Tagged: bible
I Am Never Ready
These last three days I learned that despite my training and full belief in the Boy Scouts’ “Be Prepared” motto, there are three things I am never ready for.
Firstly, America’s natural beauty, specifically the Rocky Mountains.
I drove to Salt Lake City from the Springs (and back) and while my eyes were necessarily on the road, I could’t help but marvel at the grandeur passing by my right and left.
I have decided that this area will be my kids and I’s new playground.
Secondly, folk’s response to, “What is the gospel?”
“You are insolent,” the friend of my buddy told me, as we sat next to each other late into the wedding reception. This was preceded by, “You are proselytizing.” Which was preceded by a three to five minute recounting of his entire childhood interaction with the Church which concluded, as he could tell he was avoiding the question, with a tremendously subpar answer, which he knew was subpar as he delivered it even before my eyes surely indicated so. This being preceded by his rehearsal of the lunacy of the concept of the “chosen people” and my, “Well, and to be sure—I am giving you my best now, no pulling punches—you must understand the gospel before you can understand or be at peace with any of the rest of it. There is an order of events, so to speak. So I would ask you (you don’t have to answer) what is the gospel?” And of course this was preceded by his, “You’re religious, huh? My problem is…”
I guess I am just an optimist. It’s my only explanation why I am always surprised that such a simple question can evoke such a dark response.
Thirdly, once in a lifetime offers of unimaginable wealth and luxury.
“Are you happy there? Are you happy with your job?”
I said, “Sorry what are you asking?”
“Are you settled in for good? Do you like your job?” the man repeated.
I had just met him. I learned he was a doctor. He was immediately kind. I believe his opening banter was complimenting the toast I had just given/hosted as best man. And, I never confirmed, but I am pretty sure he was a Mormon.
Do you see it now?
He saw what I had just accomplished in the other room and was ready to put those talents to work for the faith—and we all get richer in the process.
But I stumbled. Someone else was nearby and asking those around if they knew the movie that the current bluegrass band’s song was from, and I couldn’t help but ignore my new friend and lean over to answer, “O’ Brother Where Art Thou?!”
By the time that reverie ended, the moment had passed. The “doctor is out”, and never to return.
Oh well. I do like my house and I do like my job. But I also feel shame that I have acted in the same way during similar moments enough times to recognize the physical sensation I get afterwards as the “missed/blown opportunity” one. And this shame is only made worse in that these moments keep happening to me.
Maybe next time, I’ll be ready.
Some Thoughts On Vindictive Little Hussy Tamar in Genesis, the One that Played the Harlot (Not Absalom’s Sister Who Was Raped).
My wife uses the Bible to argue with me. Anyone else have a woman like this at home? It’s wonderful.
Just this morning she brought up “Judas son of Jacob”, from which I can only assume she meant (talk to text doesn’t work well for those with heavy accents) Judah. We’re already in funny-land with this, as it clearly demonstrates why surnames ever came to be. Who? Judas? Which Judas? NT Judas? Iscariot? Oh, Jacob’s son? Oh, Judah. You mean Judah? Judah, son of Jacob? Judah Jacobson. Judah Ben Jacob. Ha.
Anyhow. So the story has it that Judah’s first son, Er Judah-son, is killed by Yahweh for being evil. Par for the course. And his second son, Onan, is unwilling that his biological son become his older brother’s heir and so he will not consummate the deed. Yahweh kills him, too.
Only then do we learn the full nature of the issue. It seems Judah has this idea, perhaps divinely inspired, perhaps not, and holds to it like his last breath, that Tamar (Er’s wife) is owed a son by one of his (Judah’s) sons. So he promises Tamar that when Shelah Judah-son grows big, he can donate his seed to the common cause.
Here’s where the story gets interesting, and not just in Azeem’s, “How did your uneducated kind ever take Jerusalem?” sense.
Er’s widow Tamar (Tamar has no surname, so “Er’s widow Tamar” will have to suffice…for now) hears that Judah Jacob-son is going on a trip. It is this moment of the story that deserves grave attention. Here is the focus of this exegesis.
