Broccoli and stuff

This is a strange fall; yesterday was 60ºF and today was in the mid-50s until a thunderstorm lowered it to a still warm 45ºF. Normally, nothing would be growing—or at least growing very slowly. Not this year. Good thing, too, because I was late in planting some of my stuff in the hoop house.

The peas are getting big enough to eat and the spinach is almost there, too. The sprouting broccoli and the broccoli raab are coming up nicely, as is the Winter Density Romaine (I was really late on this!). But, the fall broccoli is looking really nice; I plan on cutting a head or two tonight. The picture doesn't really do it justice—the heads are larger than they look here—but you get the idea.

Still on Genesis 1:1

“Thus, the nuanced meaning of bārāʾ that best suits the data is that it means ‘to bring something into (functional) existence’. It suggests the establishment of order often accomplished by making distinctions as roles, status, and identity are distinguished. In contexts where it may retain some of its latent etymology, it may even concern giving something a distinct (functional) existence. Nothing suggests that it should be considered an act of manufacturing something material. Thus, Gen 1:1 becomes, 'In the initial period, God brought cosmic functions into existence.'

“It is not on the basis of the semantic sense of bārāʾ that we draw the conclusion that Israel’s ontology was functional. The main evidence for this conclusion will be brought out in subsequent chapters. However, it is clear that the synchronic analysis of the verb bārāʾ becomes much simpler when the factor of Israelite ontology is brought into the investigation.”— Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology, page 133

<idle musing>
Undoubtedly, I'm doing John a disservice here by posting the conclusions without the corresponding pages of backup. But, you'll just have to buy the book to find out how he backs it up!

A clever marketing ploy? Not really, I just didn't want to take up all the space necessary (besides, I might run into copyright issues for too much text). If you really are interested, I figured you'd buy the book anyway...
</idle musing>

Wow, what a hornet's nest

I certainly didn't expect to stir up a hornet's nest with my post on Wednesday, but I certainly seem to have. Peter Kirk posted a link to my post and some additional observations. Rob Holmstedt has been active in commenting both on my blog and Peter's, with the result that today, he posted his own response—without actually linking to Peter's blog.

So, Genesis One continues to be a war zone. Only this time, it is a war zone not over creatio ex nihilo or how long it took or didn't take, or how it happened, but a war zone over the best linguistic explanation. Me, I'm just putting on my fireproof underwear and posting this!

Beginnings-again

“In Genesis, the ‘beginning’ (rēʾšît) refers to a preliminary period of time rather than a first point in time. This is comparable with the Akkadian term reštu, which means ‘the first part’ or ‘the first installment’; as well as with the Egyptian phrase introduced (above, p. 126), a term that plays a significant role in cosmological texts. In these texts, the Egyptian phrase refers to “when the pattern of existence was established and first enacted.”[Allen, Genesis in Egypt, 57] In English, we might refer to an initial period such as this as the primordial period. All of this information leads us to conclude that the ‘beginning’ is a way of labeling the seven-day period of creation described in the remainder of Genesis 1 rather than a point in time prior to the seven days. As an independent clause, it offers no description of creative acts but provides a literary introduction to the period of creative activity that then flows into the tôlĕdôt sections that characterize the remainder of the book.”— Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology, page 127

<idle musing>
Rob Holmstedt posted a comment yesterday where he mentioned an article he had written with an alternative explanation.

Which do you prefer?
</idle musing>

In the beginning...

“...bĕrēʾšît is a strikingly appropriate term to introduce a sequence that will be carried on by the tôlĕdôt transitions. It marks the very first period, with the tôlĕdôt phrases introducing each of the successive periods. If this be the case, the book would now have 12 formally marked sections (a number that is much more logical than 11). If the bĕrēʾšît clause is a marker comparable to the tôlĕdôt clauses, it could easily be seen as functioning in an independent clause, just like the tôlĕdôt clauses. The conclusion then is that it is an independent clause that functions as a literary marker to introduce the seven-day account, just as the tôlĕdôt phrase is a literary marker that introduces the passage that follows.”— Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology, page 125

<idle musing>
Now that makes sense to me. All the other explanations of the construct form in Genesis 1:1 have struck me as contrived.
</idle musing>

What is rest?

“Divine rest is portrayed as occurring in a number of different contexts in ancient Near Eastern cosmogonies. Aside from the occasional text in which rest refers to an inactive stupor, divine rest generally represents a state that has been achieved through a particular action that was undertaken as a response to a condition or situation that prior to the divine action was usually viewed as unacceptable. The condition in each case represents something that prevents rest. The action indicates how rest is achieved, and the state describes the type of rest anticipated or enjoyed. The common denominator in most of these cases is that divine rest provides a sense of security. When the situation among the gods or in the larger cosmos is secure, deity may rest—regardless of whether the rest means that he/she is thereby free to do nothing, to socialize, to enjoy life, or to do the work of running the cosmos unimpeded. The location where this rest will be experienced is, of course, the temple, the palace home of the god, where the deity may enjoy leisure, social activity, and rule.”—Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology, pages 110-111

<idle musing>
I like this (think Hebrews): "The common denominator in most of these cases is that divine rest provides a sense of security."

Good summary of what Jesus sitting down at the right hand of the Father means for us, isn't it?
</idle musing>

A tale of inventiveness

This weekend I discovered that there is an alternative to duct tape and WD-40™—zip ties!

It's November, the time to rake the lawn. Well, in our case, we use an Agri-fab™ that the previous owners left behind. It sure is nice with 2 acres and lots of trees. But, it is getting old. I know I said the previous owners left it, but actually, the owners before them left it, and so on, going back about 18 years. So, it has a few idiosyncrasies about it. For example, the connection to the lawnmower is hand-made, and the place where the chute connects to the trailer is held together with bungy cords.

Well, Saturday, the hose from the lawnmower to the lawn vac decided to come apart. I looked back and the leaves were shooting straight back into the air; the hose was at a 90º angle. I figured I could buy a new hose. I went to 2 different stores, one of which sells the same lawn vac. Nope. I could order it and wait a few weeks—right. Or, I could get creative.

It was obvious that duct tape wouldn't work. The angle was too sharp and there was too much force on the hose. So, I sealed the hole with duct tape and grabbed my handy zip ties. I circled the hose twice, once on each side of the break, and then put a few zip ties between them and pulled them tight. It worked!

So, my toolbox is now a triad: duct tape, WD-40™, and zip ties...

The center of the universe

“Throughout the ancient world, the temple was a significant part of the cosmic landscape. It was considered to be at the center of the cosmos, the place from which the cosmos was controlled, and a small model of the cosmos—a microcosm...In cosmic space, the temple is at the center. In cosmic time, it precedes everything else.“—Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology, page 100, 102

<idle musing>
The Greeks thought that Delphi was the center of the world, so that agrees. Of course, we know that the U.S. is the center of the world, right? After all, every map has it in the center...
</idle musing>

Putting it to sleep for the winter

We had a serious freeze last weekend; it got down to 26ºF. That was the end of the green peppers. I picked them right away in the afternoon, cut them up, and froze them. I ended up getting about 12 more that were of sufficient maturity.

I also decided it was time to harvest my cabbages. If you recall, the cabbage butterflies got a good meal out them. But, even so, I was able to get 8 decent sized heads out of the 15 plants that survived. I put them in the refrigerator to make into sauerkraut later. Later ended up being Tuesday night.

We bought a new hand shredder for the kraut; the old one was Debbie's from before we got married (33 years ago!). This new one is stainless steel and sharp. Very sharp. Extremely sharp. Painfully sharp. Ouch! The cabbage heads I got from the garden are much denser than the ones in the store. That translates into 5 1/2 quarts of sauerkraut from relatively small heads of cabbage. It also translates into more effort to shred them. It also translates into some serious cuts as I adjusted to the shredder being sharper.

It must be November, that's the only way I can think of to explain it. Last November, I tried to cut off my fingers. This year, I tried to cut off my thumb with the new shredder. As I said, it was extremely, painfully sharp. I have a nice flap of skin on the end of my thumb under a bandage. The next day at work, Marti noticed and asked if I had been playing with my lawnmower again. Nope, but the kraut might have a little extra iron in it :)

The garden—except for the hoop house—is pretty much done for the year. I dug the rest of the straw potatoes Wednesday night. We ended up with about a wheelbarrow full. Now, I just need to find a way to store them that is cool enough. Right now, they are in the garage, which stays cool. But, once the nights get colder, they will freeze. By then the basement will probably be cool enough I can move them there. But, I suspect I will get some growth on them come February...

Why?

