshall:

When the servant girl heard Peter’s voice in response to her query, she was so surprised and overjoyed she ran back into the house to tell her exciting news without opening the door. The people indoors refused to believe her story. First, they said she was out of her mind. When they could not shake her story, they thought it must be Peter’s angel. This curious reference must be to some sort of ‘heavenly’ counterpart to a person, having the same physical appearance.

The Jews believed people had guardian angles (see Matt 18:10 for an echo of this belief), and there is some evidence (admittedly much later then the New Testament and not all together easy to interpret) that guardian angels were thought to bare the image of the persons whom they protected. The suspicion of the people in the house was in this case false, since it really was Peter himself; Luke says nothing to indicate the supposition rested on a sound doctrine of angels and it is most likely that it is nothing more then a Jewish superstition which he sites but does not necessarily corroborate. [1]

This would seem to satisfy the reference to angel if the servant girl has seen Peter, but apparently she hadn’t seen him. Of course, the people inside might not have known that she only heard him and just assumed she had seen him, and that is why she was so sure. However, the time delay between servant girl’s outburst and opening of the door seems to have been at least a few minutes since Peter “kept on knocking.” So apparently this superstition about angels may have logically flowed to a belief that a person’s angel could look, and speak in the same fashion. This would make plenty of sense. God’s angles were his messengers, and spoke for him --- so in a way they were the ‘voice of God.’

[1] I. Howard Marshall, Acts The Tyndal New Testament Commentaries, First Edition (Eerdmans Publishing Co. 1980)

Christmas Traditions

2005-12-18T18:22:00.000-08:00

Rick Mansfield posted a few interesting 'back-stories' on Christmas Traditions. I love these sort of things for some reason.

Here's an example.

7. Holly, with its prickly leaves and wild berries, was adopted by Christians to stand for the crown of thorns and drops of blood worn by Jesus at His crucifixion.

Now who knows if they are all true, but it’s none the less fascinating. On a side note I leave for Virginia on Thursday --- to hopefully enjoy some Christmas Traditions of my own!

Bart Ehrman, Misquoting a Culture

2005-12-16T00:57:00.000-08:00

Earlier this week I was listening Bart Ehrman (thanks to Mark Goodacre) speak about his book Misquoting Jesus on the Diane Rehm Show. While listening, I was reminded of a chapter in Jesus Under Fire.

Basically Ehrman’s main thrust was that the text of the Gospels was “changed” so much over time that that we are now “misquoting Jesus.” I actually think that is pretty silly. Greek has no quote marks --- so how you can misquote someone is beyond me, but I digress.

My one major gripe with Ehrman is, at times, he exaggerates, even scandalizes things too much for my taste. For example he points out the “thousands of differences” in the NT manuscripts (and only later admits most all of them are completely inconsequential.) I suppose that sells books --- but just leads to a misunderstanding of the culture --- a culture that had no quote marks, and cared more about getting the ‘jist’ (not ‘jive’) of a quote right then a word for word dictation. No doubt that same philosophy extended to writing.

Anyhow, the Chapter I was reminded of in Jesus Under Fire was by Darrel Bock called The Words of Jesus in the Gospels: Live, Jive or Memorex? here is a tidbit of it:

In examining the wording of Jesus’ teachings in the Gospels, we must distinguish between the ipsissima verba of Jesus (“his very words”) and the ipsissima vox (“his very voice,” i.e., the presence of his teaching summarized). One universally recognized reality makes assessing the presence of the exact words of Jesus difficult and argues for the distinction between verba and vox. It is that Jesus probably gave most of his teachings in Aramaic, the dominant public language of first-century Palestine where Jesus ministered, whereas the Gospels were written in Greek, the dominate language of the larger first-century Greco-Roman world to which the Gospels is already a translation.

Though on could argue Jesus spoke Greek and that some of the tradition is not translated, that is unlikely for the whole tradition, particularly when Jesus ministered in a Semitic context. It would be like asking Jesus to speak in English to a Mexican audience on the Mexican side of the Rio Grande! Since a translation is already present in much of the tradition, we do not have “his very words” in the strictest sense of the term.

Yes I realize it’s a tad ironic I just quoted Bock instead of just giving you the ‘jist.’

Did Herod Help Fund The Jesus Movement?

