Thursday, February 10, 2011

A thought and some interesting links

As usual, I rode my bicycle in today—even though the temperature was -11º F (-24º C). My experience has been that once it gets below about 5º F, there isn't a whole lot of difference unless the wind is strong. But, it is fun to watch the reactions of people in their cars. I thought one person was going to have to pick their jaw up off the steering wheel! Most at least did a quick double-take. But from my perspective, it sure was a refreshing and energizing ride.

OK. Now for those links...

For those of you interested in textual criticism, Larry Hurtado has a nice little post. It's a summary of a forthcoming article about the textual stability of the gospels versus some Apostolic Fathers writings. Looks intriguing:

His calculations for the NT manuscripts included show an average textual stability of 92.6% (of the words in the test passages), the spread of results for individual manuscripts ranging from 87.1% to 99.7%.

To achieve some perspective, Heide then conducts the same sort of analysis of extant manuscripts of Shepherd of Hermas (the single most frequently copied extra-canonical text, and more frequently copied than most canonical texts in the first several centuries). The average stability is ca. 86%. Heide notes that this doesn’t “even reach the worst value of the New Testament text, as reprsented by P45 [the Chester Beatty Gospels codex].”


And, for those of you who like to eat (I think that includes just about everyone!), here's something to think about:

The real problem, again, is Wal-Mart’s other promise: “healthier” packaged foods. And whether baked, low-salt chips are “better” than fried ones, is not only arguable — the baked ones are more likely to be chemical-laden — but misses the point which, again, is that real foods are superior in every way.

The truly healthy alternative to that chip is not a fake chip; it’s a carrot. Likewise, the alternative to sausage is not vegan sausage; it’s less sausage. This is really all pretty simple, and pretty clear. But the messages we’ve heard recently are as clear as . . . well, a SOFA [Solid Fats and Added Sugars, a new acronym of what to avoid].

You want an acronym? Let’s try ERF: Eat Real Food.

Oh, the article links to a very good article that is now over 4 years old, but still very relevant. Of course, it's 12 pages long...but the meat (pun intended) is on the first 2 and last pages.

And, finally, a short little reflection on US Interests and democracy.

In short, we would rather support a tyrant who does what we want than a democratic movement that may not be our puppet. So much, then, for America’s grand talk about wanting democracy all around the globe. We really don’t. We want tools so we can implement our foreign policy without interference. And that’s quite shameful.

So, to the rising democracies around the world, I apologize on behalf of the good people of the US who value true freedom above imperialism. Choose your own paths. You may not get foreign aid, but you’ll have freedom of choice- and that’s more valuable.

Wednesday, February 09, 2011

Paperwork

“Our civilization suffers from a superstitious belief in the magical effect of printed forms. And the superstition is most dangerous when it leads us into trying to handle the exceptional, nonroutine situation by procedure. In fact, it is the test of a good procedure that it quickly identifies the situation that, even in the most routine of processes, does not fit the pattern but require special handling and decision based on judgment.”— The Essential Drucker, page 123

<idle musing>
I love that first sentence; it is sooo true. I've worked in many different companies over the years, and every one of them suffers from this to at least a small degree. No wonder C.S. Lewis chose the corporation as his model for hell in The Screwtape Letters!
</idle musing>

Thought for today

“The soul that delights itself in God is pleased with whatever happens. It has no way or will of its own, and therefore cannot be disappointed. It has no craving or lusting of a selfish nature, and therefore is not disappointed by being crossed and denied things on which its affections are set, because its affections are set on nothing but God. While it delights itself in God it is of course cheerful and happy under all circumstances, and can rejoice evermore, and pray without ceasing, and in every thing give thanks.”—Charles Finney

<idle musing>
Amen! This is death to self...
<idle musing>

Tuesday, February 08, 2011

Where's the cross?

Roger Olson asks where the cross has gone:

Why this trend over the past 50 years away from preaching and singing about the cross of Jesus? Why do we no longer sing “What can wash away my sin (nothing but the blood of Jesus)?” or “There is a fountain filled with blood” or “At the cross, at the cross, where I first saw the light”? Or at least similar hymns and songs about the cross?
...
What can explain this? Given the centrality of the cross and atonement in the New Testament and in evangelical tradition, the only explanation I can think of is accommodation to culture. We know talk about “the blood” is offensive to many people and maybe it is to us as well. It doesn’t fit very well with our shiny new sanctuaries and all the shiny new cars in the parking lots. We’re educated and upwardly mobile now. We’re affluent and sophisticated. The imagery of the cross just doesn’t sit very well with us.

Another possible reason for the dearth of language about the cross (especially blood, wrath of God, etc.) is that churches that consider themselves moderate and non-fundamentalist don’t want to do anything that smacks of fundamentalism. But I ask why give the rich New Testament and historical evangelical emphasis on the cross over to the fundamentalists? We are so often ruled by what we’re against or afraid of. We need to overcome that.

I would go so far as to say that crossless Christianity is not real Christianity. Or at least it is seriously defective, accommodated, negotiated, shallow Christianity. (Of course, most evangelical churches are not quite totally “crossless” yet, but my fear is they may be on that path.)

<idle musing>
He's right. I was at an evangelical church building recently that didn't have a cross anywhere. I asked about it, and they said they wanted to be able to make the building available to the community and that the cross would be a stumbling block. Amen! It's supposed to be a stumbling block! What does Paul say? "but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength." (I Cor. 1:23-25 TNIV)

John Fischer wrote a book On a Hill Too Far Away that looks at the disappearance of the cross from Christianity. Great book; still true—even more true—10 years later. In fact, I think that book is a new edition of something he wrote back in the early 1990s, but I might be wrong.

Maybe we should put the cross back in Christmas?
</idle musing>

More on food

<rant>
Debbie is at Joel and Renee's right now (go there for great pictures of grandson and grandma!), so I am making some (vegetarian) baked beans. Background: the smell of baked beans simmering overnight keeps her awake, so when she goes on trips like this, I make lots and freeze them—we both like to eat them :)

Anyway, I went to the local grocery store the other day to get some molasses for the baked beans. Normally, the molasses have been on the top shelf amongst the honey and by the syrup. Last time, there were three options: Grandma's™, Brer Rabbit™ dark, and Brer Rabbit™ light. But, not anymore. Now, there is only one choice, Brer Rabbit™ dark and it is on the bottom shelf. The top shelf is mainly honey, with some real maple syrup. The rest of the section, 3.5 shelves worth, is pancake syrup—you know, the high fructose, fake maple flavoring, sickeningly sweet stuff that is supposed to substitute for real maple syrup. The bottom shelf, where the lone bottle of molasses sat, is surrounded by light and dark corn syrup. :(

Doesn't anybody cook anymore? I wouldn't be surprised to see that the next time I go to buy molasses there isn't any. But, I'm sure I could buy some fake molasses made of high fructose corn syrup :(
</rant>

Doing all in love

Great post by Ted Gossard today on controversy and Christian love. Here's the ending paragraph:

While we’re not going to escape controversy, it is required that we do all things in love. That we listen well. And be open to where we may be wrong, or where our position on a matter needs to be refined. That we hold as first priority that we love God and each other, no matter what our differences. That will require effort, but more than that it requires the grace and work of God. But it is part of our walk of faith in this life. That we will learn to love each other in spite of differences and things we may not like. Knowing that indeed is a two way street.

<idle musing>
Read the whole thing. You may, or may not, agree with some of his stands, but as Christians, we are called to love anyway. Good stuff.
</idle musing>

Monday, February 07, 2011

Take action

Alan, at The Assembling of the Church has been going through Colossians in preparation for teaching it next month. Right now he is reviewing Paul's (and Timothy's) prayer for the church in Colossae; one thing jumped out at me that I would like to highlight:

...knowledge of God’s will, wisdom, and spiritual understanding never remain in the mental realm. Instead, they result in action on the part of the person/group who knows God’s will and has wisdom and spiritual understanding. The purpose of knowing God’s will is so that we will live according to it.

<idle musing>
In my line of work, this is a truth that needs to be emphasized over and over again. It is so easy to get caught up in the cerebral aspects. But, as the Eastern Orthodox repeatedly say, study should result in worship. And worship includes obedience. Alan goes on to say “the power to live according to God<'s> will is supplied by God alone. We work from the power that God provides.” To which I give a hearty “Amen!”
</idle musing>

Sunday, February 06, 2011

Real food options

I strongly agree with this opinion piece.