“...it is important to realize that the cosmic geography of ancient peoples was predominantly metaphysical and only secondarily physical and material: the roles and manifestations of the gods in the cosmic geography were primary. So, for example, in Mesopotamian thinking, cables held by the gods connected the heaven and earth and held the sun in the sky. In Egypt, the sun-god sailed in his barque across the heavens during the day and through the netherworld at night. The stars of the Egyptian sky were portrayed as emblazoned across the arched body of the sky goddess, who was held up by the god of the air. In another Egyptian depiction, the Cow of Heaven was supported by four gods who each held one of her legs. She gave birth to the sun every day, and the sun traveled across her belly and was swallowed by her at night...

“The apparent neglect of curiosity about the physical structure of the cosmos is therefore not simply a consequence of the ancients’ inability to investigate their physical world. In their thinking, the physical aspects of the cosmos did not define its existence or its importance; physical realities were merely the tools that the gods used for carrying out their own purposes. The purposes of the gods were of prime interest to the ancients.”—Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology, pages 89-90

But where do humans fit in all this?

“The role of humanity is not an independent topic; in the ancient Near Eastern cognitive environment, it can only be understood in relationship to the role of deity. All of the ideology concerning the role of humanity in the cosmos—whether it addresses the circumstances under which people were created, the materials of which they were made (i.e., their composition), their functions, or their propagation—associates them with deity.
The conception of humanity focuses on two roles:
1.Humanity’s role with regard to its place or station in the cosmos
2.Humanity’s role with regard to its functions in the cosmos .”—Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology, page 84

Serving the gods

“The foundation of religion in Mesopotamia is that humanity has been created to serve the gods by meeting their needs for food (sacrifices), housing (temples), clothing, and in general giving them worship and privacy so that these gods can do the work of running the cosmos. The other side of the symbiosis is that the gods will protect their investment by protecting their worshipers and providing for them. Humans thus find dignity in the role that they have in this symbiosis to aid the gods (through their rituals) in running the cosmos.”—Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology, page 78

<idle musing>
A bit different from the biblical God, eh? Of course, to hear some people talk, maybe not...name it; claim it; stomp on it and frame it! They want a tame god, but the only way to get a tame god is to have an incompetent one that you need to take care of. I'll stick with the biblical God!
</idle musing>

AAR/SBL prep

Andy, our webmaster and graphic designer, has a nice post on our AAR/SBL prep this year. He even includes photos of the procedure. Do check it out—and check out the real thing at AAR/SBL :)

Oh, by the way, all the books left yesterday for the conference. It is costing us about $1600 to ship them out to a warehouse in South San Francisco—and $2600 for them to be moved about a mile to the conference center. Can you say greedy? We're in the wrong business! We should start hosting conferences and charging ridiculous prices of the vendors...OK, I'm done for now.

<UPDATE:> I fixed the link; sorry about that.

Enuma Elish

“Neither the literature of Canaan nor the literature of Egypt testifies to a revolt of the gods; all we encounter is one god challenging another god. In neither literature, however, is there any reason to conclude that the conflict is related to cosmogony. Enuma Elish, as we have seen, provides examples of three categories of theomachy: dissatisfied class struggle is resolved by creating humankind; macrocosmic chaos, represented in Tiamat’s rebellion, is resolved in cosmogony; and struggle for rule (represented in Kingu’s possession of the Tablet of Destinies) is resolved by Marduk’s ascension to the throne. In this respect, Enuma Elish should be viewed as idiosyncratic rather than paradigmatic. We have no reason to expect that an ancient Near Eastern cosmogony would feature theomachy. “—Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology, page 74

Running the Cosmos

“The cosmic deities do not govern the cosmos from an independent existence outside the cosmos. The cosmos functions as a result of the gods’ being who they are. The daily function of the cosmos is the story of the lives of the cosmic deities. They are not only manifest in the components of the cosmos; the cosmos is their very identity. Though mythology developed personalities for these deities in narrative contexts, the foundation of these personalities is grounded in their cosmic identity. Running the cosmos is not something they do; it is a result of who and what they are. It is from this cosmic identity that their portfolio of competencies is derived. Cosmic deities are those who are associated with the static aspects of the cosmos.”Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology, page 65

Study Bibles

David Lamb has a wonderful post on study Bible here. Here's an excerpt:

I want to invoke the curse at the end of Revelation (21:18-19), which states that if anyone adds to the words of the prophecy, all the nasty things that Revelation describes will come upon them. Seems appropriate, don’t you think?

Why? A valid question.

The comments in Study Bibles appear to have the same authority as Scripture because they are printed right there on the same page. That’s scary. Hence the Revelation curse. In fact, since the comments often attempt to clarify an unclear text, they seem to have more authority than God’s word. Obviously, discerning readers will view the comments critically and take them with a grain of salt, but most people don’t do that.

I can’t count the number of times during a Bible discussion someone says, “Well, my Bible says…”. I ask, “Is that your Bible, or a note in the margin?” It’s usually a Study Bible comment...

<idle musing>
A man after my own heart! I have had people say the same thing about a note in their study Bible. In their mind, if it is on the same page as the text, it is equal to the text in authority. I have but one answer, "NO!"
</idle musing>

Thomas got a bum rap

The apostle Thomas, that is. A co-worker forwarded a link to me that was primarily about the arts and Christianity (it's quite good, although relatively old, 2005). Anyway, buried in there was this wonderful paragraph:

Thomas has said he won't believe unless he can actually put his finger into the mark of the nails, thrust his hand into the place where the spear went into Jesus' side. And it would have been better if Thomas had believed without needing that, but Jesus meets him where he is. "OK, Thomas, here are my hands, here's my side, don't be faithless. But believe." And Thomas takes the flying leap of faith and doesn't just say, "OK, all right, I believe." He says what none of the others have said to this point, "My Lord and my God."

<idle musing>
See what I mean? Thomas is called "doubting" Thomas—but he is the first one to make the connection. He got a bum rap in history; he should be celebrated as the first one who truly comprehended (after the resurrection) who Jesus was.
</idle musing>

Cosmos as people

“In our modern, material ontology, we are inclined to think of the cosmos as a machine—often with no one running it (that is, the modern perspective is dysteleological). When we moderns think about the ancient world (including the Bible), it is most natural for us to imagine that ancient peoples simply thought of the world as a machine with Someone running it, rather than seeing that they did not in any respect conceive of the world as a machine. In the ancient functional ontology, the cosmos is more like a business. In this metaphor, it is clear that a business only functions in relationship to people, both the company’s employees and its customers.”Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology, page 45

But it's not that simple

“The idea that the ancients did not have a material ontology of course does not mean that they had no interest in or awareness of the physical world around them. That is, it is not as if they had a mystical view of the world rather than paying attention to the real world they experienced every day. The point is, however, that to them the 'real' world was a world of divine presence and activity. Their cosmological ontology reflects that it is the functioning of that ordered, real world that is of importance, not its physical makeup or the physical origins of the material objects.”Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology, page 44

and

“In a material ontology, the world is full of objects. To us moderns, a cow or a tree can be nothing more than an object to be exploited for its material value (milk and meat in the case of the cow, wood or maybe shade or even beauty in the case of the tree). But in some cultures, where cows or trees have religious significance, they do not serve as objects that function only in terms of their material components or offer only material for exploitation. Although giving milk or shade are functions, the cow and tree are considered to have sacred functions that at times preclude the exploitation of their material functions. They have been personified (imbued with the divine) or at least sacralized. The personification or sacralization of material things was common in the ancient Near East. Israel’s theology moved away from the sacralization of the surrounding world. Isaiah the prophet argues that the wood used to make an idol is nothing more than wood and cannot attain the sacralized status that was attributed to the wood through the image-making process. But though the world around them was desacralized by Israel, this does not mean that the material of the world was objectified. The function performed by anything in the world is a result of its having been assigned this function by deity. The physical properties of the thing are designed to facilitate this function rather than to determine it. Israel’s movement toward desacralization may have been the first step toward a material ontology, but the functional perspective continued to dominate its understanding of the world.”Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology, pages 44-45

<idle musing>
Take away sentence: "But though the world around them was desacralized by Israel, this does not mean that the material of the world was objectified." In a lot of ways, I wish that were still true. We see nature as something to be conquered and overcome instead of something to live in communion with. Look at the pesticides and herbicides that we use; look at the earth that we move to create subdivisions—to say nothing of all the trees that get chopped down in the process...
</idle musing>

Baseball

I don't follow sports at all anymore. I used to follow professional cycling, but that got too drug infested, so I gave up following it. Anyway, that disclaimer aside, Michael Gorman has an interesting observation about baseball and God and nationalism:

The God revealed in Jesus Christ is not interested in blessing America or Americans any more than any other nation or individuals. Even more importantly, the God revealed in Jesus Christ has absolutely no interest in blessing the American military machine or furthering American military interests around the world. Quite the contrary, in fact.