2005-12-16T00:11:00.000-08:00

My good friend Josh Peters gave the sermon tonight at Crave, and he pointed a funny little instance in the Gospel of Luke that I somehow missed.

Soon afterward he went on through cities and villages, proclaiming and bringing the good news of the kingdom of God. And the twelve were with him, and also some women who had been healed of evil spirits and infirmities: Mary, called Magdalene, from whom seven demons had gone out, and Joanna, the wife of Chuza, Herod's household manager, and Susanna, and many others, who provided for them out of their means.

Luke 8:1-3

Not only is it interesting that Jesus was in part bank rolled by woman --- but not just any women --- the wife of King Herod’s ἐπιτρόπου “one to whom a charge is entrusted, a trustee, administrator.” Some translations render that “steward of Herod.”

How wonderful is that --- basically you’ve got Herod indirectly financing Jesus’ Ministry! Brillant.

A Favorite Verse From Romans

2005-12-15T17:08:00.000-08:00

While I'm posting some scans, I thought I'd share one of my favorite verses in Romans; this scan is from a 1638 printing of the KJV. The verses are Romans 12:1-3

A Page From Galatians, 397 Years Ago

2005-12-15T01:00:00.000-08:00

I own a number of different “bible leaves” from 1500s through the 1700s. I have them framed, or just saved up for later use, mainly as decoration.

As I am digging into my study on Galatians I thought I’d take a look at one of the leaves I have from that book, specifically Galatians 2 & 3. This particular leaf is from the “Geneva Bible” and was printed in 1608. This was before the KJV of course, and was a first of a kind “study” bible of sorts.

I’ve scanned all my leaves and thought I’d share a portion of this one, however it’s in gothic type face so it’s a bit hard to read (others are in more readable roman type.) The study notes are quite interesting however; the detail is of the start of Chapter 2.

Enjoy!

Daniel in the Lions’ Den Redux

2005-12-14T00:50:00.000-08:00

I was checking out the NET Bible’s Deutero-Canonicals/ Apocrypha translations today --- and ran across this --- which I didn’t remember in the book of ‘Bel and the Dragon.’ This account of the Lions’ Den pretty exciting, I wonder if this was thought of as a second time Daniel was in the Den, or a different telling of the original in Dan 6:16-24?

Now when the Babylonians heard about this, they were furious and conspired against the king, saying, “The king has become a Jew! He has destroyed Bel and killed the dragon and slaughtered the priests!” Approaching the king, they said, “Deliver Daniel over to us! If you don’t we will kill you and your family.” When the king saw that they were pressing him relentlessly, under compulsion he delivered Daniel over to them.

Then they threw Daniel into the lions’ den, where he remained for six days. Now there were seven lions in the den, and they used to be fed two human bodies and two sheep daily. But these were not given to the lions at this time, so that they would devour Daniel.

Now the prophet Habakkuk was in Judea. He had boiled some pottage and had crumbled some bread in a bowl, and he was in the field on his way to take it to the reapers. But the angel of the Lord said to Habakkuk, “Take the meal that you have to Daniel who is in the lions’ den in Babylon.” Habakkuk replied, “Lord, I have never even seen Babylon, and I know nothing about this den.” But the angel of the Lord seized him by the top of his head and lifted him by the hair of his head. He deposited him in Babylon above the den with the speed of a rushing wind. Habakkuk cried out, “Daniel! Daniel! Take this meal that God has sent to you.” Daniel replied, “You have remembered me, O God. You do not abandon those who love you.” Then Daniel got up and ate. And the angel of God suddenly removed Habakkuk to his former place.

On the seventh day the king came in order to grieve over Daniel. When he came to the den and looked in, there sat Daniel! Crying out in a loud voice, the king said, “You are great, O Lord God of Daniel! There is none other than you!” He hauled Daniel out and threw into the den those who had sought Daniel’s destruction. They were devoured immediately right before the king.

Bel and the Dragon 1:28-1:42

Funny thing is, if you read the rest of the book basically every time someone apposes Daniel the ultimatum is given that Daniel must die or they must die depending on who is proved right. Each time Daniel “wins” and the other people are killed --- yet people seem to pop up again and again against him --- and the same thing happens to them. You think after a while you’d figure Daniel wasn’t a good guy to mess with.