<idle musing>
We are destroying ourselves with bad food, bad herbicides, and bad pesticides. The problem is we aren't just destroying ourselves, we're destroying other plants and animals, and insects (especially honey bees) as well. Below are a pair of excerpts, but do yourself a favor and read the whole thing. Then go out and buy local (good) or grow your own (better). And then try to get congress to be honest about labeling food—they do work for the people, right? OK, at least in theory they do!
</idle musing>

Tax the marketing and sale of unhealthful foods. Another budget booster. This isn’t nanny-state paternalism but an accepted role of government: public health. If you support seat-belt, tobacco and alcohol laws, sewer systems and traffic lights, you should support legislation curbing the relentless marketing of soda and other foods that are hazardous to our health — including the sacred cheeseburger and fries.

Mandate truth in labeling. Nearly everything labeled “healthy” or “natural” is not. It’s probably too much to ask that “vitamin water” be called “sugar water with vitamins,” but that’s precisely what real truth in labeling would mean.

HT

Friday, February 04, 2011

Remember when Customer Service meant service?

If only people in management would read more, they would (maybe/hopefully) get it that customer service matters. Drucker sure knew it:

“...the starting point for management can no longer be its own product or service, and not even its known market and its known end uses for its products and services. The starting point has to be what customers consider value. The starting point has to be the assumption—an assumption amply proven by all our experience—that the customer never buys what the supplier sells. What is value to the customer is always something quite different from what is value or quality to the supplier. This applies as much to a business as to a university or a hospital.”— The Essential Drucker, page 86


<idle musing>
That is definitely true. And, given the difficulties of communication, is it any surprise?
</idle musing>

Thursday, February 03, 2011

Today's thought

One does not “manage” people.
The task is to lead people.
And the goal is to make productive the specific strengths and knowledge of each individual.
— The Essential Drucker, page 81 (bold in original)

<idle musing>
Isn't that a good definition of servant leadership?
</idle musing>

Wednesday, February 02, 2011

Where's the snow?

Well, I haven't received any official reports on how much/little snow we received, but it fell well short of the 18 inches they were predicting. The wind was very strong last night, though. And, we had freezing rain/ice pellets for a while. The power didn't go out, but it did flicker a bit.

So, this morning I was faced with a dilemma. Should I try and ride my bike in, hoping that the bike path was plowed? Or, should I take the safe way and ski in? I opted to ski in. Here' a picture of my parking area at work:



I haven't had a chance to check on the hoop house yet, but it looks like it held together. That's good news, as I got a new set of metal reinforcers for the plastic clamps I have been using. Nothing else I had tried worked. This morning it looked like it might have come apart a bit at the top by the door. I didn't reinforce that because I thought it was too small an area to come apart—of course :( We'll see.

Motivation

“We have known for fifty years that money alone does not motivate to perform. Dissatisfaction with money grossly demotivates. Satisfaction with money is, however, mainly a 'hygiene factor,' as Frederick Herzberg called it all of forty years ago in his 1959 book Motivation to Work. What motivates—and especially what motivates knowledge workers—is what motivates volunteers. Volunteers, we know, have to get more satisfaction from their work than paid employees, precisely because they do not get a paycheck. They need, above all, a challenge. They need to know the organization's mission and to believe in it. They need continual training. They need to see results.”— The Essential Drucker, page 80

<idle musing>
People are looking for something to believe in, to give their life to. What has a better mission statement and something to believe in than the church? And what better training than the indwelling Holy Spirit? And what better results can they see than the transformation of their life as the Holy Spirit lives through them?

Hold on! I'm not saying you work at it! I'm saying that the Holy Spirit does it through you. Not works sanctification—any more than it is works justification! It is the Holy Spirit living and loving through you as you yield to Him.
</idle musing>

Thought for the day

“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 7:9-12 TNIV

<idle musing>
As usual, we do exactly the opposite of what God says we are supposed to do...
</idle musing>

Tuesday, February 01, 2011

Don't do this with my books

Seen on the web:


This has got to stop!

OK, I just looked at the search terms that are being used to find this blog. Some are downright funny, others understandable—like "what is the plural of index" (which is one of my favorite posts!). But, this one has got to be put to rights:

I am not, and never have been, a "Jim"! While there is nothing wrong with the name in itself, it isn't what I go by. I am James. In fact, I've been tempted to change the jps on the blog to "James—not Jim—Spinti!"

Now that I have that off my chest, we return to our regularly scheduled programming...

Some good stuff from Peter Drucker

I mentioned a while back that I had just finished a few management books. I'm planning on blogging a few (OK, maybe more than a few!) excerpts from Peter Drucker's The Essential Drucker which is a collection of his essays from about 50 years. It is amazing to me how relevant most of them are to the church. Maybe that's because he believed in the human element of management. Anyway, here's the first of several:

“We talk incessantly about 'teams'—and every study comes to the conclusion that the top management job does indeed require a team. Yet we now practice—and not only in American industry—the most extreme 'personality cult' of CEO supermen. And no one seems to pay the slightest attention in our present worship of these larger-than-life CEOs to the question of how and by what process they are to be succeeded—and yet, succession has always been the ultimate test of any top management and the ultimate test of any institution”— The Essential Drucker, page 76

<idle musing>
In the preceding paragraph he specifically mentions the church...how appropriate, eh? In our world of super-pastors and super-authors, but no thought of shared leadership, his statement is especially damning. The church—to her own hurt—is just as enamored with worldly success as the world. We may cry out “Where is the God of Elijah,” but God is asking us “Where are the Elijahs of God?” Unfortunately, we cultivate a personality cult instead of a relationship with the living God. The heavens are brass, but we gladly substitute the latest paperback by so-and-so on how to live the christian life instead of seeking the only one who can live the Christian life—God via the Holy Spirit!
</idle musing>

How about that garden?

Well, today marks the end of the “Persephone months” as Eliot Coleman calls them, the days of less than 10 hours of daylight. Things tend not to grow in those months. So, to celebrate, over the weekend I planted my garden! Sure, its snowing now and they predict 10-18 inches :) But, I have a hoop house with cold frames in it (right about now I wish I had a bigger one with more frames, but its probably just as well that I don't).

Anyway, on Sunday, I planted carrots, lettuce (Romaine), radishes, spinach, and green onions (from seed) in the garden and watered them. Then, I started broccoli and Roma tomatoes inside for setting out in March. Last night when I got home, I propped up the middle of the hoop house with a 2x2 and added a few reinforcing clips to the plastic to protect against the wind. We'll see how it does...if we really do get that snow! Then I came in and had a nice hot bowl of chili made from last year's tomatoes, peppers, and onions. Nothing like a nice hot bowl of chili to warm you up—it was 16º F out with a strong wind, but it hadn't started snowing yet.

After that, I decided I might just as well plant a few green peppers as well. They will be ready to go out at the end of March. By then I should be able to move the cold frames out of the hoop house and use them to plant early peas, potatoes, and some other items yet to be decided. The peppers and tomatoes will go in the hoop house, but the broccoli will go in a bed with only row cover over it; the row cover protects down to about 29º F, so I might need to add some more covering on colder days. Again, we'll see how it does. This is all just one big experiment, so come on along for the ride and avoid making the same mistakes I do :)

Monday, January 31, 2011

I don't get it

I don't pretend to understand modern politics and positioning. Give me the ancient world any day! But, I have to agree with this astute Canadian blogger on Egypt:

All the United States can say is the corrupt autocratic leader needs to deliver on concrete reforms. Initially they couldn’t even utter the word democracy. Nor have they threatened to pull the 1.5 billion dollars of funding. 1.5 billion dollars they could probably using patching that 1.6 trillion dollar deficit they are running.

Al Jazeera is kicked out the country. Not CNN, not the BBC, not the CBC, but Al Jazeera. Is it perhaps because their hard hitting and honest reporting is more of a threat than western media? I don’t know for sure. Perhaps they just have more people on the ground and constitute an more viable threat to the government.

Egypt isn’t the only country uncomfortable with Al Jazeera. Al Jazeera’s channel isn’t available in most of the United States.

Has the west lost its place in championing human rights, free expression and democracy?

<idle musing>
I fear he is correct. Here's something I read over the weekend (I hope the formatting sticks). It describes the west only too well—and the U.S. especially:

“‘Woe to him who piles up stolen goods and makes himself wealthy by extortion!
How long must this go on?’
Will not your creditors suddenly arise?
Will they not wake up and make you tremble?
Then you will become their prey.

Because you have plundered many nations, the peoples who are left will plunder you.
For you have shed human blood; you have destroyed lands and cities and everyone in them.
“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.—Hab. 2:6b-14 TNIV
</idle musing>

Friday, January 28, 2011

Read this and weep

Just read this article on genetically modified organisms (GMO):

The biotech industry and Organic Inc. are supremely conscious of the fact that North American consumers, like their European counterparts, are wary and suspicious of GMO foods. Even without a PhD, consumers understand you don't want your food safety or environmental sustainability decisions to be made by out-of-control chemical companies like Monsanto, Dow, or Dupont - the same people who brought you toxic pesticides, Agent Orange, PCBs, and now global warming. Industry leaders are acutely aware of the fact that every single industry or government poll over the last 16 years has shown that 85-95% of American consumers want mandatory labels on GMO foods. Why? So that we can avoid buying them. GMO foods have absolutely no benefits for consumers or the environment, only hazards. This is why Monsanto and their friends in the Bush, Clinton, and Obama administrations have prevented consumer GMO truth-in-labeling laws from getting a public discussion in Congress.