Sports have their place in any culture. But they can become, and in the U.S. have become, another arm of nationalistic and even militaristic propaganda. The book of Revelation might counsel us to be wary, and even to “come out.”

<idle musing>
Amen! Good preaching! Read the whole post, it is very short.
</idle musing>

Give it a function

“The acts of creation involved naming, separating, and temple building. This coincides with what Eliade observed [Cosmos and History: The Myth of the Eternal Return (New York: Harper, 1954)] concerning the perspective prevalent in the ancient world: the 'ontological thirst' of the ancients was the pursuit of a view of reality that could give meaning to life. Modern material ontology offers no secure understanding of the meaning of life, but the functional ontology of ancient Near Eastern peoples gave meaning to the reality that they experienced in the way the world worked.

“In the ancient cognitive environment, it was more important to determine who controlled functions than who or what gave something its physical form. We could therefore conclude that in the ancient world something was created when it was given a function.”Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology, page 43

<idle musing>
I could try to be funny and make a snide remark about some people not really existing...but I won't :)
</idle musing>

What's the matter?

“In Mesopotamian sources, as in Egypt, when the texts report on the components of the cosmos, the building blocks overwhelmingly involve functional aspects of these components rather than treating them primarily as material objects. Even when material objects are mentioned, it is their functions, not the structures or substance of these material objects that are the focus of attention. Causation, likewise, was not thought of as involving material natural processes; instead, causation is always the prerogative of deity.”Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology, page 42

<idle musing>
Simply put, matter doesn't matter :)
</idle musing>

Creation as separation

“The principal acts of creation [in the Enuma Elish] are naming, separating, and temple building. While separating holds a prominent position in Egyptian and Sumerian texts, the significance of naming can be seen in its role in Enuma Elish...”—Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology, page 34

<idle musing>
Pay attention. This is the beginning of his argument for the importance of the temple...
</idle musing>

What I've been reading lately

My sidebar doesn't reflect it, largely because I have been reading them too quickly to keep up, but here's a quick run down:
The China Study, Forks over Knives, The Engine 2 Diet, Keep it Simple, Keep it Whole. You can pick them up at your local bookstore, or order them here. I checked most of them out of the library.

As I was musing over the weekend about the path we've decided on, I realized that it was just a small step along the journey that began way back in college and before. I started adding whole grains back into my diet then; I've always been a fruit and vegetable guy. As the kids were growing up, we slacked off on the whole grains a bit and had more meat/fish than before. But, while I was working for a video wholesaler in the 1990s, I was exposed to Covert Bailey. He had a PBS program that we sold and I received a free video.

The video led to reading his books, especially Fit or Fat (which is now revised) and Smart Exercise. We made changes to our diet, incorporating more whole grains, dropping more fats out, etc. The stuff that I've learned in the last 2 weeks simply confirms what he was saying back then—just a bit more.

So, if you are looking for more reading, there you go...

Quite the difference

“That all of the world was governed by the gods’ activities is an integral element of the cognitive environment of the ancient world, and it is diametrically opposed to the reigning modern paradigm, which is thoroughly dysteleological: origins and causation are seen in impersonal terms, the simple result of random reactions within the bounds of natural laws, discernible only within an empirical framework.”Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology, page 38

<idle musing>
That is a significant difference in viewpoints. No wonder we don't "get" Genesis and the rest of the Bible so often. As I said yesterday, we're asking the wrong questions.
</idle musing>

From unity to diversity

“Egyptians were not concerned with abstractions such as the eternality of matter, nor were they interested in the origin of matter per se; but the continuity of matter from the original precosmic condition to the current state of differentiated elements was of utmost importance. Creation involved the transition from primordial unity to the diversity of the world that they experienced.”—Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology, page 28

and
“The [Egyptian] texts are more interested in the unfolding process than the means or mechanisms by which the unfolding was accomplished. First and foremost, creation was considered to be not an account of the manufacturing of material things but a teleological account that reflected divine purpose.”—Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology, page 29

<idle musing>
As were the other ANE civilizations—including the Israelites. We are simply asking the wrong questions...
</idle musing>

Recipes

I had a request for the recipes yesterday, so here you go. I don't claim they are anything special, but I like them.

Cornbread
1 cup cornmeal
1 cup whole wheat flour
1 t salt
2 t baking powder
1/4 cup sugar/honey <---this was too sweet for me; try halving it
1/4 cup unsweetened apple sauce
1 cup water

Mix the dry ingredients, add the liquid ones and mix. Avoid overmixing as it develops the gluten and make a tougher cornbread. Pour into a 9x9 glass pan. Bake at 350ºF for 22 minutes (may vary, depending on your oven).

Chili
2 quarts stewed tomatoes (I use home canned, obviously)
1 small can of tomato paste
1/4 t cummin
1/4 t chili powder
1/4 t paprika
chili peppers (I used a small can because I didn't grow them this year)
3 onions, minced
1/2 green pepper, diced
simmer for about an hour, stirring periodically
add a can of kidney beans and heat through (about 30 minutes) (I have used dried kidney beans in the past, but they take forever to rehydrate!)

I add a few drops of habanero sauce to my bowl; it is too strong for Debbie, so I don't add it to the main pot. I also broke up some cornbread and added it to my bowl. I didn't miss the cheese.

We finished up the leftovers last night. The cornbread didn't age very well; it was still ok, but without the oil and egg, it gets old quickly, so eat it the first day :)

About substituting the flour in the cornbread recipe: our granddaughter is celiac, so our daughter started a blog that has some information. I know Renee found a good substitute for flour—a mix of various stuff. It actually is quite good; I eat it when we are visiting them. Maybe Renee would be willing to post it in the comments?

Chaos

“In the Classical world, Chaos in Hesiod’s Theogony and in Virgil’s Aeneid is personified as the primal state in which earth, sky, and seas were all merged. More generally, chaos is the opposite of cosmos, which refers to the ordered whole. It is this latter juxtaposition that is particularly evident in the ancient Near East. Egyptian philosophers conceived of the precreation state as the opposite of the created state. In Mesopotamian views of the precosmic condition, chaos was personified only secondarily in the conflict myths in which the created order was considered to be at risk. In this cosmological literature, the creatures posing the threat must be overthrown and order reestablished.”—Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology, page 27

Update on food

So, it has been one week now since the dairy and eggs disappeared. I have to say that I really haven't noticed the difference. The pizza was a bit strange without cheese, but I found that I could detect the flavors of the various ingredients better. I liked it.

One thing I have noticed is that the granola seems sweeter without milk—as did the cornbread we made last night. That was an experiment that turned out, but I wasn't too sure at first. I made chili and we wanted to have cornbread to go with it; I haven't been able to find a recipe without egg, milk, or butter/oil. So, we improvised. I substituted water for the milk, skipped the egg, and used applesauce for the oil. The texture of the batter was a bit strange, so I wasn't sure. I checked it after 12 minutes and it looked ok. I checked it again at 22 minutes and took it out. Believe it or not, it was good—except it was too sweet. Next time I'll reduce the sugar to 2 tablespoons; if that isn't sweet enough, then I'll try 3 tablespoons. I know some of you were raised without sugar in your cornbread, but I like it a bit sweet.

The chili was good, too, but I've always made vegetarian chili, so that was no change. The one difference was that I didn't add cheese to my bowl, but I really didn't miss it. On the whole, not much has changed in my diet, except dropping the dairy. We've been experimenting with some recipes. Some work, some don't. But, that's always been true :)

Miscellany

Some miscellaneous stuff that you might enjoy.

From the Wall Street Journal, about The Science of Irrationality:

We like to see ourselves as a Promethean species, uniquely endowed with the gift of reason. But Mr. Kahneman's simple experiments reveal a very different mind, stuffed full of habits that, in most situations, lead us astray. Though overconfidence may encourage us to take necessary risks—Mr. Kahneman calls it the "engine of capitalism"—it's generally a dangerous (and expensive) illusion.

What's even more upsetting is that these habits are virtually impossible to fix. As Mr. Kahneman himself admits, "My intuitive thinking is just as prone to overconfidence, extreme predictions and the planning fallacy as it was before I made a study of these issues."

Read the whole thing, though. It is quite short, but good food for thought. We certainly aren't rational!