So she removed her widow’s garments from herself and covered herself with a veil and wrapped herself. And she sat at the entrance of Enaim, which is on the road to Timnah; for she saw that Shelah had grown up, and she had not been given to him as a wife.
“For she saw that Shelah [Judah-son] had grown up, AND she had not been given to him as a wife.”
“Vindictive little hussy” Tamar sounds more appropriate than “Er’s widow Tamar” at this point. But let’s read on.
Judah, now a widower and past the time of mourning, apparently still gets the itch. So when he sees a harlot on his trip, he begins to negotiate. Unlike, or perhaps exactly like, men from every corner and age of the planet, he didn’t think ahead and so now he is stuck. “1. Get laid but have to give her my ID to hold until I can find my darn credit card.” Or “B. Don’t get laid.”
He gives her his ID.
She takes it, gives herself to him, and then runs, never to be seen again—even after he finds his credit card.
But this, to most illiterate preachers, is still merely the setup for the punchline of the story.
(Let’s pause here for an apropos Uncle Remus saying: “You can hide the fire, but wha choo gunna do bout da smoke?!”)
Vindictive Little Hussy Tamar is soon “showing” and the affronted Judah Jacob-son wants her burned.
She wants to live and so offers Judah Jacob-son his ID back.
The next killer-line is:
And Judah recognized them and said, “She is more righteous than I, inasmuch as I did not give her to my son Shelah.”
Oh, the qualifier.
We almost had a perplexing, a-historical, fantasy account on our hands. Without the qualifier, we might have real evidence that scripture is flawed, uninspired, and not the Word of God that we all believe it to be.
So thank the LORD and his precious son, Jesus, for the qualifier.
Judah Jacob-son does not elevate Vindictive Little Hussy Tamar unreservedly, no. That would be the work of the uninspired Woke mob, post-#metoo and George Floyd and all.
Instead, since we’re reading the Word of God—which was written by men who lived thousands of years ago at a time before Jesus fulfilled Yahweh’s plan—there is a qualifier.
Nowhere does the story suggest that Vindictive Little Hussy Tamar was righteous full-stop, but it does convey that Judah Jacob-son now recognized that he hadn’t fulfilled his vow. Or as Apollo Creed says, “Some people gotta learn the hard way!”
Granted, I still have no idea why my boo brought this up in the argument over the kids’ clothes today. And granted I honestly am not 100% certain I analyzed the right story, since “Judas son of Jacob” is not certainly “Judah Jacob-son.” But these are some thoughts on Tamar, the eency-weency-bit-more-righteous woman than the John, Judah Jacob-son, little horn-dog that he was.
When It Comes to Israel, Please Try to Focus
Terrorists—not some internationally recognized State military—executed a terror attack on Israel.
How does the en vogue question, “Whose land is it?” relate to the war?
Debates are being had across the world regarding some idea of “a two-State solution”—has Hamas made such a demand? Have they suggested that they will cease hostilities if only…? Moreover, is anyone in Hamas actually in possession of enough integrity to believe, even if they have?
Some heavy hitters in academia suggest that the claims of Israel’s tie to the Land—especially as it regards the Messiah—within the books of the Bible are irrelevant, having clearly lost out to publicly recorded statements and votes by nearly all leaders, on nearly any level in favor of a two-state solution. Is any Israeli earnestly citing scripture in an attempt to denounce Hamas or secure their country?
Then we come to my personal favorite of the many distractions from the issue, being the cries against violence upon innocents. “But the IDF is killing innocent people!”, they wail.
When it comes to Israel, please try to focus.
There is a difference between an academic discussion, or put concretely, a classroom discussion, and war. By my thinking, the only people who don’t seem to understand this might be thought of analogous to the two apparently ugly and old flight attendants at United who are pissed because they haven’t ever been selected to work as supermodels on Dodger’s charter flights.
Talk that is focused on the war sounds like a yes/no answer to this question: should Israel have your support (indirect as it might be) in their war?