<idle musing>
Yep. That's why we grow as much of our own as possible. But, if GMO stuff is out there, it will produce super-weeds just like the overuse of antibiotics has produced super-viruses.

You know, if I weren't a Christian, I don't know that I would have much hope for this country. The dollar reigns. Hey, that sounds like Amos' indictment against Israel!
</idle musing>

Its just plain wrong

I received a $252 book today that was casebound, print-on-demand, with cheap quality paper. The binding was already starting to come apart! That is just plain wrong. It's bad enough charging $252 for a book, but to do it as a print-on-demand is insulting...

Wednesday, January 26, 2011

random stuff

I just wanted everybody to know that my seed order shipped today from Johnny's! I'll be planting some stuff this weekend. Some will be inside as seedlings, but some will go in the hoop house for eating in early March (I hope!).

On a related note, we ate the last home grown potatoes this weekend. We'll have to plant double this year. I am now a firm believer in straw potatoes.

For those just tuning in, straw potatoes are regular seed potatoes that are placed on top of the ground and then covered with 3-6 inches of straw. I tried it last year for the first time with great success. Sure beats digging them! As an added boost, I set them on top of about 5 inches of leaf mold (partially decomposed leaves) and then added the straw. The leaves became a wonderful black dirt by year-end and fed the potatoes well.

Something doesn't ring true here...

I was looking through some book catalogs yesterday, deciding what to list, when I ran across a book that contained the assertion, "female homosexuality is never forbidden in the Bible." I've run across this several times in the last year or two, so it is not a one-time statement—and it is usually well-known scholars who are stating it.

Now, aside from whether or not homosexuality is condemned in the scriptures (I believe it is), this just strikes me as bad hermeneutics. Why? Well, would these same scholars claim that Paul only meant to include men when he used the word ἀδελφοὶ (adelphoi—brothers)? Of course not! The ancient world was sexist (by our standards); if they wanted to include both men and women, they used the masculine. (I'm old enough to remember when that was true in English, as well, but that is another issue altogether!)

It strikes me as more than a bit disingenuous to claim that the masculine is inclusive in certain situations, and then, when if fits your argument, to say that the feminine is not ever specifically named. Maybe it isn't conscious, but it does make me wonder if we aren't all fundamentalists at heart...

What do I mean by that? Well, when it is convenient, we use one hermeneutic—say an inclusive one. But, when something is dear to our hearts, we change over to a more literal, verbatim reading. What do you think?

Tuesday, January 25, 2011

Seen on Twitter

Who said Twitter is worthless? OK, so not worthless, but easily a time sink. Here's a great quotation:

"One Book is enough, but a thousand books is not too many!"— Martin Luther

<idle musing>
He's sooooo right!
<idle musing>

Monday, January 24, 2011

How does the garden grow?

I picked spinach and a carrot out of the hoophouse this weekend. The carrots aren't growing very much this time of year and I planted them a bit late. But, still it was a garden fresh carrot :) The spinach is getting a bit old and the leaves aren't growing back as well—but it is January, after all.

I placed my seed orders last Friday. This year I ordered from both Pinetree Garden Seeds and Johnny's Selected Seeds, both in Maine. Of course, the next day, we saw a book at Lowe's The Kitchen Garden that we bought. As I was looking through it yesterday, I saw something I got to try—sprouting broccoli, also known as non-heading broccoli. This isn't broccoli raab, but a true broccoli that bears throughout the winter. Johnny's has it, of course. But, my order is already placed. Oh well, maybe a later order.

In other news, over the last week or so, I put a shower in the downstairs bathroom. When we moved in, they had one of those hang from the ceiling surround curtains and a push over the spout shower. Because they smoked, it stunk, so we just took the whole thing out. We have a shower upstairs, so we just kept it as a tub. But, all along we had intended to put a real shower in there for guests. So, last week was the week. I cut through the plaster along the stud, put in the shower line, a new faucet, and a tub surround. Well, it wasn't that simple (is it ever?). There was no shutoff valve on either line, so the first thing I had to do is install those. And, the offset on the faucets was different, so I had to use a coping saw in a very small space to cut away the supports, and... If you ever owned an older house, you know what I'm talking about.

But, last night, I finished caulking everything and it looks pretty good. Actually, with the new curtain and shower curtain that Debbie picked out, it looks very good.

I think I'll plant some tomatoes, peppers, and broccoli this week. It should be warm enough in the hoophouse six weeks from now for them to grow...especially under the cold frames inside it. Maybe by then my lettuce and radishes will be ready for harvest...

Friday, January 21, 2011

A radical change

“As we have seen, on the one hand the NT texts are consistent in claiming that it is the God of the OT, the God of Jewish tradition, who sent Jesus, raised him from death, and exalted him to heavenly glory, and now demands that Jesus be reverenced. On the other hand, these same texts emphasize that in view of these things it is now no longer possible to speak adequately of 'God' without confessing Jesus' significance and, equally important, that an adequate obedience and devotion to 'God' now requires the inclusion of Jesus as recipient of reverence ad devotion with 'God.' So, the NT texts express a major reconfiguring of God-discourse, and a major reconfiguring of devotion to 'God' as well.”—God in New Testament Theology, pages 111-112

<idle musing>
That's the last quotation from the book. I wasn't sure when I started reading it if I would be able to excerpt from it; Hurtado's writing doesn't lend itself to excerpting very well. I hope that what I've posted whets your appetite for more and hasn't distorted what he is saying too badly.

I'm not sure what I will be excerpting next. I've just finished two business books, but I'm not sure how much of those I'll post. What do you want to see?
</idle musing>

Help out a scholar

John Anderson is looking for help! He wants more books and needs advise on what books to get. I know that most of you have very vocal opinions, so give him a hand. Of course, he'll buy them all from Eisenbrauns—won't you John? :)

Thursday, January 20, 2011

Nice thought from a new book

I was looking over forthcoming book today, The Land of Canaan and the Destiny of Israel, and ran across this wonderful set of lines:

Several rabbis emphasized that the Torah is not an exact reflection of God’s values. The following passage in y. Mak. 2.6 is illustrative:
שאלו לחכמה חוטא מהו ענשו? אמרה להם, “חטאים תרדף רעה” )משלי יג, כא(. שאלו
לנבואה, חוטא מהו ענשו? אמרה להם, “הנפש החוטאת היא תמות” )יח’ יח, ד(. שאלו לתורה,
חוטא מהו ענשו? אמרה להם, יביא אשם ויתכפר לו. שאלו לקב″ה, חוטא מהו ענשו? אמר להם,
יעשה תשובה ויתכפר לו.
They asked Wisdom, “What is the sinner’s punishment?” She said to them, “Evil pursues sinners” (Prov 13:21). They asked Prophecy, “What is the sinner’s punishment?” She said to them, “The soul that sins shall die” (Ezek 18:4). They asked Torah, “What is the sinner’s punishment?” She said to them, “Let him bring a guilt offering and be atoned.” They asked the Holy One, blessed be he, “What is the sinner’s punishment?” He said to them, “Let him repent and be atoned.”

This rabbinic text presents a scene in which a theological question (What is the punishment of the sinner?) is posed to the three biblical personifications: Wisdom, Prophecy, and Torah. After each personification offers its answer, usually with a biblical quotation, the question is then presented to God, who offers an answer not contemplated by the biblical personifications. God, the talmudic passage implies, cannot be fully captured in the biblical passages that speak of his ways. God’s transcendence always remains higher than the biblical theologies captured by the text. What is more, the different sections of the Bible (Wisdom, Prophets, Torah) present divergent approaches to the theological issue that is raised. It is thus acknowledged that the Bible is a theologically diverse collection of works that reflects various perspectives on central theological issues. No single biblical statement can therefore be taken as anything more than an incomplete and partial reflection of the biblical witness as a whole, which is itself an incomplete reflection of God’s ultimate truth.—The Land of Canaan and the Destiny of Israel, pages 386-387

<idle musing>
I really like this part: "No single biblical statement can therefore be taken as anything more than an incomplete and partial reflection of the biblical witness as a whole, which is itself an incomplete reflection of God’s ultimate truth." We can't put God in a box—not even a biblically sized one! As a friend of mine says, "God is a whole lot bigger and a whole lot more complicated than we think." And Amen to that!
</idle musing>

Wednesday, January 19, 2011

One of the ramifications

“Indeed, that 'God' had declared Jesus' high status meant more than a justification for reverencing him; it constituted a requirement to do so. This is probably the implication of the statement in Philippians 2:11 that the divinely intended universal acclamation of Jesus as 'Lord' was 'to the glory of God the Father.' This in turn means that any refusal of devotion to Jesus would amount to disobedience to 'God.'”—God in New Testament Theology, page 107

<idle musing>
Amen! Good preaching! Who says scholarship can't lead one to worship? This book certainly has led me to worship!
</idle musing>

Tuesday, January 18, 2011

The triangular shape of the New Testament

No, not the physical codex! The God-discourse in it:

“...the sort of 'God'-discourse that we have in the NT did not arise from philosophical reflection it was not initiated as an intellectual exercise to address some problem of metaphysics or to stake out some novel position in the spectrum of religious thought of the day. Instead, the triadic contours of discourse about 'God' in the NT reflect the 'triangular' shape of early Christian religious experience in which 'God,' Jesus, and the Spirit featured as linked in the special way we have observed.