From Michael Gorman's blog:

...In addition to its approximately 1,000 military bases worldwide, the U.S. has drone operations in and from numerous countries. And, according to this apparently well-researched article, “In less than three years under President Obama, the U.S. has launched drone strikes in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Pakistan, Somalia, and Yemen. It maintains that it has carte blanche to kill suspected enemies in any nation (or at least any nation in the global south).”

I know that many “progressive” Christians have been huge fans of Obama. Christians of all stripes need to remember that empires with two parties are still empires.

Killing should bother us—especially such impersonal killing and disregard for other nation's borders. Can you say hubris?

From the Brazos blog:

We are not so much integrating human and technology as we are confusing the two.

And for that reason, I think that the trend will continue, and even accelerate. Too few people are asking questions about what is desirable. We tend to ask, instead, only about what is possible. That is the nature of a culture, like ours, that is enamored with technology, and sees it as a means of salvation. And my main response to this is a simple line of questions. “Has it made us happier persons? Has it made us more content as persons? Has it made us better persons?”

Yep; sadly, we worship technology.

Finally, Roger Olson cites some examples of the exegesis of Romans 9, both Calvinist and Arminian, that don't go the double predestination route. He concludes with these thoughts:

But, as I said earlier, it is not only Arminians who offer exegesis of Romans 9 that conflicts with traditional Calvinist interpretations. Lesslie Newbigin, for example (hardly an Arminian!), also explained Romans 9 in the Arminian manner (which is also how it was interpreted by ALL the church fathers before Augustine!)–as dealing with nations and service rather than individuals and their salvation.

Finally, Arminius himself offered a very cogent exegesis of Romans 9.

My point in quoting Wesley was NOT (as some disingenuously imply) to say that Arminians have no alternative explanation of Romans 9 based on exegesis. It as simply to say that ANY interpretation of Romans 9 or of ANY OTHER scripture that makes God arbitrary and unloving, in brief, a monster, is impossible BECAUSE there is no reason to believe Scripture if God, its author, is evil and not good. The (perhaps unintended) view of God as actually WANTING many people to suffer eternally in the flames of hell for his glory (as Theodore Beza asserted) undermines the validity of Scripture itself. It makes it untrustworthy because it is only trustworthy if God is trustworthy and an evil God is not trustworthy.

Amen and amen!

Materialism in the deepest sense

“In the post-Enlightenment Western world, the framework of cosmic ontology has become strictly material—that is, the cosmos is perceived to exist because it has material properties that can be detected by the senses. The functioning of the cosmos is consequently understood as resulting from its material properties, and its origins are described in material terms. In a material ontology, something is created when it is given or otherwise gains its material properties. In material ontology, there is great interest in investigating and understanding the physical nature of reality, especially in terms of its building blocks, from the smallest constituents, including molecules, atoms, cells, quarks, and so on (the constituent parts), to the largest agglomerations of constituents, including planets, solar systems, and galaxies. In a material ontology, material origins are of ultimate importance and of central concern.

“However, we have no reason to think that cosmic ontology in the ancient world was conceived as having a material basis. Though an ancient material cosmic ontology cannot be ruled out, it certainly should not be assumed as the starting point for our consideration. Good methodology demands that we take our lead from the texts themselves when thinking about how the ancients framed their own ontological perspectives. If their ontology was not material, then they likely would have had little interest in material origins. The focus of their ontology would also naturally be reflected in their accounts of origins.”—Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology, pages 23-24

Borrowing?

“...understanding the Hebrew Bible requires its interpreters to recognize the pervasive connection that ancient Israel had with the legacy of ancient Near Eastern literature and thought. This relationship, however, is not merely a matter of literary adoption at some point in time; that is, we cannot simply consider what we may think Israel has derived from contemporary literature. The relationship is more complex, because Israelite literature reflects the broad ancient stream of culture from which it was watered in the course of centuries or even millennia. As a result, the issue is not whether Israel borrowed or adopted another culture’s ideas. The stream was so pervasive and persistent that some of the ideas we are considering had become a “native” way of thinking; they had long been a part of the conceptual framework of the ancient world and had much earlier taken root in whatever context(s) the Israelite cognitive environment took shape.”—Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology, page 13

<idle musing>
Indeed. The idea of "borrowing" that was so pervasive a generation or two ago is overly simplistic. After all, does a fish know it's wet?
</idle musing>

Thought for the day

“Everyone lies to their neighbor;
they flatter with their lips
but harbor deception in their hearts.

“May the LORD silence all flattering lips
and every boastful tongue—
those who say,
'By our tongues we will prevail;
our own lips will defend us—who is lord over us?'
“'Because the poor are plundered and the needy groan,
I will now arise,' says the LORD.
'I will protect them from those who malign them.'
“And the words of the LORD are flawless,
like silver purified in a crucible,
like gold refined seven times.

“You, LORD, will keep the needy safe
and will protect us forever from the wicked,
who freely strut about
while depravity is honored by the human race.”—Psalm 12:2-8 TNIV

Eisenbrauns annual ASOR/AAR/SBL in October sale

I love this sale, although it is a lot of work to put together. Anyway, here's the announcement.

OK, that's it

I finished The China Study last night. But, even before that, I had made up my mind—and acted on it. I'm done with animal protein. No more. Nada.

What did it? The chapter on prostate cancer. My dad already had an enlarged prostate over 15 years ago and there is some evidence that it could be genetic. Large intake of dairy products was shown to increase your chances between 2-4 times. Later, he cited a study that said 9.5 times. Not worth it!

So, why not just reduce? The data showed that if you kept animal protein under 10% of your protein intake, everything was fine. Right. That's something like a 1/2 cup of milk/yogurt or 1 ounce of cheese a day. Why bother? Besides, I was nearly a vegetarian anyway.

Just to give some perspective, I'm healthy and quite fit. My resting heart rate is in the low 50s. My cholesterol was under 100 the last time I had it checked. I ride 11 miles a day to work and back all year round. I don't take any medication—prescription or otherwise. I like it that way; I don't want to increase any risk that there might be in ingesting animal protein. Oh, and my grandfather was a dairy farmer. I spent many hours on that farm growing up. I was drinking a quart of milk a day and loving it—until this week, so I'm anything but anti-dairy.

I welcome your feedback—even if you tell me that the study is flawed (it isn't, but the dairy and meat industrie$ would like you to think $o...).

The ancient cosmos

“It is clear from the cosmological literature of the ancient Near East that order in the cosmos and the control of the functions of the cosmos were more prominent in the ancient thought world than any consideration of the material origins of the cosmos. In what follows, I will show that ancient Near Eastern literature is concerned primarily with order and control of functions of the world that exists rather than with speculations about how the material world that exists came into being... A study of these concepts reveals how pervasive the issues of rule and authority were for ancient thinking. The model of the cosmos as a kingdom was more relevant in the ancient world than our modern model of the cosmos, which typically portrays it as a machine.”—Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology, pages 8-9

Ouch!

We just received a shipment from Germany today. Ouch is the best way to describe it

Watch your perspective

“As with any other attempt to place ideas in context, comparing and contrasting the cognitive environment are both important. One of the most obvious dangers in this process is that we impose our modern cognitive environment on the ancients simply because we have failed to recognize that our own categories are not relevant to the ancients’ way of thinking. For instance, it was long claimed that Enuma Elish should not be considered a creation text because nothing was actually “made” by Marduk. This claim arises out of a basic assumption that the ancient understanding of the creative act should correspond to our own—or even more so, that creative activity can only be construed in one way (our modern way!). Consequently, the first important guideline to bear in mind is that we cannot seek to construe their world in our terms.”—Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology, page 6

<idle musing>
A very important, and usually overlooked point. We are frequently asking the wrong kinds of questions from the text. We need to see the text with fresh eyes, eyes that aren't glazed over with preconceived ideas of what it is saying.
</idle musing>

From an internal e-mail

"...repetitive reading of Eisenbrauns titles could render one more literate, geeky, or historically accurate with bouts of bibliographic brain swelling. Eisenbrauns titles are not to be taken in combination with doses of Biblical Archaeological Review or violent reactions may result with episodes of prolonged agitation."

<idle musing>
Sometimes the people I work with are almost too creative : )
</idle musing>

Reading

A delightful little musing on a parent who gave up her iPad for reading (do read the whole thing; it's short, but sweet):

I did love my Kindle app. I still do. But the most relevant feature of the iPad is that while reading is one option, Angry Birds and Facebook and e-mail are others, all available at a swipe.