I say, “Yes.”
You may disagree. That doesn’t revoke your US Citizenship. Just please don’t skip to the nuanced reasons for your position before stating it. That’s lazy and cowardly. The question of war is not answered by debate. Focus. Answer the question. And stop pretending that “reasons” are the answer. Please, if you fancy talking about the topic, focus and answer.
In Brief: The Similarity Between the Bible and the US Constitution
Released a couple days ago, Justice Thomas’ concurring opinion says, “Though I do not doubt the sincerity of my dissenting colleagues’ beliefs, experts and elites have been wrong before and they may prove to be wrong again. In part for this reason, the Fourteenth Amendment outlaws government-sanctioned racial discrimination of all types.”
Released a couple thousand years ago, St. Paul’s letter to the churches of Galatia says, “I marvel that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ for a different gospel, which is really not another, only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should proclaim to you a gospel contrary to the gospel we have proclaimed to you, let him be accursed! As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is proclaiming to you a gospel contrary to what you received, let him be accursed!”
For my dad: the similarity is that Justice Thomas and St. Paul defend received wisdom. That, and the fact that both passages breathe life and manifest hope.
The Fallout Is Not The Attack: Stay Focused—Especially When The Devil Is Involved
When is the last time you read a definition of the word “number”? Probably never, right?
Have you ever read one of the earliest definitions? Also “no”. I get it.
Nichomachus of Gerasa, around the time of Jesus, wrote, “Number is limited multitude or a combination of units or a flow of quantity made up of units; and the first division of number is even and odd.”
His overall task (as he saw it) was to defend the study of abstractions, like math—for its own sake. He writes, “Evidently, the one which naturally exists before them all is superior and takes the place of origin and root and, as it were, of mother to the others.”
In sum, within “science”, since arithmetic is first, it is greatest. So study it, he argues.
What I want you to see in this is the concept of order. Geometry is second to arithmetic because we can’t speak of geometry without using arithmetic terms and concepts.
The reason I want you to focus on “order”, Christian, is that headlines today include the removal of the Bible from some public school libraries.
Like all news, this event is published with the hopes of being sensational. And it certainly is. (Though I suspect many of us who brush the dust off the cover of our Bibles from time to time would save much of the sacred content until our children are teenagers.)
But we need to temper this sensational event (and future iterations of it) with the knowledge that this banning of the Bible is merely fallout of the attack (largely successful) against the Bible that has been ongoing for at least decades.
I say again, order.
Time for the gut punch.
Do you read the Bible to your kids and family?
My daughter, H-, from my first marriage isn’t talking to me right now. She’s thirteen and lives in a different town. We used to read the Bible as a rule before reading anything else.
Now in my second marriage and family, I tried some dinner time Bible reading for while (maybe a month), but the nature of my job kept interrupting it and “life gets in the way”, so that went by the wayside. (Never discount the sheer difficulty of the Bible.)
All the while, I created a Bible study podcast, mostly to help me study, but also with the idea that it’s easy and anyone could use it.
But it has been probably a good year or so since I’ve opened the actual Bible with my family. (I do have an old children’s Bible type book that I made it a point to read in full to my toddler and I am still reading it to my 1 year old from time to time.)
Finally, I can tell you that my church-going parents read us the Bible less than 5 times while we were kids.
The banning of the Bible at public school libraries is fallout, folks. The real attack is on our hearts, “hearts” in the Biblical sense.
The fallout is not the attack. The attack is real. The devil is real.
But so is our champion, Jesus the Christ, Yahweh our God, and the Holy Spirit.
Don’t be distraught.
But surely use the sensational event the way the LORD intends you to—repent! Begin anew. Read the Bible to your family. Make time.
(Comment below if you want recommendations on where to start. I’d be happy to offer ideas.)
Damely, A Review of Gentle and Lowly: The Heart of Christ for Sinners and Sufferers, by Dane Ortlund
Evangelical Christianity has a problem.