“I repeat that the triadic discourse about 'God' in the NT is not the developed trinitarian doctrine of subsequent centuries, but equally, I contend that the latter would not have developed without the 'God'-discourse and the devotional pattern that we find attested in the NT.”—God in New Testament Theology, page 102

<idle musing>
Amen!
</idle musing>

Monday, January 17, 2011

Jesus, actually present

“The unique phrase, 'the Lord is the Spirit,' certainly striking and memorable, is indicative of a remarkably close link; but the larger context of Paul's references to the risen Jesus and the Spirit makes it clear that for Paul they are fully distinguishable and yet also intimately related. [Merhdad] Fatehi [WUNT 2/128] proposed that Paul's link of the Spirit and the risen Jesus should be understood as 'a dynamic identification,' the Spirit acting to communicate Jesus' presence, power, and glory to believers and Jesus in some real way 'actually present and active through the Spirit.' This seems to me to be a cogent characterization.”—God in New Testament Theology, page 92

<idle musing>
I like that!
</idle musing>

He's here!

The latest grandchild, that is. Some nice pictures can be seen here. That makes six, with one more on the way via Ryan and Emily :)

Friday, January 14, 2011

The binitarian shape of the NT

“...although Jesus is included uniquely in what we may call the 'devotional pattern' reflected in the NT writings, he is characteristically reverenced in connection with 'God.' Jesus is treated not as a second deity but as having a unique status with and from 'God.' This is unlike the pagan polytheistic pattern in which there are multiple deities, each with its own image, rites, sacred time, and often its own sacred space. Instead, in the early Christian circles reflected in the NT writings, the exclusivist worship of the one true God has this distinctive 'binitarian' shape, Jesus featuring uniquely along with 'God,' yet with a pronounced concern to assert a monotheistic stance and avoid multiplying deities.”—God in New Testament Theology, page 61

<idle musing>
This is a very important point that tends to get missed. The monotheistic emphasis is strong—but yet Jesus is worshiped as God! Hurtado has some very good stuff on this in his other books as well.
<idle musing>

Thursday, January 13, 2011

Yippee!

The Spirit

“...in the NT 'God's' Spirit is much more prominently mentioned than in the OT or the texts of Second Temple Judaism. One reason for this is that the NT reflects the experience of early Christians who believed that they had been blessed with rich manifestations of 'God's' Spirit, evidenced in such phenomena as prophesying, healings, and glossolalia, as well as in powerful moral regeneration and the promotion of new loving relationships, especially among fellow believers. Earliest Christians believed that they were experiencing the fulfillment of biblical prophecies of an eschatological outpouring of 'God's' Spirit (e.g., Acts 2:14-33). So it is little wonder that in their religious discourse reference to the Spirit of 'God' features prominently.”—God in New Testament Theology, page 44

<idle musing>
Would that the church were experiencing the same intimacy today! Of course, it is possible, but we don't believe it is, so we don't experience it...at least in the rationally oriented world of western christianity, that is.
</idle musing>

The tax rates

I rarely comment on political items on this blog. Not because I don't feel strongly about them, but because I am of the opinion that they tend to be more disruptive to Christian fellowship than helpful. But...I get seed catalogs from all over the place and love to drool over them. I don't usually order from most of them, but it's still fun.

One place I download the catalog and drool over is Fedco seeds. They are a co-operative in Maine. Anyway, this is from their current catalog:

Do you know that from 1954–1963 the marginal income tax rate for individuals in the top bracket was 91% and from 1965–1981 70%? These rates didn’t prevent our nation from enjoying its longest period of relative prosperity, in fact they aided and abetted that outcome. Now we hear dire forecasts from the Tea Party that President Obama’s modest proposal to restore the rate to a whopping 38.5% from its present 35% will cripple the economy even though it affects only our wealthiest 2%. He ought to raise it to 60%!

Change I can believe in?
• Redistribute our income through fair progressive taxation.
• Revamp global trade agreements to bring back our jobs.
• Rebuild our infrastructure to manufacture real goods.
• Revitalize our food system to de-centralize, re-localize and re-energize.
–CR Lawn, Sun. Oct. 31, 2010

<idle musing>
I agree! and now, back to our regularly scheduled programming...
</idle musing>

Wednesday, January 12, 2011

It's snowing!

OK. That has nothing to do with today's post, but I just thought I'd let everybody know that we are getting a nice bit of snow here. Yesterday was about 6 inches; I'm not sure what today has brought yet. It did make for interesting riding going home last night. If the wind had picked up, we could have had a very nice blizzard.

Now for today's thought:
“...we have in the NT numerous expressions of what seems to be a rather profoundly new view of 'God' in which Jesus is crucial and integral. Yet it also remains the case that typically NT authors can distinguish 'God' and Jesus. Jesus never displaces 'God' in the NT , and the two are never pictured as in tension or competition with each other. Moreover although Jesus is ascribed or is integrally involved in a number of 'God's' attributes and actions, from creation through eschatological redemption and judgment, this never means that 'God' fades or is diminished. In the NT, Jesus does not overwrite 'God,' and each is defined in relation to the other.”—God in New Testament Theology, page 44

<idle musing>
Which has some serious trinitarian ramifications...
</idle musing>

Monday, January 10, 2011

In all and through all

“...we can say that in the view attested in the NT, 'God' is so closely linked with Jesus and Jesus so closely linked with 'God' that one cannot adequately identify the one without reference to the other. Jesus is the one through whom 'God's' eschatological redemption is now bestowed and to be consummated. But this central significance of Jesus is also retrojected through time, especially to the origins of the world, with Jesus (the 'Logos' and 'Son') depicted as the agent through whom God created all things (1 Cor 8:6; Heb 1:2; John 1:1-3). So, practically all of God's previous actions and self-disclosures can be retroactively understood in light of Jesus.”—God in New Testament Theology, page 43

<idle musing>
That is still a radical thought...
</idle musing>

Thoughts on community care

I ride my bike to work everyday—ok, you know that; I've said it a thousand times. What you probably don't know is that there is another person who lives out our way who does it, too. He rides about 10 months of the year, taking the coldest days off.

Anyway, he and I usually ride to work at different times, so we rarely see each other. But, I saw him last Wednesday and we rode together for a mile or two. We have similar interests: he has a cold frame and grows greens through December; I have a greenhouse and try to grow year round. They have chickens; we don't, but we buy local eggs. We both prefer to grow as much as possible of what we eat. We both prefer to bike (duh!).

Anyway, I found out he works for one of the local churches here as a Community Care Pastor. Being too far from the institutional church, I naively asked if that meant he was in charge of the deacons. He said no, that he did the visitation at the hospital, took care of counseling, and helped people who were unemployed, and other things of that nature. He added that there was another pastor helping him.

Now, don't read this as a criticism of him! I'm sure he is doing a great job. It was obvious he loves what he does and takes it seriously. But, where is the church in all this? Doesn't the Bible call all Christians to do this stuff? I can understand having someone who directs it, oversees it, and trains people in it if the church is large. But, to do it all? Isn't that in some way cheating the body of Christ? And, isn't it asking for burnout of the one doing it?

Thought for the day


via Marti, our Operations Manager

Friday, January 07, 2011

Stuck in a rut, or still more about the gods

“...the human knowledge of this God advocated in the NT is to be exhibited primarily by participating in this relationship and not simply by ritual performance.