A book — a real book — is one choice, taken from a pile, opened and entered as its own singular, separate world. Once chosen, you are not holding the constant opportunity to alter or improve your choice, or simply change it just for the sake of restless change. You are there, now, without the relentless pressure of the fact that you could always be, and maybe you should be, maybe you’d be happier or more productive or different, doing something else. It’s a choice I hope my kids will decide to make, often.

<idle musing>
I think that summarizes very well the difference between a physical book and an e-book. I read a lot on the screen, but I also get distracted a lot when I do. With a book, not so much...
</idle musing>

Context is king

This is the first of series of excerpts from John Walton's new book from Eisenbrauns, Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology:

“Reconstructing literary relationships often becomes an elaborate connect-the-dots game in which the results resemble more the apparent randomness of a Rorschach inkblot test than the clear literary links that are claimed. Our efforts should focus on using all the literature at our disposal to reconstruct the ancient cognitive environment, which can then serve as the backdrop for understanding each literary work. Rather than employing comparative methodology as an apologetic serving our own ideologies, promoting theological or antitheological agendas, we must as careful scholars allow the text, as a product of its cognitive environment, to be interpreted within the context of this cognitive environment.”—Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology, page 2

Thought for the day

And the word of the LORD came again to Zechariah: “This is what the LORD Almighty said: ‘Administer true justice; show mercy and compassion to one another. Do not oppress the widow or the fatherless, the foreigner or the poor. Do not plot evil against each other.’

“But they refused to pay attention; stubbornly they turned their backs and covered their ears. They made their hearts as hard as flint and would not listen to the law or to the words that the LORD Almighty had sent by his Spirit through the earlier prophets. So the LORD Almighty was very angry.—Zechariah 7:8-12 TNIV

Changes

Last weekend, Jim, Shannon, and little Jacob came over. We had grown some potatoes and acorn squash for them and it was time to harvest it. One of the many things we talked about was a book that Jim was reading, The China Study. He had found out about it through a documentary that Shannon has discovered, Forks over Knives, which explored the role of protein in our diet. Wow, scary stuff.

Now, Debbie and I have been essentially ovo-lacto vegetarians for years. Not because we're anti-meat (we aren't), but because we prefer to stay low-fat and we like vegetables and fruits better. So, I wasn't surprised by some of the things Jim was reading. But, I had always thought that the problem was the fats and cholesterol. Nope. Seems the problem is the form of protein in animal products.

My interest was piqued, so last night I went to the library and checked out the book (see the link above). I have only read about 100 of the 400 pages, but it is forcing me to re-evaluate my diet. You see, I love cheese and I love milk. I drink over 2 gallons of milk a week by myself, plus about a pound of cheese and 2.5 pints of yogurt. That's a lot of protein! If what I've read so far is correct, I need to cut that down to almost nothing. If he had said to get rid of steak, I would have been in the AMEN! chorus. If he had said eat more vegetables, I would have joined the choir. But, he was telling me to give up one of my favorite foods. That's hard. If you've read this blog for very long, you know that I enjoy making cheese, yogurt, and cottage cheese. Ouch.

So, I'll continue reading, but the documentation in the endnotes makes me know that he's right. This is a readable, but scholarly, book. The author is a well-respected university professor who has been doing this research for over 30 years. I'm out of wiggle room. I have to make a choice. Sort of like where God gets us when we consider his claims, isn't it?

Stay tuned and I'll post periodically on what I've decided and how I've changed my diet...

Ten Myths About Calvinism

Ten Myths About Calvinism
Recovering the Breadth of the Reformed Tradition

by Kenneth J. Stewart
InterVarsity Press - IVP, 2011
255 pages, English
Paper, 6 x 9
ISBN: 9780830838981
List Price: $24.00
Your Price: $19.20
www.eisenbrauns.com/item/STETENMYT

I just finished this book yesterday. Like Defending Constantine, which I reviewed yesterday, Nick gave this to me back in June (thanks Nick!); obviously, I'm not the fastest reviewer on the planet :)

First, let me say that I am unabashedly Arminian/Wesleyan. Second, I probably read more Reformed books than most Reformed people—ok, I probably read more books than most people :) Anyway, this is an excellent book. Every Calvinist should read it. And every Arminian would benefit from reading it. It was refreshing to go with the author as he reviewed the widely divergent takes on Reformed theology throughout the last 500 years. In our highly polarized culture of today, it was nice to see that history contains a plurality of Calvinisms.

Stewart's Calvinism is inclusive; he has no time for wall-building to keep people in or out. For him, Calvinism isn't about us versus them, but about trying to understand the workings of God. While I can't agree with him on how he sees those workings, I can appreciate the spirit of his endeavor.

One chapter stood out in particular, probably because it was the only myth I had believed, "TULIP is the Yardstick of the Truly Reformed." I had always been told—by Calvinists, mind you—that to be truly Reformed, you had to buy TULIP. Imagine my surprise to discover that the acronym is not even 100 years old!

I came away from the book having hope for the future. If there are still irenic Calvinist theologians like Stewart, then the future of the church won't have to devolve into pastors who tell people that God hates them and they only exist so God can condemn them, as one prominent Calvinist pastor did recently. That is the kind of love that, as Wesley said, "makes the heart run cold."

Fall

It has been a beautiful last two weeks. The temperatures have been in the mid-70s F, with the nights in the low 50s/upper 40s. The leaves are turning and the riding is wonderful. Fall is my favorite time of the year.

I've spent the time cleaning up the garden, adding to the compost pile, putting new compost on the beds, planting for the fall/winter. I added a threshold to the hoop house door this year. Last year, I couldn't open the door all the way because of frost heaves and snow buildup. That means I have to resize the door, too; I'm hoping to get that done early this week. I'm also putting new plastic on the hoop house this year. All my experimenting with different clips and using hog panels for trellis put too many holes in the old stuff.

My fall broccoli is looking good; the late beans are blooming, the peas are starting to bloom. The carrots are growing, the bunching (green) onions are a nice size. If I can get the top on the hoop house before it gets cold, they should all do well right into November and beyond for some.

I planted some more fall crops over the weekend. It is a bit late, but with the warm weather they might do ok. I planted kale and radishes in an exposed bed. I'm thinking I'll put row cover over them as it gets colder. I might even put a cold frame over them. I planted more bunching onions in the hoop house, as well as some radish.

I ordered some more Winter Density romaine, broccoli raab, and some sprouting broccoli yesterday. I'm planning on planting those in the hoop house, as well. We'll see how they do. The sprouting broccoli has a 90 day maturity, so it might not actually bear until next March, but the other two should do well.

Defending Constantine

Defending Constantine
The Twilight of an Empire and the Dawn of Christendom

by Peter J. Leithart
InterVarsity Press - IVP, Forthcoming November 2010
367 pages, English
Paper
ISBN: 9780830827220
List Price: $27.00
Your Price: $21.60
www.eisenbrauns.com/item/LEIDEFEND

I just finished reading this a week or so ago. Nick from IVP gave me a copy back in June (thanks Nick!) and I didn't get to it until now, so here's a very brief review.

I know the book has generated some controversy, but I fail to see why. Sure, he attacks Yoder, but I've always felt that Yoder's history was pretty poor. I'm sympathetic to Yoder and think his pacifism is correct, but I never bought his historical justification of it.

Leithart refers to Fredriksen's Augustine and the Jews extensively (which I reviewed here, by the way). He also cites one of my graduate professors at Kentucky, Louis Swift, so he must be ok, right :)

The book does a good job of defending Constantine, rehabilitating him from the current anti-Constantine diatribes. Anyone who is unfamiliar with the 4th century would do well to read the book. When Leithart tries to draw parallels and conclusions related to the modern world, though, I would urge caution. That is where his anti-Yoderism is wrong. Pacifism is similar to the anti-slavery stand in the church, in my opinion. It is latent in the texts and just needed to be brought out over the course of time as the thinking developed.

The safe life

For my disclaimer on this series, see here

“To everyone wanting a safe, untroubled, comfortable life free from danger, stay away form Jesus. The danger in our lives will always increase in proportion to the depth of our relationship with Christ.”— Radical: Taking Back Your Faith from the American Dream, page 167

<idle musing>
Yes! Amen! Good preaching! I get sick of hearing people go on and on about wanting to keep their children "safe" or hearing a radio station say "Safe." Jesus didn't call us to live "safe lives; he called us to live selfless lives.
</idle musing>

Thought for today

“That Jesus did not command all his followers to sell all their possessions gives comfort only to the kind of people whom he would issue that command.”—Robert Gundry, quoted in — Radical: Taking Back Your Faith from the American Dream, page 120

Material prosperity and the gospel

For my disclaimer on this series, see here

“In the dawn of this new phase in redemptive history, no teachers (including Jesus) in the New Testament ever promise material wealth as a reward for obedience. As it this were not startling enough to first-century Jews (and twenty-first century American Christians), we also see no verse in the New Testament where God's people are ever again commanded to build a majestic place of worship. Instead, God's people are told to be the temple—the place of worship.”— Radical: Taking Back Your Faith from the American Dream, page 117

<idle musing>
Take that you "name it—claim it—stomp on it and frame it" or, as my cousin says, "Gab it and grab it" preachers!