We say the canon is closed, but then we keep writing and writing and writing. And encouraging to write and write and write. And read and read and read—everything about the Bible, but never the Bible itself.
Mr. Ortlund’s, or Pastor Ortlund’s, book was given to me last birthday by a good friend. We went to Seminary together. I told him I’d let him know how the book was after I read it. He clearly loved it, so this was an awkward setup for someone as critical as me. He knew that going in. I agreed because I thought I could use some light Christian reading and figured it couldn’t be terrible. And it wasn’t. It wasn’t even close to terrible.
But it’s for women. Dames.
Check out these sentiments:
We don’t use a word like benevolence much today; it means a disposition to be kind and good, a crouched coil of compassion ready to spring.
Or, …my swirling internal world of fretful panicky-ness arising out of gospel deficit…
The felt love of Christ really is what brings rest, wholeness, flourishing, shalom—that existential calm that for brief, gospel-sane moments settles over you and lets you step in out of the storm of of-works-ness.
(My bold.)
No man feels like that was written to him. We all just acknowledge that the Pastor has to include some girly stuff in order to satisfy the publisher, who knows that men typically don’t read anyway. But the book was filled with these and more. Too many. Nobody speaks like that, nor should they. It’s insulting. “Crouched coil of compassion ready to spring”. Sheesh. No need for gender-reassignment surgery here. Just learned what it feels like to be a woman.
Here’s even more truth. The introduction lists a few “who this is written for” descriptions, and the one (only one) that made me decide to go through with reading it was, “…suspect we have disappointed him [the Trinity].” That’s not feminine, neither is it far off from ideas floating around “upstairs” as my step-son says. So I read on.
But I confess that I never really thought the book was for me. And I still don’t. The Bible is for me. This type of book is not.
The problem with these books is their existence itself. You don’t need someone to come up with analogies to the Bible’s analogies in order to understand how to walk according to the Way. You really don’t.
I repeat: the canon is closed.
I have this argument with my wife often too.
The canon is closed. The minute someone creates a recording of what they said, some preacher/teacher, they’re implicitly suggesting that they are as inspired as the authors of the real Bible.
By contrast, I write these posts for me. I don’t believe they can help you in any way that meaningfully would be help. That’s partly because I don’t believe you need my help. You definitely have never asked for my help.
If anything, my theologically-oriented posts may help you understand what makes me tick, but I would never suggest they can help clarify the Bible.
Back to Pastor Ortlund.
If you’re looking for a good spiritual book, most folks would point you to the big ones. Gospel of John, Genesis, early Psalms, Ephesians. Acts is a winner. And that disappoints you. Because that’s not what you’re looking for, I suspect. I suspect that, when looking for a Christian/Devotional book, you’re looking to find a shortcut to the Bible. Bluntly, my gut tells me that you’re looking for a lazy-man’s Bible.
To that search I say: Good luck in your quest. I never have found one. So I stopped wasting time searching and started reading the Bible.
They Will Know
Hardly a day has gone by while I have been a professing, confessing Christian that I don’t think about the vast increase of nearly irrefutable knowledge since Bible times—and its seeming ability to dethrone gods.
This new Jurassic Park movie is one more stumbling block for Christianity. It’s not just, “There are no dinosaurs in the Bible.” It’s not just, “Using the Bible timelines, there’s no accounting for dinosaurs.” It’s not even merely, “Christians go to unappealing lengths to rationalize away everything that dinosaurs mean to timelines of the universe.” It’s that dinosaurs are certainly not gods and yet they have seemingly trounced the god of the Bible—and effortlessly at that.
As I mentioned last post, I’m currently reading selections of the greatest math and science books, and that means Euclid. When it comes to science, you start with math. When it comes to math, you start with Euclid. (Wait for it…) It’s elementary.
I have mentioned Euclid in past posts, and I have mentioned that I think comparing what Euclid was doing circa Bible times with what Biblical authors and God Himself was doing circa Bible times is endlessly fruitful.