“This produces some striking differences with the larger Roman-era religious environment. To cite one often overlooked, it was in that setting a remarkable claim that 'God' loves humans. Indeed, many sophisticated pagans of the day would have regarded any such idea as ridiculous. It was certainly not a feature typical of the religious outlook of the time. In recorded prayer texts from the Roman period, various deities are praised for their power, their ordering of the world, their answers to prayers, and other attributes. Some philosophers did refer to human love for beauty, understood in ethical terms as identified with the 'good,' and so with 'god'; but the idea that the gods would love humans (as distinguished from the tales of erotic love for humans by the Greek gods) was not common. Yet any reader of the NT will note the ubiquity and frequency of assertions about the love of 'God.'”—God in New Testament Theology, page 37

<idle musing>
He's right; it is overlooked. I totally forget about it most of the time, but it is unique—especially if you exclude the erotic love of the gods (really just lust).
<idle musing>

Thursday, January 06, 2011

Access to God

“The God of the NT is not accessible primarily or more fully through speculative reason, contemplation of nature, feats of ascetical effort, or mystical prowess. For instance, Paul writes that, although the creation bears the marks of the power and divinity of 'God,' human perversity (which extends even to cognitive faculties) typically yields a distorted perception and response to these things (Rom 1:18-21). In short, humans readily see thing to fear or adore in nature, but the typical result is idolatry rather than a correct recognition of the one true God.”—God in New Testament Theology, page 35

<idle musing>
Not much has changed in 2000 years, has it?
<idle musing>

Wednesday, January 05, 2011

A very public dissent

“Moreover, faithful commitment to 'God' in the NT requires abandonment and refusal to participate in the worship of any other deity. This meant Christians absenting themselves from a variety of corporate occasions of religious ritual, for religion pervaded the the social and political scenes. So, conscientious Christian practice could amount to a significant severing of believers from the pervasive religious activities of the Roman world, which could entail serious tensions with family members, neighbors, friends and associates in business or employment, and also even with civic and political authorities. Elizabeth Castelli vividly captured the political significance of religious ritual in the Roman setting:

Sacrifice keeps the tenuous balance between the human world and the divine realm intact, assures that the dramatic vagaries of divine dissatisfaction will be held in check. In the Roman context, where sacrifice serves as a first line of defense in the preservation of political stability, the refusal to sacrifice or the perversion of the carefully balanced sacrificial relations produces threatening seismic fissures running underneath the foundations of society.

“The pervasively public nature of religion meant that Christian withdrawal from ritual events could not readily be hidden. Faith in 'God' in the NT was by no means simply a particular devotion to this deity or a belief that one held as a private religious opinion. The uniqueness of the NT 'God' was to be matched by an exclusivity in the devotional behavior of believers. Their devotion to 'God' required believers to disassociate or distance themselves from core activities of their cultures, especially the worship of the gods on whom the welfare of city and empire was thought to depend. That is, faith in the NT God involved both a 'cognitive dissonance,' and also an unavoidable social dissonance (which could, and as time went on, did involve sometimes severe dissonance with political authorities). As noted already, philosophers of the time toyed with various ideas about the gods with impunity (e.g., whether they were all one or whether some of them had been invented) in the cosy and safe settings of their elite circles. These were little more than thought experiments with little substance and of no major impact on the religious practice of these philosophers or of people more widely. Early Christian faith in 'God,' however, involved a much more robust 'atheism' in beliefs and religious practice!”—God in New Testament Theology, pages 30-31

<idle musing>
So much for private spirituality, eh? The life of a Christian should be at a dissonance with the surrounding culture. If it isn't then something is wrong...
</idle musing>

Tuesday, January 04, 2011

Yes, we're still talking about the gods...

“All of this means that the 'God' of the NT is posited, not as one among others, or as one member of a divine genus, but as sui generis, uniquely and solely worthy of worship. In the NT, 'God' (ho theos) represents something categorically distinguished from the many deities of the Roman environment. Indeed, as illustrated by the Pauline passage that we have considered, all the other gods are to be regarded as invalid, spurious, and unworthy of worship. They are 'idols' (eidolon), a term with a distinctly pejorative connotation that emerged in ancient Jewish tradition and was appropriated also among earliest Christians. In short, faith in the NT 'God' requires a practical kind of disbelief in all other gods, or at least a radically negative and pejorative view of them and the worship given to them.”—God in New Testament Theology, pages 29-30

<idle musing>
This is good stuff. I can't recommend this book enough. As Augustine was told, "Tolle! Lege!" Pick it up and read it!
</idle musing>

Monday, January 03, 2011

And even more thoughts on the gods

“Along with devout Jews, however, earliest Christians typically distinguished themselves in taking a rather critical stance against devotion to the many deities of the time, insisting that there was only one true and living 'God' to whom alone worship was rightfully due. To be sure, early Christians (and their Jewish contemporaries) conceived of a diversity of spiritual and heavenly beings, some of whom they regarded very positively, typically as part of the entourage of the one God (e.g., angels). The 'monotheism' of ancient Christians and Jews was not primarily of typically expressed as a denial of the existence of any heavenly (or even divine) being other than the one God. Instead, their emphasis was that only the one God was the rightful recipient of worship, whether from them or from anyone else. That is, they believed that the one God held a universal right to exclusive worship and that the religious devotion offered to any other deity was an offense against the one God—'idolatry,' at best a tragic expression of ignorance and at worst the gravest of sins.”—God in New Testament Theology, page 28

<idle musing>
Glad to see a scholar of the standing of Hurtado agreeing with me :) Seriously, this is what I have been trying to express in my posts on the gods here and here. This is serious stuff that we need to think carefully about.
</idle musing>

Are we sure that's what we want?

I get many, many, many catalogs as a bookseller. The titles sometimes make me angry, sometimes make me laugh, sometimes I want to cry. But, every now and then, one makes me go, "Are you sure that's what you want?" Such was the case today. I received a catalog from STL Distribution which included Husbands, Wives, God: Introducing the Marriages of the Bible to Your Marriage.

Now, aside from the questionable hermeneutics, think of the marriages in the Bible. Which of those would you want to model your marriage after? Abraham and Sarah? Really? Have your wife call you brother...I don't think so. Isaac isn't any better. And, don't get me started on Jacob, to say nothing of Hosea and Gomer. Of course, those are old covenant marriages—how about the New Testament? Ananias and Sapphira? At least they agreed!

No, the Bible isn't about good marriages—or any marriages. It is about a God who became flesh and dwelt among us, died for us, and was resurrected that we might live a new life to his glory and praise through the power of the Holy Spirit who lives within us. Now, that is a story I can endorse whole-heartedly!

Friday, December 31, 2010

A virtual cafeteria of gods

I'm in a new book now, God in New Testament Theology by Larry Hurtado. Here's the first excerpt. I'm not sure how much I will be able to excerpt, though; so much of the stuff depends on more than a short excerpt.

“But in the ancient world of the first Christians (and in large parts of the current world as well), the words for god (e.g., the Greek word theos) designated one of many kinds of divine beings. There was neither one deity nor even one genus or definition of deity. Instead, there was a veritable cafeteria of divine beings of various orders, attributes, and functions. Not only the Roman Empire as a whole but also individual nations and peoples were rather richly supplied with deities. So, in that setting, when one spoke of a “god” it was not automatically clear who or what the referent was. It could be one of the numerous traditional deities of the many cities or various peoples, or it could be new or imported ones. Indeed, in a number of settings one could even refer to the ruler as a 'god'.

“Moreover, the common view was that all deities were entitled to receive appropriate worship. A city or a people might well have their particular patron-deity—and might well have thought of one deity as holding pre-eminence among the gods—to whom a city or people might give special reverence. But it was understood that other cities and peoples had their deities too and that they were just as worthy of worship. Indeed, when people traveled to another city or country, ordinarily they would freely participate in the worship of the local deities, if invited, with no sense of unfaithfulness to their own deities. To be sure, philosophers of the day sometimes urged the idea that there was really one deity behind or above all the particular traditional deities, the latter sometimes thought of as manifestations of the one deity. But even those proposing such a view (sometimes referred to by scholars today as a 'pagan monotheism') did not really question giving worship to all the many deities of the religious environment. That is, their philosophical musings in general had little impact on popular religious behavior, not even their own.”—God in New Testament Theology, pages 27-28

<idle musing>
I can't emphasize too much the importance of this for understanding the ancient world and the persecution of Christians. If you don't get this, it makes no sense. I guess the closest to it today is when some people (such as myself) believe that saying the pledge of allegiance to the U.S. flag is compromising their commitment to God. Heresy! I can hear you crying; but it is true, if you but stop and think about it. No? Then I have a question for you: does a fish know it is wet?
</idle musing>

Musings at the end of a year

Yesterday we had a 3.8 earthquake (downgraded from 4.2); today we had a thunderstorm and it is 50º F. What's going on?