Pretty amazing, isn't it? We are the temple of God! That is so amazing...
</idle musing>

Thoughts on the poor

For my disclaimer on this series, see here

“So what is the difference between someone who willfully indulges in sexual pleasures while ignoring the Bible on moral purity and someone who willfully indulges in the selfish pursuit of more and more material possessions while ignoring the Bible on caring for the poor? The difference is that one involves a social taboo in the church and the other involves the social norm in the church.”— Radical: Taking Back Your Faith from the American Dream, page 111

and

“Regardless of what we say or sing or study on Sunday morning, rich people who neglect the poor are not the people of God.”— Radical: Taking Back Your Faith from the American Dream, page 115

<idle musing>
Harsh words, but very true. I sometimes think that people took Luther too literally and have knocked the book of James out of their Bibles:

Is it not the rich who are exploiting you? Are they not the ones who are dragging you into court? Are they not the ones who are blaspheming the noble name of him to whom you belong?
If you really keep the royal law found in Scripture, “Love your neighbor as yourself,”a you are doing right. But if you show favoritism, you sin and are convicted by the law as lawbreakers.—James 2:6-9 TNIV

But, that still doesn't explain why they ignore Paul's warnings. Maybe it is just selfishness and an unwillingness to die to it? Nah, can't be that! That sounds too, well, biblical!
</idle musing>

Thought for the day

Though the fig tree does not bud
and there are no grapes on the vines,
though the olive crop fails
and the fields produce no food,
though there are no sheep in the pen
and no cattle in the stalls,
yet I will rejoice in the LORD,
I will be joyful in God my Savior.

   The Sovereign LORD is my strength;
he makes my feet like the feet of a deer,
he enables me to tread on the heights.—Habakkuk 3:17-19 TNIV

<idle musing>
This has probably got to be one of my favorite set of verses in the Bible. Habakkuk has argued with God and then seen a theophany of judgment. What other response can you have? He's seen the end—God wins; nothing else matters. All the stuff in between is just a distraction. Not really, but you get my drift.
</idle musing>

Empty stomachs

For my disclaimer on this series, see here

“Anyone wanting to proclaim the glory of Christ to the ends of the earth must consider not only how to declare the gospel verbally but also how to demonstrate the gospel visibly in a world where so many are urgently hungry. If I am going to address urgent spiritual need by sharing the gospel of Christ or building up the body of Christ around the world, then I cannot overlook dire physical need in the process.”— Radical: Taking Back Your Faith from the American Dream, page 109

<idle musing>
I think you could easily find more than a few Bible verses that agree with him—James comes to mind, as does Habakkuk, and Amos, and...just about all the prophets. The unthinking alignment in the United States between capitalism and christianity is definitely unbiblical. But, as I was once told, does a fish know it is wet?
</idle musing>

Thought for today

“Woe to him who builds his house by unjust gain,
setting his nest on high
to escape the clutches of ruin!
You have plotted the ruin of many peoples,
shaming your own house and forfeiting your life.
The stones of the wall will cry out,
and the beams of the woodwork will echo it.

   “Woe to him who builds a city with bloodshed
and establishes a town by injustice!
Has not the LORD Almighty determined
that the people’s labor is only fuel for the fire,
that the nations exhaust themselves for nothing?
For the earth will be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the LORD
as the waters cover the sea." — Habakkuk 2:9-14 TNIV

Safe!

For my disclaimer on this series, see here

“In our Christian version of the American dream, our plan ends up disinfecting Christians from the world more than discipling Christians in the world. Let me explain the difference.

“Disinfecting Christians from the world involves isolating followers of Christ in a spiritual safe-deposit box called the church building and teaching them to be good. In this strategy, success in the church is defined by how big a building you have to house all the Christians, and the goal is to gather as many people as possible for a couple of hours each week in that place where we are isolated and insulated from the realities of the world around us.”— Radical: Taking Back Your Faith from the American Dream, pages 104-105

<idle musing>
One of my pet peeves about American christianity has always been the emphasis on "safe." I don't see that anywhere in the Bible or Christian history; serving Jesus is anything but safe!
</idle musing>

First Frost!

On Saturday night we had our first frost—2 weeks early! I wasn't ready, but it wasn't a heavy frost, so almost everything came through. I did cover the raspberries, peppers and green beans; they're a bit touchier than the others.

Needless to say, I spent most of Sunday getting the garden ready for fall. I cleaned up the watermelon, the cucumbers, and the earlier plantings of beans (I succession plant my beans&mash;a new crop every 2-3 weeks). I also pulled the last of the San Marzano Roma-style tomatoes. They did really well this year.

So, how what worked and what didn't? This year we tried containerized gardening on some corn. It grew really well, but I should have side-dressed it with nitrogen earlier than I did. Also, we didn't get to eat any because the raccoons got it. The day before I was going to pick it, they climbed the fence, then the corn stalks and got all the corn. Bummer!

The watermelon were very good this year, but there weren't very many. Maybe that's why they were good? Anyway, I need to get access to some high quality manure to have good flavor and quantity. I probably won't do them again, although I might try cantaloupe there next year.

The turnips didn't germinate, nor did the rutabaga. That's ok; I prefer kohlrabi anyway. I can't get beets to grow very large in this garden. I'm pretty sure it's a mineral balance thing. Next year I think I'll add some boron.

The cabbage needed to stay under row cover—the cabbage butterfly caterpillars got to them. Same for the late broccoli and the Brussels Sprouts—although they recovered and I will get some. I need to plant more cucumber plants for the first planting and forget about a second planting.

On the whole, the garden was a success. I like planting earlier under row cover and in the hoop house. The plants get a head start and are pretty much done by the time the bugs catch up. I used to can more in August/September than any other month. This year, because of the row cover and hoop house, I canned more in July/August. That was nice; it left September freer for apples :)

Speaking of apples, I canned 23 pints of apple sauce over the weekend and we have dried about 2 bushels. I also canned 6 more quarts of rhubarb sauce. We're about out of jars now. I'm going to need to buy another dozen wide mouth quarts for the remaining dried apples.

So, how did your garden do this year?

Thought for the day

“Woe to those who plan iniquity,
to those who plot evil on their beds!
At morning’s light they carry it out
because it is in their power to do it.

They covet fields and seize them,
and houses, and take them.
They defraud people of their homes,
they rob them of their inheritance.

Therefore, the LORD says:

'I am planning disaster against this people,
from which you cannot save yourselves.
You will no longer walk proudly,
for it will be a time of calamity.'”—Micah 2:1-3 TNIV

People, please

For my disclaimer on this series, see here

“One of the unintended consequences of contemporary church strategies that revolve around performances, places, programs, and professionals is that somewhere along the way people get left out of the picture. But according to Jesus, people are God's method for winning the world to himself. People who have been radically transformed by Jesus.”— Radical: Taking Back Your Faith from the American Dream, page 90.

Let's state the obvious

For my disclaimer on this series, see here

“We are not the end of the gospel; God is.”— Radical: Taking Back Your Faith from the American Dream, page 71

Only God can do it

For my disclaimer on this series, see here

“It is the way of Christ. Instead of asserting ourselves, we crucify ourselves. Instead of imagining all the things we can accomplish, we ask God to do what only he can accomplish. Yes, we work, we plan, we organize, and we create, but we do it all while we fast, while we pray, and while we constantly confess our need for the provision of God. Instead of dependence on ourselves, we express radical desperation for the power of his Spirit, and we trust that Jesus stands ready to give us everything we ask for so that he might make much of our Father in the world.”— Radical: Taking Back Your Faith from the American Dream, page 60

Blind spots

I just ran across an interesting post here about home schooling blind spots, but I think you could just as easily say parenting blind spots (via Joel Watts). Here's a particularly good snippet:

As I was looking back on this experience [of his son's first job] several years later, something my son said shortly after he started his job kept coming back to me. When I picked him up the second night of work, he got in the car with a big smile on his face and said "They like me!" As I dwelt on that comment, it suddenly came clear to me - my son had finally met someone who liked him for who he was. Few others in his entire life had shown him much acceptance, especially not his mother and I. It is no exaggeration - in our efforts to shape and improve him, all we did was find fault with everything he did . We loved him dearly, but he constantly heard from us that what he did (who he was) wasn't good enough. He craved our approval, but we couldn't be pleased. Years later, I realized he had given up trying to please us when he was 14, and from then on he was just patronizing us. [italics original]

The reason our son wanted to adorn himself like his work associates, was because they accepted him for who he was. He wanted to fit in with those who made him feel significant. He wanted to be like those who gave him a sense of identity. The problem wasn't one that could be solved by extended sheltering - he could have been sheltered until he was 30 and he still would have been vulnerable. The problem was that we had sent our son into the world insecure in who he was. He went into the world with a hole in his heart that God had wanted to fill through his parents.