This time around, the guided reading book put special emphasis on the fact that Euclid was concerned with ideal figures, not with drawn figures. Put differently, his definitions, postulates, common notions, and eventually propositions were not about, “Can you draw an equilateral triangle or circle etc.?” No, they were about, “Can you build a mental construction (field of study we call geometry) which supports itself against all attack?”
Student: “Why is a point that which has no parts?”
Teacher: “Because that’s what Definition 1 says.”
Smart Student: “Okay, I get it.”
It’s not far removed from fiction.
Reader: “Why is Batman not able to fly?”
Author: “Because he’s just the man Bruce Wayne.”
Smart Reader: “Okay, I get it.”
Unlike fiction (you’re telling me no one ever notices Bruce Wayne is not present when Batman is??), however, Euclid holds up tolerably well.
And my point, regrouping, is to highlight that Euclid was intentionally teaching things he knew were only in his mind.
Dinosaurs—only dead objects.
Triangles—at their purest, only in our minds.
Religion—inadequate written and spoken term for core reasons for actions and ideas among living people.
****
Next, a lady at work yesterday rolled up her sleeve to reveal a new-ish tat of a scene of the “North Woods” on her forearm, from what I could tell without staring.
At the gentlemen’s clubs, I saw many women with bodies all tatted up. I learned that some men found it ugly, and others liked it. I found it kinda sexy when the tattoos were thought through. But no matter my opinions today, I can remember initially being repulsed by what I thought the ink did to an otherwise beautiful figure.
Yesterday, I felt that revulsion again. This was a pretty darn normal looking lady—definitely not a lady of the night choosing fast living at every turn. I then felt, “She’s searching for meaning. That’s the only explanation. She’s feeling like a cog in a machine and needs to individualize and ground herself. That’s why she took the counter-culture path.”
I know, I know. Seems like a lot of thought for something trivial. But my religion compels me to see it’s not trivial. Everything matters. And most of all, losing matters. It’s clear that religion has been losing. At every turn this is true. Why is religion losing?
This brings me to my title.
I’ve been studying Ezekiel for some time now. And many times the LORD gives, “And they will know that I am the LORD,” as the reason for his actions. Most often, his actions were lethal judgement of the members of a prideful tribe.
I’m not gonna ask the corresponding question about dinosaurs. But I do want to ask it about the math and science geniuses. What power did ideal figures have in staving off death? What power does a jurassic period in history have in clinging to life?
How about the tattoo? Did my co-worker’s tattoo satisfy?
****
Clear, consistent thought is a must. It doesn’t obtain eternal life, mind you, but it sure is essential while on Earth.
Dinosaurs are fascinating to contemplate—especially when they are destroying national monuments.
It feels wonderful to make long-lasting decisions (permanent tattoos). I can speak as an expert on this one. Being able to act decisively with an aircraft which does not forgive poor judgment is half the reason to become a pilot. My thoughts and actions matter. I’m important.
But even I can report that making many vital decisions still doesn’t satisfy.
Religion satisfies.
At the end of the day, I see American history recording our current age as “one in which we discovered the reason religion didn’t die.”
“And they will know that I am the LORD.”
Friday Post-Bible Reading Fantasy Debate
“So it’s campfire story until after Moses dies?”
“That’s right.”
“So Moses is telling the story of Adam and Eve, Cain and Abel, and then Noah, and then Abraham, and eventually Jacob and Joseph?”
“You got it.”
“So is Moses somehow ‘read into’ a version of scripture as a young boy, like an already begun tale, or is he passing down something later related to him, perhaps by Yahweh Himself?”
“Interesting question. What brings it to mind, if I may ask?”
“Well, in early books of the Bible, books authored by Moses, books written before Moses learns God’s name on Sinai, characters use that name in speech. For example, Abraham talks to the king of Sodom and says, ‘I have raised my hand to Yahweh God Most High…’”
“So?”
“So, my real question is, ‘Is Moses telling us the truth that Abraham actually uttered the name “Yahweh”—which would mean it was then lost by the time Moses had to ask—or, is Moses helping the story along, and keeping it particular because he, Moses, knows that Abraham meant the god “Yahweh” whatever he, Abraham, actually uttered in that moment?’”