Simple; I'm becoming a senior citizen tomorrow! Yep, in only 15 more years I can retire. Of course, by then they will have raised the retirement age to 80, but no worries. As long as I can ride my bike to work, I'm fine for another 30 years :)

Seriously, though. May you have a blessed and happy year in 2011. May God make the fullness of his glory known to you through Christ. And may you learn to rest more fully in his love.

Thursday, December 30, 2010

The real issue

“'First,' Gordon [Cosby] says, 'a person must come to that place where he knows that the real issue is always an internal one.' this is a difficult lesson to learn. The temptation of the natural man is to focus on what is wrong 'out there.' Leaders want to blame circumstances and other people for struggles and failures, but it is crucial that leaders begin with the only person they have the authority to change or control: themselves.” Missional Small Groups, page 165

<idle musing>
Amen! This is a tough one to admit; it's so much easier to blame "somebody else" for everything. Hey, we've been doing it since Genesis 3, so why should it be a surprise?
</idle musing>

Wednesday, December 29, 2010

How-to versus who

“...we often look for leadership training that focuses on skills development. The questions asked in such training always focuses on the how question. The reality, however, is that leading a missional group is more about the who question. I have written this book as an invitation to be and live differently. Being missional will not result from a list of how-tos we can follow; developing the skills to lead a missional group will not occur when a person simply abandons one set of leadership techniques and adopts another.

“Leading missional groups occurs as leaders are formed and shaped for mission. We have to think and lead differently when the purpose of the group moves from simply getting churched people to attend groups to moving our experience of community back into the neighborhoods. And this us especially true when we realize that those in our neighborhoods are not that interested in coming to church as it has traditionally been conceived.” Missional Small Groups, page 163

<idle musing>
This is very true. Leadership training will never be effective by itself; the who is far more important than the how.
</idle musing>

Join the flat-earth society

Robin Parry has a nice thought about cosmology today:

I want to say that God did not reveal himself in spite of the ancient cosmology but through the ancient cosmology. Whilst it is impossible for us to inhabit the cosmos in the way that we did (it is scientifically naive) we can still inhabit the cosmos in a way that is deeply informed by their cosmology.

Ancient cosmologies were very much to do with the meaning, purpose, and function of the cosmos. Their ways of thinking of the universe saw it as "enchanted" and meaning-full. I tentatively suggest that God is actually affirming the meanings embedded in their naive cosmology. Thus whilst we cannot affirm biblical cosmology at a scientific level we can affirm it at the level of meaning...

I am suggesting that our job as Bible readers is not to say what the apostles and prophets said (that would require us to join the flat earth society). Rather, echoing Barth, we must say what we must say in light of what the apostles and prophets said. We must not simply cast aside ther [sic] husk of biblical cosmologies but rather learn from them how to reenchant the cosmos and how to inhabit "our" cosmos biblically.

<idle musing>
It is nice to see people interacting with the biblical text on its terms instead of our terms. Would that more people did! It sure would eliminate a lot of the senseless arguments I hear.
</idle musing>

Tuesday, December 28, 2010

We're back

We just got back from 2-plus weeks with our kids. The drive up was in the middle of the biggest snow storm in December's Minnesota history; some areas we drove through ended up with 23 inches. It was a blast!

We spent the first week with our son, Ryan, and his wife and child (Emily and Evelyn). Their basement had flooded in the rains that the Minneapolis area got earlier this fall; Ryan wanted to get rid of the damaged paneling and Styrofoam™ insulation as soon as possible to avoid mold growth. So, we spent the first few days tearing out old paneling and insulation. We found the spots where the wall had leaked and plugged them with Portland cement, then we painted the whole basement wall with Drylock™. Then we put up drywall and stuff. We also added a new room which will eventually become a bedroom. I'd say we got about half-done by the end of the week.

We spent the second week with our daughter, Renee, and her family (Joel, Joshua, Rachel, Madeline, and Beansprout, who is about to be born). We had a grand time playing, talking, cooking, singing, etc. We even got to go on a sleigh ride on Christmas day! Good times!

I sure enjoyed the snow while we were there, but it is good to be back home again—even though there isn't much snow here...

No easy answers

“The nature of injustice in neighborhoods varies from one place to the next. It is easy to make this about poor neighborhoods and rich neighborhoods, proclaiming that justice is about those classified as rich doing something nice for those classified as poor. As a result, justice becomes about being good deed doers. With this mind-set, groups might think they are following Jesus in righting wrongs by attending the church's monthly outreach night or doing a periodic service project for the community. But facing injustice is not something we can check off our monthly to-do list so that we can feel proud of our good deeds.

“Treating people as a project reinforces the injustice. Instead, we are called to engage people relationally to discover who they are as people. Jesus instructs his people to face injustice personally and to do so by treating those in need as equals.” Missional Small Groups, pages 154-155

<idle musing>
Treating people as people is the beginning of evangelism. Treating them as projects is demeaning and does no one any good.
</idle musing>

Tuesday, December 14, 2010

Business is not missional

“After working with churches for nearly two decades, I have seen one consistent problem with people actually doing this practice. Some of the people who have the most to offer neighborhoods are also the busiest at keeping the organization of the church going All of their volunteer time is spent working in committees, singing in the choir, leading youth events for kids in the church, teaching Sunday school, and attending up to three services per week. Sometimes it seems like the more committed to God a person becomes, the less he or she is involved with the neighborhood. This seems especially true of those who are paid employees of local churches.

“To enter into Missional Engagement with the neighborhood is not synonymous with maintaining the organization of the church and all of its trappings.”— Missional Small Groups, page 140

<idle musing>
I've seen the same thing. Sad isn't it, that we have confused activities to keep the organization going with the heart of God for the world?
</idle musing>

Friday, December 10, 2010

Vacation

We are leaving today and won't be back until December 27. I don't know if I will have Internet access consistently enough to post or not. I suspect not. Besides, I'll be spending time with the kids and grandkids :) So, merry Christmas to all and check out this post from last year about Christmas.

The mission field

"Our mission field is ripe for God's people to live consistently with one another in a certain way and in a certain place. We no longer need a haphazard gospel sharing that is not supported by visible community. We need much more than good sermons, big buildings, and professional video presentations. We need a people committed to specific places who are called to bring redemption to those places."— Missional Small Groups, page 139

<idle musing>
Amen! The hard part, of course, is living it...and that can only happen by the power of the Holy Spirit, living within us and empowering us.
</idle musing>

Thursday, December 09, 2010

The neighborhood

"When we practice presence in the neighborhood, we give people the opportunity to feel the life of the gospel and not just hear it. If we are not present in the neighborhood, we have no credibility to do some of the more proactive rhythms identified in the next few chapters. And if we are not present, we have no right to expect people to take the message of the gospel seriously. Presence establishes us as people who live in this world and as people who have a God who can do something about what is going on in this world."— Missional Small Groups, page 135

<idle musing>
The incarnation is a perfect example. As Roger Olson put it the other day: "For God so loved the world…that He couldn’t stay away. Yes, to academics and scholars it sounds simplistic and even smacks of folk religion. But if you strip from it any connotation of God being “lonely” or absent it’s an apt statement of the gospel itself."
</idle musing>

Wednesday, December 08, 2010

New Interpreter's Dictionary on sale!

Here it is the 8th of December already, and I haven't mentioned the Eisenbrauns December sale! Good thing this isn't an official Eisenbrauns blog :)

This is a great sale, if I have to say so myself; it isn't every day you can get an $800.00 set for $240. Here's the BookNews announcement:

December brings many things for many people. If your inbox is anything like mine, you are being inundated by marketing e-mails screaming for attention. At Eisenbrauns, we like to be a bit more low key. As a company that was started (and still run and owned) by a scholar for the benefit of other scholars, we try to get you the tools you need every day of the year at a reasonable price. We are extremely grateful for your 35 years of support and hope that we can continue to serve you in the future.

While I was attending SBL, I received permission to run a sale on the New Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, with the CD-ROM. This is an unprecedented offer which I hope you take advantage of. To add to the dictionary, Eisenbrauns is offering a 40% savings on individual volumes of the New Interpreter's Bible commentary.

If you are looking for gift ideas, we encourage you to visit our gift page by clicking on Rex, the Eisenbrauns' Ibex on our home page--the one with the blinking nose, that is. We offer t-shirts, mugs, brass bookmarks, and gift certificates. You can also create a wish list for yourself, or search the wish list for others.

As always, all sales on this web sale are final; no returns will be permitted. Offer good only on orders placed at www.eisenbrauns.com through December 31, 2010.