<idle musing>
Do yourself and your kids a favor, love them—and tell them repeatedly that you love them. And assure them that your love is unconditional; that you will always love them. God's business is changing them and molding them.

Now, don't think I'm saying not to discipline them, because I'm not. You can end up with just as big a mess that way :( But, for better or worse, most of the time we don't tell our kids we love them enough. Or, we say it but don't show it.

The results can affect them for years afterward. Please, tell them you love them—and show it.
</idle musing>

It creeps in and consumes you

Have I started writing horror? No, but that is exactly what technology can do. Check out this post by Andy Le Peau from IVP:

I was at a conference recently where often, when there was a break, the participants tended not to get up, stretch, get a cup of coffee, chat with those nearby or even go to the bathroom. Instead they sat there. They were not mesmerized by the presentation they had just heard. They were mesmerized by their screens—handheld or laptop—checking email, tweets, Facebook, news feeds and more.

<idle musing>
I've seen the same thing. In fact, I've seen people walking in the woods with their faces buried in a smartphone. What's the point of walking in the woods?

I'm no stranger to technology—in fact, I ran the IT department at a previous job—but, I have chosen to limit my technology. We don't have a TV set, nor a computer at home. I don't have a smart phone and only got a cell phone because of business needs. It's a choice. Debbie and I have chosen to spend our time in different ways that we believe are more productive. You should try it, you might find out that it is a worthwhile change :)

Just an
</idle musing>

What Holy Spirit?

For my disclaimer on this series, see here

“I am a part of a system that has created a whole host of means and methods, plans and strategies for doing church that require little if any power from God. And it's not just pastors who are involved in this charade. I am concerned that all of us—pastors and church members in our culture—have blindly embraced an American dream mentality that emphasizes our abilities and exalts our names in the ways we do church.”— Radical: Taking Back Your Faith from the American Dream, Pages 48-49

<idle musing>
Yep. Generally speaking, if the Holy Spirit failed to show up in our life today, we wouldn't even notice—practicing atheists.
</idle musing>

The american dream and the gospel

For my disclaimer on this series, see here

“The dangerous assumption we unknowingly accept in the American dream is that our greatest asset is our own ability. The American dream prizes what people can accomplish when they believe in themselves and trust in themselves, and we are drawn toward such thinking. But the gospel has different priorities. The gospel beckons us to die to ourselves and to believe in God and to trust in his power. In the gospel, God confronts us with our utter inability to accomplish anything of value apart from him. This is what Jesus meant when he said, 'I am the vine; you are the branches. If a man remains in me and I in him, he will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing.'”— Radical: Taking Back Your Faith from the American Dream, page 46

<idle musing>
Amen! I think he's at his best when he is critiquing how culture has infiltrated the church.
</idle musing>

A new creation

For my disclaimer on this series, see here

“We are saved from our sins by a free gift of grace, something that only God can do in us and that we cannot manufacture ourselves.

“But that gift of grace involves the gift of a new heart. New desires. New longings. For the first time, we want God. We see our need for him, and we love him. We seek after him, and we find him, and we discover that he is indeed the great reward of our salvation. We realize that we are saved not just to be forgiven of our sins or to be assured of our eternity in heaven but we are saved to know God. So we yearn for him. We want him so much that we abandon everything else to experience him. This is the only proper response to the revelation of God in the gospel.”— Radical: Taking Back Your Faith from the American Dream, page 39

<idle musing>
Amen! That we are new in Christ is the good news. Everything else he mentions is the fruit of being new and being in Christ.
</idle musing>

Sinking sand

For my disclaimer on this series, see here

“We have been told all that is required is a one-time decision, maybe even mere intellectual assent to Jesus, but after that we need not worry about his commands, his standards, or his glory. We have a ticket to heaven, and we can live however we want on earth. Our sin will be tolerated along the way. Much of modern evangelism today is built on leading people down this road, and crowds flock to it, but in the end it is a road built on sinking sand...”— Radical: Taking Back Your Faith from the American Dream, page 38

<idle musing>
And we all know what happens to roads (or buildings) built on sinking sand...
</idle musing>

Argh!

My computer died today. All the posts were on it...at first they thought it was the video card, which was under warranty. It's not :( It's the logic board...bummer. Ah well, in and for everything give thanks!

I'm a good person

For my disclaimer on this series, see here

“My life is not going right, but God loves me and has a plan to fix my life. I simply need to follow certain steps, think certain things, and check off certain boxes, and then I am good.

“Both our diagnosis of the situation and our conclusion regarding the solution fit nicely in a culture that exalts self-sufficiency, self-esteem, and self-confidence. We already have a fairly high view of our morality, so when we add a superstitious prayer, a subsequent dose of church attendance, and obedience to some of the Bible, we feel pretty sure that we will be all right in the end.”— Radical: Taking Back Your Faith from the American Dream, page 32

<idle musing>
Self-this and self-that...Jesus says death to self, so we just ignore him or redefine what he meant. The latest Barna poll (sorry, can't remember the link) showed that while religious belief was decreasing over the last 15 years, certainty of heaven was increasing. Explain that!? Obviously it ain't coming from the biblical text...
</idle musing>

Stop and look

For my disclaimer on this series, see here

“The gospel reveals eternal realities about God that we would sometimes rather not face. We prefer to sit back, enjoy our clichés, and picture God as a Father who might help us, all the while ignoring God as Judge who might damn us. Maybe this is why we fill our lives with the constant drivel of entertainment in our culture—and in the church. We are afraid that if we stop and really took at God in his Word, we might discover that he evokes greater awe and demand deeper worship than we are ready to give him.”— Radical: Taking Back Your Faith from the American Dream, page 29

<idle musing>
"the constant drivel of entertainment..." I quoted that to Debbie last night. I think it describes our culture too perfectly. As a society, we're afraid of silence, of being face-to-face with ourselves.
</idle musing>

The American Gospel

For my disclaimer on this series, see here

“Fundamentally, the gospel is the revelation of who God is, who we are, and how we can be reconciled to him. Yet in the American dream, where self reigns as king (or queen), we have a dangerous tendency to misunderstand, minimize, and even manipulate the gospel in order to accommodate our assumptions and our desires. As a result, we desperately need to explore how much of our understanding of the gospel is American and how much is biblical.”— Radical: Taking Back Your Faith from the American Dream, page 28

<idle musing>
Amen! Good preaching!
</idle musing>

Poor Guy

I feel sorry for Guy. He's back in the US and is being subjected to the standard way of doing "church" in the US. Read his observations and see if you don't think they make more sense than the current way of doing things. To whet your appetite, here's one:

Prayer. Probably the most striking thing I have noticed after years of being away from legacy churches is the almost non-existent place of prayer in the gatherings of believers. Prayer is used more as a way to begin and close meetings, but I have seen little real praying when believers gather. Singing praise and worship songs is certainly a way of addressing our Lord, but there are so many other aspects of our communion with God that are going unaddressed in our gatherings: prayers of repentance/confession, prayers of united intercession and supplication, prayers for laborers (Lk. 10:2), prayers for wisdom/guidance/discernment, spiritual warfare, prayers for healing and for the sick, prayers for those who do not know the Lord, etc.

I suspect the reason prayer is downplayed is that prayer takes time. Maybe the problem is we have to cram everything in between 11am-12noon. There simply isn't time for prayer if we are going to sing for 20-minutes and listen to a 30-minute message. But then, is it any wonder we have such little spiritual power in our midst?

<idle musing>
Read them all and consider how much more scriptural they are...and then head on over and read this
</idle musing>

Which Jesus do you want?

For my disclaimer on this series, see here

“...we are starting to redefine Christianity. We are giving in to the dangerous temptation to take the Jesus of the Bible and twist him into a version of Jesus we are more comfortable with.