“Ah. I think I see your point. Quick clarifying question. What difference would it make if Abraham uttered ‘Yahweh’ vs. Moses only saying that Abraham uttered it?”
“Well, doesn’t that make Moses a liar? I mean, how can he say something happened that he knows did not happen?”
“What do you think? Is there any way that scripture holds integrity here? You’ve painted a pretty stark picture.”
“I guess I could zoom out a bit and say the point of scripture is not to get Abraham’s exact words correct, but to reveal who Yahweh is.”
“Seems a bit too loose.”
“Maybe I could say that it must be that the name Yahweh was lost by the time Moses was on Sinai?”
“Seems like you don’t actually believe that.”
“Maybe Moses didn’t really write it as tradition holds?”
“Jesus seemed to think he did.”
“Good point. Hmm. So Moses knows he’s a member of Israel, and knows this before the burning bush, because that’s the whole point. His people were already a “people” in their own eyes, that’s how they were enslaved. Then it’s got to be some kind of more immediate need on Sinai when he asked, than Moses inserting it into Abraham’s speech falsely. And that would, or but that would also mean that Moses is passing on an inherited tradition—which is now not that unlikely because the story is definitely that they were enslaved according to their tribe.”
“But this still leaves what problem?”
“It leaves the problem of ‘If Moses is passing on inherited stories, why did Moses have to ask Yahweh what his name was? Shouldn’t he and all the people fresh off the Exodus have known?’”
“Precisely. But let’s ask it this way, ‘Would the people who were already creating an idol while Moses was up on Sinai have known Yahweh?’”
“Good point. And yet someone had to have told Moses.”
“Had to have. Or else Moses, as author of Genesis, must be lying.”
“But he can’t be lying.”
“But he can’t be lying, that’s right.”
“What do you think?”
“I think what I normally think.”
“‘More reading.’”
“More reading.”
God Did Not Write the Bible
This post is driven by that same Wednesday night church experience last week behind that other post about choosing a home church. As a refresher, the Baptists had a new children’s winter Bible Study and through it, on day one, lesson one were teaching the kids that, “God wrote the Bible.” In fairness, the pastor quickly clarified or tempered this claim with something like, “…using men…” But my point remains. God did not write the Bible. Moreover and more to the point, no Baptist, alive, dead, or yet-to-be even believes that God wrote the Bible. So why teach a child that?
I’m actually a little at a loss on the topic overall, these days. Why even say, “The Bible is inspired by God?” Or, “The Bible is God-breathed?” I’m totally fine with quoting scripture as in, “In Peter’s second letter he (Peter) says the writings we consider as the Bible are…” But, if we’re talking amongst ourselves (Christians to Christians), the thing being communicated is known and part of the “Christian-ness”. It’s like two basketball players describing that there is air inside a basketball.
And if we’re not talking to Christians, then we’re telling a person who doesn’t believe in an admittedly invisible being that that self-same unseen being wrote a very visible book which is most evidently written by humans.
What, then, shall we say? Start with, “The Bible is coherent.” We Christians believe that both the Christian and the non-Christian/pagan/heathen can all understand the contents. No different than Romeo and Juliet or the Constitution of the United States of America. So start there.
Scrap all the virtue-signaling and holier-than-thou talk and just tell the truth. Say true sentences that are defensible to their core. Was the Bible written by God? I answer as a Holy Spirit filled follower of Jesus Christ and a literate human, “No.”
Follow-Up To Yesterday’s NASB Translation One
One more note. When we look at the issue as I do, then the entire question changes. Instead of, “Did ‘brothers’ mean ‘brothers and sisters’ in certain passages?” we now ask, “What should we do if the majority of believers want to make that change?”
See how that question reveals a totally different issue than what the Lockman Foundation is defending? (My dad came up with that one when following my argument through.)
I’ll leave it here with: and this is why I love the Bible.
Captain’s Log 