To easily access all the sale items, please visit:
http://www.eisenbrauns.com/pages/SPECIAL
================================================================

"New Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible,
all five volumes plus CD-ROM"
Edited by Pheme Perkins, et al.
New Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible - NIDB
Abingdon, 2010. English.
List Price: $800.00 Your Price: $240.00

"The New Interpreter's Bible, volume 1: General and
Old Testament Articles; Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus"
by Terence E. Fretheim, Walter Brueggemann, and Walter C. Kaiser, Jr.
New Interpreter's Bible - NIB 1
Abingdon, 1994. Cloth. English.
ISBN: 9780687278145
List Price: $74.00 Your Price: $44.40

"The New Interpreter's Bible, volume 2: Numbers, Deuteronomy,
Introduction to Narrative Literature, Joshua, Judges, Ruth,
1 and 2 Samuel"
by Thomas B. Dozeman, et al.
New Interpreter's Bible - NIB 2
Abingdon, 1998. Cloth. English.
ISBN: 9780687278152
List Price: $74.00 Your Price: $44.40

"The New Interpreter's Bible, volume 3: 1 and 2 Kings,
1 and 2 Chronicles, Ezra-Nehemiah, Esther, Additions to Esther,
Tobit, Judith"
by Choon-Leong Seow, et al.
New Interpreter's Bible - NIB 3
Abingdon, 1996. Cloth. English.
ISBN: 9780687278169
List Price: $74.00 Your Price: $44.40

"The New Interpreter's Bible, volume 4: 1 and 2 Macabees,
Introduction to Hebrew Poetry, Job, Psalms"
by Robert Doran, et al.
New Interpreter's Bible - NIB 4
Abingdon, 1996. Cloth. English.
ISBN: 9780687278176
List Price: $74.00 Your Price: $44.40

"The New Interpreter's Bible, volume 5: Introduction to
Wisdom Literature, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles,
Book of Wisdom, Sirach"
by Richard J. Clifford, et al.
New Interpreter's Bible - NIB 5
Abingdon, 1997. Cloth. English.
ISBN: 9780687278183
List Price: $64.00 Your Price: $38.40

"The New Interpreter's Bible, Volume 6: Introduction to
Prophetic Literature; Isaiah; Jeremiah; Baruch; Letter to
Jeremiah; Lamentations; Ezekiel"
by David L. Petersen, et al.
New Interpreter's Bible - NIB 6
Abingdon, 2001. Cloth. English.
ISBN: 9780687278190
List Price: $74.00 Your Price: $44.40

"The New Interpreter's Bible, volume 7: Introduction to
Apocalyptic Literature, Daniel, Twelve Prophets"
by Frederick J. Murphy, Daniel L. Smith-Christopher, and Gale A. Yee
New Interpreter's Bible - NIB 7
Abingdon, 1996. Cloth. English.
ISBN: 9780687278206
List Price: $64.00 Your Price: $38.40

"The New Interpreter's Bible, volume 8: General Articles
on the New Testament, Matthew, Mark"
by M. Eugene Boring and Pheme Perkins
New Interpreter's Bible - NIB 8
Abingdon, 1995. Cloth. English.
ISBN: 9780687278213
List Price: $64.00 Your Price: $38.40

"The New Interpreter's Bible, volume 9: Luke; John"
by R. Alan Culpepper
New Interpreter's Bible - NIB 9
Abingdon, 1995. Cloth. English.
ISBN: 9780687278220
List Price: $64.00 Your Price: $38.40

"The New Interpreter's Bible, Volume 10: Acts, Introduction to
Epistolary Literature, Romans, 1 Corinthians"
by Robert W. Wall, N. T. Wright, and J. Paul Sampley
New Interpreter's Bible - NIB 10
Abingdon, 2002. Cloth. English.
ISBN: 9780687278237
List Price: $74.00 Your Price: $44.40

"The New Interpreter's Bible, volume 11: 2 Corinthians, Galatians,
Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians"
by Richard B. Hays, et al.
New Interpreter's Bible - NIB 11
Abingdon, 2000. Cloth. English.
ISBN: 9780687278244
List Price: $62.00 Your Price: $37.20

"The New Interpreter's Bible, volume 12: Hebrews, James,
1 and 2 Peter, 1, 2 and 3 John, Jude and Revelation"
by Clifton Black, et al.
New Interpreter's Bible - NIB 12
Abingdon, 1998. Cloth. English.
ISBN: 9780687278251
List Price: $64.00 Your Price: $38.40

"The New Interpreter's Bible Index"
New Interpreter's Bible - NIB
Abingdon, 2004. Cloth. English.
ISBN: 9780687039166
List Price: $44.00 Your Price: $26.40

Kids in small groups

"Oftentimes, group members see the children in a way that is counterproductive. Some of these ways include these false beliefs:

* Kids are a nuisance to group life.
* Small groups are for adults, and the kids are not group members until they can participate in the discussion.
* Bible study is the purpose of the meeting and it is an intellectual activity.
* Kids are not old enough to be used by the Spirit."
Missional Small Groups, page 124

<idle musing>
Wow! The last one floored me! I have seen God use kids in a way adults would never let him! To say that kids aren't old enough is just plain insane.

That being said, dealing with kids in a small group/house church setting isn't simple. He spends the better part of the next 2 pages expanding on it. I've also read chapters-long ideas on how to handle kids in a small group/house church setting. There really isn't an "easy" answer, but they are definitely not to be viewed as second-class citizens!
</idle musing>

This is rare

It is very rare that I agree with anything Al Mohler says. But, I do agree with him about yoga. Our of Ur has a nice post summarizing the mess. Read the whole thing, but here's a taste of it:

Many of the responses Al Mohler received to his original column were from people who do yoga stretches while forgoing any of yoga’s religious elements. Mohler took issue with this bifurcation. "My response to that would be simple and straightforward: You're just not doing yoga.”

Mohler received support for his view from a surprising source—a Hindu. Rajiv Malhotra wrote a column for The Huffington Post on the question of “Christian yoga.” He said:

While yoga is not a "religion" in the sense that the Abrahamic religions are, it is a well-established spiritual path. Its physical postures are only the tip of an iceberg, beneath which is a distinct metaphysics with profound depth and breadth. Its spiritual benefits are undoubtedly available to anyone regardless of religion. However, the assumptions and consequences of yoga do run counter to much of Christianity as understood today. This is why, as a Hindu yoga practitioner and scholar, I agree with the Southern Baptist Seminary President, Albert Mohler, when he speaks of the incompatibility between Christianity and yoga, arguing that "the idea that the body is a vehicle for reaching consciousness with the divine" is fundamentally at odds with Christian teaching.

With the popularity of yoga among all people, including Christians, getting a better understanding of the issue is important for pastors responsible for giving spiritual guidance. What Mohler, Driscoll, and even Malhotra agree on is that the philosophical/religious origins of yoga are incompatible with Christian belief, AND if those elements of yoga are stripped away what remains (the stretches and breathing practices) cannot be rightly called “yoga.”

<idle musing>
Yep. It isn't compatible with Christianity. I do take issue with Mohler's statement about reaching divinity; it seems incompatible with theosis, which I strongly believe in (just do a search on this blog for the term to see how much I believe in it!). But, that could just be a misuse of terminology.
</idle musing>

Tuesday, December 07, 2010

As the snow blows

Time for a garden update, as the snow flies and the temperature hovers around 20º F. Friday night I got home, after a cold, snowy ride, and walked into the greenhouse. It was dark (it gets dark at about 5:30 now), but still warm, so I picked some spinach, a head of romaine lettuce, and pulled two carrots. Oh, I grabbed some beet greens, too.

The outer leaves of the romaine were a bit frost bitten, but the rest were fine. I hadn't put a second layer of protection over them yet. The carrots were very nice and sweet—the cold converts the starches in carrots into sugar, and the spinach was excellent. I washed them, cut them up, added home made pickle relish and yogurt for a dressing, and enjoyed a wonderful salad. Not bad for December 3 in northern Indiana, is it?

Saturday, I put a second layer over the stuff in the greenhouse. The temperatures had gotten into the low teens, Fahrenheit, which is a bit cold for an unheated greenhouse. The second layer keeps the stuff from freezing. A few of my radishes, which are very small right now (I'm hoping for a January crop), had gotten frostbit. I put them under a cold frame to keep them warmer.

I pulled a couple of nice sized beets for supper. They went well with the potatoes that we have stored in the basement. I finished up the romaine lettuce, too. The rest of the spinach had been consumed on the pizza we made Friday night.

Yep. I can make pizza again. The bandage on my right hand is small enough I can knead the small amount of dough we need for a pizza. I still can't knead a regular loaf of bread, though :(

I do have a problem with the greenhouse door, though. I forgot that it is very humid inside; the wood on the frames swelled and now the door sticks at the bottom. I'll need to fix that come spring...I just hope I can continue to get inside to harvest the bounty!

Leisure time

“Leisure rest differs from Sabbath rest. In leisure rest we escape from the world into mindless numbness. We go to the theatre to escape the pressure cooker of this world. We watch TV or attend a football game in order to enter an alternative experience than the stresses of our everyday lives.