“A nice, middle-class, American Jesus. A Jesus who doesn't mind materialism and who would never call us to give away everything we have. A Jesus who would not expect us to forsake our closest relationships so that he receives all our affection. A Jesus who is fine with nominal devotion that does not infringe on our comforts, because, after all he loves us just the way we are. A Jesus who wants us to be balanced, who wants us to avoid dangerous extremes, and who, for that matter wants us to avoid danger altogether. A Jesus who brings us comfort and prosperity as we live out our Christian spin on the American dream.”— Radical: Taking Back Your Faith from the American Dream, page 13

<idle musing>
That's a version of christianity I've seen far too often...
</idle musing>

Telling it like it is

For my disclaimer on this series, see here.

“I am convinced that we as Christ followers in American churches have embraced values and ideas that are not only unbiblical but that actually contradict the gospel we claim to believe. And I am convinced we have a choice.”— Radical: Taking Back Your Faith from the American Dream, page 3

<idle musing>
Well, he certainly doesn't waste any time beating around the bush, does he? I think he is right, and he will defend that claim for a good part of the rest of the book. Stay tuned :)
</idle musing>

Advice from a teacher

Somebody posted this link on Facebook, I think, but it bears reposting. As someone who taught High School Latin, I can agree with him. The whole thing bears reading, but here's a short little snippet about grades:

This one may be hard to accept, but you shouldn't assume that because your child makes straight A's that he/she is getting a good education. The truth is, a lot of times it's the bad teachers who give the easiest grades, because they know by giving good grades everyone will leave them alone. Parents will say, "My child has a great teacher! He made all A's this year!"

Wow. Come on now. In all honesty, it's usually the best teachers who are giving the lowest grades, because they are raising expectations. Yet, when your children receive low scores you want to complain and head to the principal's office.

Please, take a step back and get a good look at the landscape. Before you challenge those low grades you feel the teacher has "given" your child, you might need to realize your child "earned" those grades and that the teacher you are complaining about is actually the one that is providing the best education.

<idle musing>
When I was in college (once I got serious), I would seek out the teachers who had the reputation of being the hardest; I knew I would learn!
</idle musing>

Popularity

For my disclaimer on this series, see here

“Jesus apparently wasn't interested in marketing himself to the masses. His invitations to potential followers were clearly more costly than the crowds were ready to accept, and he seemed to be okay with that. He focused instead on the few who believed him when he said radical things. And through their radical obedience to him, he turned the course of history in a new direction.— Radical: Taking Back Your Faith from the American Dream, page 2

<idle musing>
He sounds like Bonhoeffer here—not for the last time, either.
</idle musing>

A different book

Late spring or early summer—I can't remember which—while we were returning the grandkids, someone or two suggested a book to me that looked interesting. So, I read the first 60 pages. It was fascinating and deadly accurate, so I asked if I could borrow it. They let me, and I set it on my desk at home.

Six weeks passed before I got back to it. By that time, I had forgotten the first 60 pages, so I started over again. I still found it fascinating and deadly accurate. The author hit the nail on the head, time after time. He was diagnosing what was wrong with the church in America—and he isn't a far-out on the limb house church or Emergent author either! In fact, he is a mega-church pastor.

I found myself devouring the book, hoping he would offer the cure to all the ills he was highlighting. When he got to the prescription, I found that his cure was as bad as the disease. Where was the power of the Holy Spirit? Where was the presence of God in your moment-by-moment life? Where was the vibrant life of the book of Acts? He recommended reading the Bible through in a year, making a financial sacrifice, going on a mission trip, and getting involved in a meaningful church relationship. Same old same old, just a different package :( Not that there is anything wrong with any of them, in and of themselves. But, when you remove the emphasis on the Holy Spirit as the motivating, living factor in your life, you end up with another program.

What was/is the book? Radical: Taking Back Your Faith from the American Dream. Not that the book is all bad; as I said, his diagnosis is spot-on. So, I have decided I will extract the stuff that I found good from the book over the next so many days, but always link back to this caveat.

Feel free to show me where I misread him or where I am wrong; that's what the comments are for.

In the Assyrian chariotry...

“It is remarkable that, after the fall of Samaria, the Assyrians redeployed a large Israelite chariot force to fight as a unit of the royal army on its northern borders. It is also significant that the king of Assyria selected an Israelite equestrian to train the crown princes and designated many Samaritan charioteers as officers in the Assyrian army. This speaks volumes about the level of equestrian expertise in Israel.”—The Horsemen of Israel, page 143

Apples!

This Saturday, I picked a bushel of Gala apples. We've been drying them ever since; we should be done by Saturday, just in time to pick some more :) Last year we dried 2 bushels and made apple sauce out of a couple bushels. This year we plan to dry 3 bushels—1 Gala and 2 Jonathan. That should give us enough to eat and give away.

In other gardening goodness, I canned 8 pints of pickle relish and 4 pints of beet pickles. My second planting of cucumbers is full of blossoms; I just hope this cold weather (high of 65º yesterday and 60º so far today) doesn't keep them from producing. I still would like to can another 10-15 quarts of bread & butter pickles.

I should take a picture of the canning shelf in the basement to match last year's. I don't know why, but it seems to be fuller this year than last. There's room for the dried apples, but the space for the apple sauce is full of other things. Not sure what I did differently...

In the "this didn't work so well" department: The cabbage butterfly caterpillars are devouring my cabbage. I should have left the row cover on them :( They also are enjoying the Brussel sprouts and kohlrabi, but the cabbage is the big sufferer. I might not get any to speak of. Oh well, next year.

We dug our first potatoes last week. I did straw potatoes again this year; low maintenance, high productivity :) They sure beat store bought potatoes—even organic ones.

High-tech in the Iron Age

“In our nuclear age of sophisticated electronics and high-tech weaponry, it is easy to lose the sense of the astounding power of the horse that people in the ancient world witnessed routinely. Unfortunately in modern times, false notions about the horse and riding have infiltrated historical analysis—for example, that the lack of stirrups and saddles prevented superior horsemanship in battle, or that horses required stables to survive and were prohibitively expensive to maintain, or that Israel was unsuited for raising and training horses. In fact, the archaeological and epigraphical evidence as well as basic equestrian knowledge prove the contrary. The horse was key to the survival of nations, and every country, including Israel and Judah, did whatever was necessary to support and train its war-horses and equestrian warriors.”—The Horsemen of Israel, page 142

Chariots

“Iron Age Israel and Judah were far better suited to accommodate a large chariotry than their surrounding neighbors. They had a varied but compact terrain with open plains for chariot training, rich valleys of pastureland, more than adequate barley and oat production, and hilly areas appropriate for breeding and rearing foals. More importantly, both Israel and Judah were geographically small with short distances between cities, forts, and battlefields. Horses could be moved from one area to another in a matter of hours, rather than the weeks required to cross a much larger country such as Assyria or Egypt.”—Contrell, page 63

<idle musing>
This is from a professional equestrian, so it would be a good idea to listen...
</idle musing>

Final post from Severe Mercy

“This journey through the Old Testament has consistently revealed the importance of the character of God for remedying sin, and it is this character that makes sense of the variety of remedies. God’s character is consistently emphasized, especially focusing on the recitation of elements from the character creed found in Exod 34:6–7. There, God’s character is identified as both gracious and just; God forgives and yet punishes, that is, he displays a severe mercy. This character has been consistent throughout the Old Testament. Yahweh is a God who takes sin very seriously and does not leave the guilty unpunished, and yet he is a God filled with grace and mercy expressed through his patience and forgiveness. It is his justice that explains his regular discipline of sin but his grace that offers hope to a disciplined people. His justice has gracious intent, as he seeks to eliminate the sin that threatens human existence and severs relationship with him. His grace is seen in his constant mitigation of punishment and expressed in his reticence to discipline. This severe mercy, however, cannot be controlled even by the character creed, which is carefully qualified by Yahweh himself as being always under the control of his sovereign will (Exod 33:19).”—A Severe Mercy, pages 522-523

<idle musing>
That's the final bit from A Severe Mercy. I put off starting the book for nearly two years because it was so monstrous in size, but once I started it, it was well worth my time. I hope you've enjoyed the snippets—maybe even enough to buy/borrow the book. I know some of you have, because you told me. I know others looked at the shear size of the book and got scared—just like I did initially. Don't let the size overwhelm you, it is worth the read.

If you don't know Hebrew, some of it will go over your head, but it will still repay your time reading it. Next up will be some snippets from The Horsemen of Israel. The book doesn't lend itself well to excerpts, but it certainly reads well (and quickly at 160 or so pages). I've learned a lot about horses and chariots and ancient warfare. After that, I'm not sure what; I've got 2-3 books going right now.
</idle musing>