“In the Sabbath rest we set aside a day for two reasons. First, it is a day of not working or not producing goods or services for the sake of personal gain or sustenance. We have six days for production; this day is about trusting God for our sustenance. Second, it is a day for asking to see what God is up to in my life, the life of my community and in my neighborhood. On this day we look at what God is doing in our world and take in God's creation by reflecting on the previous week and offering the next week to God. Missional Small Groups, page 98

<idle musing>
OK. The first paragraph makes sense. But, the second one seems to perpetuate the idea of a dichotomy between secular and sacred. If God redeemed me and bought me, that means he owns me—and all of my time—not just Sundays! Sure, I agree we need to take a day off; it isn't good to work 7 days a week. But, the true rest of God as described in Hebrews 3-4 is allowing Christ to live in you all the time. Circumstances are irrelevant to whether you can rest in Christ or not.

Just an
</idle musing>

Monday, December 06, 2010

Monday's quotation

"It is okay to talk about spiritual things in the church. We can talk about prayer, living morally upright, 'getting saved,' God's love for us, and other topics that fit nicely into a sixty- to ninety-minute spiritual escape on Sunday morning. But it is not okay to talk about the spiritual implications of how we spend our money or our time. Those are private matters that should be left to individual choices.

“But the Bible actually speaks quite a lot about these very practical, mundane matters of life. Things like greed, anxiety, self-promotion, and priorities in life fill the pages of God's Word. To limit God to a box labeled 'Spiritual' is to miss the point of biblical spirituality. The way we do life in mundane things—like how we handle our money and manage our time—directly impacts our life with God. We often fail to realize how the little decisions we make every day about seemingly insignificant things can actually undermine the rhythms that God has called us to play in this world. Missional Small Groups, page 89

Friday, December 03, 2010

More thoughts on the gods

About 2 weeks ago, I posted some thoughts on the gods as represented in ancient literature. After discussing it further with Debbie (my wife), it became obvious to both of us that I didn't adequately express what I was trying to say. So, let's try it again...

First off, a confession: I believe in the gods (and goddesses). Yes, all of them, Ba`al, 'El, Zeus, Jupiter, Apollo, etc. OK, you can get up off the floor now and let me finish. I believe that they are divine beings, but that they are created ones, under the thumb, so to speak, of YHWH. I suspect I am in the minority in the Western world, bordering on insane, but in the 2/3 world, I would be considered sane and reasonable.

Further, I believe this is the worldview of the Bible and the Church Fathers, in fact most everyone up until the "enlightenment" happened. Now, there are some corollaries to this that have important ramifications. For our purposes here, only one is important:

If the gods are real, then spells have power. The ancients thought so. In fact, in the 2/3 world even today, they will cancel soccer matches because of supposed witchcraft by the opposing team. Why, unless they saw evidence that the spells were effective?

OK, I've probably been written off by most of you, but let's go a bit further here...Why is the biblical text so adamant about not consulting horoscopes? Our 21st century Western mind says, "Because they don't work." Wrong answer! It is because they are based on the belief that the stars are deities (see The Standard Babylonian Creation Myth for details). They are exalting someone other than YHWH as in charge.

Why is witchcraft condemned? Same reason. Why is divination wrong? Again, because only YHWH should be the holder of the future.

By now you are probably wondering where all this is going. Bottom line: I created a mug that has an incantation on it. That was wrong! It was a sin against YHWH because it gave glory to someone other than YHWH. Even if nobody who reads it believes it, that doesn't change that fact. If I could, I would destroy them. But, I can't, they aren't mine...

Quiet

"In many ways we live in a culture in which people are afraid to be truly alone, because in such an experience, we don't like what we see. We are afraid to be with ourselves, to sit and reflect, to listen to what is going on in our hearts. As a result, we cling to activity, to conversations, to noise, and ultimately to others. Often we cling to people in groups in order to survive life, but this can actually steal life from the community and suck it dry."— Missional Small Groups, page 80

<idle musing>
Bonhoeffer in Life Together says that if a person can't stand to be alone, they shouldn't be allowed to be in a group; it will simply disguise their need. Our society is terrified of aloneness and of quiet. And it is getting worse; the music in the stores is getting louder, people are carrying their MP3 players everywhere, they are continually on their cellphones, mobile Internet access never leaves us alone. But, we are bankrupt! Without alone time, our wells are shallow and we have nothing to offer each other. We can't hear God speaking to us unless we are listening; all the noise keeps us distracted from his call. He yearns for intimacy with us, and we settle for a catchy tune or a fleeting tweet or text message. He beckons and we answer our cell phone. How sad.
</idle musing>

Bookselling in perspective

I ran across this in my wanderings today:

According to Orwell, "the real reason why I should not like to be in the book trade for life is that while I was in it I lost my love of books. A bookseller has to tell lies about books, and that gives him a distaste for them."

He was wrong. A great bookseller doesn't have to tell lies about books. A great bookseller is an interpreter who sometimes lets the books speak for themselves.--Robert Gray in Shelf Awareness, an e-letter for booksellers.

<idle musing>
I agree with Robert Gray, not Orwell! I point people to the books that they are looking for; the books—especially Eisenbrauns books—sell themselves.
</idle musing>

Thursday, December 02, 2010

Which questions?

"There is a lot of talk about how to do small groups and little actual talk about the God who desires to show up at those small groups. How can we talk about spiritual gifts if our small group imagination is primarily shaped by sociological principles, small group structures, and Bible study questions. Through the Internet and published resources, we have more small group tools at our disposal today than during any other era in church history. I hope these resources are helpful. but if our imagination about small group life is primarily shaped by questions about sociological principles, small group structures, and small group study materials, then I wonder if we are asking the right questions."— Missional Small Groups, page 76

<idle musing>
Agreed. Not that the resources are bad, but if they cause us to ask the wrong questions, they are pointless. If the purpose of a small group is to encounter God, then everything should lead to that end. If the purpose of a small group is to have friends, then that is a different matter all together. Personally, I prefer the first option :)
</idle musing>

Wednesday, December 01, 2010

Journal for the Study of Paul and His Letters

The Journal for the Study of Paul and His Letters has a blog.

Subscribe to the RSS feed, but be sure to check out Mike Bird's introductions—both of them! I like this one the best:

The presence of God

"When I read most books on small groups, little is said in them about God's presence. They contain a lot of tactical information and practical skill training. I read articles on group leadership and it is easy to find information on how to ask good questions, ideas for creative study materials, and instructions on what leaders do in order to be effective. I would rather be part of a group that gets all of the tactical stuff wrong but yet encounters Jesus on a regular basis than miss out on the presence of God while getting the technical steps to group leadership right."— Missional Small Groups, page 70

<idle musing>
Amen! Preach it brother! There is nothing wrong with the techniques in and of themselves, but unless they lead to an encounter with the living God, they are worthless.
</idle musing>

More links

I can type a bit better today, so watch for more posting (you were warned!). Meanwhile, a few more links.

Joel muses on whether or not we are all atheists. Sound like a familiar refrain? Here's a snippet:

I think that the notion of separating our faith into a private realm and forgoing any and all public expression of it in an effort not to offend anyone helps us to forget the immanent God. I think that for us, we have forgotten to live our faith, and instead shield it, suffocating it until it is gone all the while pretending we still have it.

<idle musing>
He's singing from the same hymnal I am. We have stripped the divine of all mystery; all that is left is a shadow not worth worshiping. But, God is bigger than that! We just need to open ourselves up to his proddings.
</idle musing>

On a somewhat related note, the newest Biblical Studies carnival is up. I don't know where he found the time to chase all those links; there is something there to make everyone mad, from fundamentalists to atheists and everywhere in between!

Shifting gears to bookselling, I just discovered this site today. It was started by the bookseller at 57th Street Books in Chicago—one of my favorite bookstores. When I was in graduate school, we would go there as a family and read the books in the kid's section. It is a part of the Seminary Coop Bookstore and I spent hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars there in the three years we were in the area. Great store! Anyway, give the site a read and bookmark or RSS it.

One of today's gems from the site is Books After Amazon. Please read the whole thing, but here is a short snippet:

For decades the publishing world has been anxious about the end of books. Industry consolidation has led to a much-lamented shift to a business-oriented ethos, particularly at some of the larger conglomerates. With corporate ownership came a demand for profit margins that the book-publishing world had never seen. Yet even if new management is nothing like that of the past—gentlemen with large fortunes who became gentlemen with small fortunes—publishing remains an intensely people-driven business, the kind where folks meet face-to-face. Even today most people involved in publishing are there because they love good books.

<idle musing>
You don't go into bookselling or publishing to get rich. Well, unless you are the founder of Amazon, that is.
</idle musing>