bass1bone's Xanga

Tuesday, February 13, 2007

Tue, 13 Feb 2007 07:35:26 GMT

I think I'm beginning to understand the nature of my current lethargy/depression/restlessness/whatever.

It is because, suddenly, the world seems less open to me. I find the path ahead getting narrower and narrower. I find myself hankering for the old days when I was pretty much careless and barely responsible for anything at all (with the exceptions of the obvious, like showering and brushing my teeth). Most of all, I suppose, I find that, being in a collegiate environment at my age, I'm being exposed to new trends and fashions and media that simply make me feel as though my youth has gone, because I can't enjoy the "new" as much as so many of those of my acquaintance.

Welcome to this brave new world, Dave. May you find your courage.

Wednesday, January 10, 2007

Wed, 10 Jan 2007 09:34:39 GMT

I dearly hope that none of you have been so thoroughly defeated that defeat began to seem inevitable. Have you ever fervently hoped, against all received wisdom, that your tomorrows will not reflect today?

"Do not be deceived: as a man sows, so shall he reap." Makes me pray for a crop failure sometimes.

On Matthew 5 and the Law

Mon, 18 Dec 2006 20:53:05 GMT

The history of the Israelites up to the time of Jesus was marked by a profound failure to be "a light to the Gentiles" as they were supposed to be. The Law was forgotten and rediscovered, forgotten and rediscovered. By the time of Jesus, it had become encumbered by added traditions; in seeking to provide guidance on how to obey the Law, the Jews had completely missed the point of the Law. They imagined that God created the Law, and then created men so that men could obey the Law that God had created beforehand. They had arguments about whether God himself abided by the Law. They conjured from the air the idea that the Law's purpose was to regulate behavior (see Deut. 10:12-17, 30:6, and Jer. 4:4 for evidence that it was not).

Into this mix comes Jesus:

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven." (Matthew 5:17-20)

He has already taken the world of his disciples and turned their perception of 'blessing' upside-down (Matthew 5:3-12). He had then told his disciples that they were going to take up the task that had been formerly given to Israel: as God's new 'chosen people,' Jesus's disciples were going to be "the light of the world" (vv. 13-16). He then announced to them (in what I like to call the "preemptive strike") that this would not involve getting rid of the Law; instead, the Law will be even more central in the kingdom of heaven. This was foretold by the prophet Jeremiah:

"'The time is coming,' declares the LORD, 'when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah. It will not be like the covenant I made with their forefathers when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, because they broke my covenant, though I was a husband to them,' declares the LORD. 'This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after that time,' declares the LORD. 'I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people. No longer will a man teach his neighbor, or a man his brother, saying, "Know the LORD," because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest,' declares the LORD. 'For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more.'" (Jer. 31:31-34)

        And so the righteousness that Jesus talks about in v. 20 which surpasses that of the scribes and the Pharisees is based in the same Law that the scribes and Pharisees purported to teach and follow. Jesus' teachings in vv. 21-48 talk about actions, yet his words in vv. 17-20 indicate that the "righteousness of the kingdom" and that his own teaching on the Law will be qualitatively different from what has come before. We can thus understand that the teaching in vv. 21-48 is describing actions which flow from the heart which has had God's law written on it.
        And not just written on it. We always talk about how Jesus seemed to see the intent of the Law, how he points us always to what the Law means for our hearts or our inner selves. Yet we don't recognize the same sort of teaching here. Jesus is showing us what life looks like when one's heart has been circumcised. Having God's law written on our hearts means something different than merely having the words enshrined there; the Law is supposed to shape our hearts. Look at the command against murder: what sort of people are we to be on the inside if we are commanded not to be murderous towards each other? Our attitude towards people should be life-giving; thus we will not be saying things ("Raca!") to our brothers that lead us down a destructive road--for what earthly court can actually prosecute one for being angry? No, they can only prosecute you for what results from your anger. The command against murder is supposed to shape your heart such that you don't have to worry about your anger leading you to do things that can be prosecuted or pulling others into such a situation with you.

Edit:
        Just thought I'd include a little something about how/what I'm doing. I've grown ever more sure over the past few months that where I'm going is not where I want to go--I'm thinking that my current educational pursuits don't have as much to do with what I'm interested in as I would like. So, in all probability, I'm about to enter Careerland.
       Another thing some of you should know is that there have been long periods of intense doubt for me in the past year-and-a-half or so. And by "intense doubt," I don't mean the common "I'm questioning my faith" stage that most Christians go through as they grow up. When that happened for me, it was the working of my mind that brought me back. This time, it has been my heart crying out against the life-blaspheming alternatives.

Christmas Survey

Sat, 02 Dec 2006 22:33:08 GMT

1. Egg Nog or Hot Chocolate?
Hot Chocolate.

2. Does Santa wrap presents or just sit them under the tree?
Santa?  Presents?  Tree?  None of the above.

3. Colored lights on tree/house or white?
Well, I prefer white.

4. Do you hang mistletoe?
No.

5. When do you put your decorations up?
Decorations?

6. What is your favorite holiday dish?
Dressing (with giblet gravy, of course).

7. What is your favorite holiday memory (from childhood)?
The year I woke up on Christmas morning and found out I'd gotten a bicycle (with training wheels); I then proceeded to ride all over the neighborhood 
in shorts and short-sleeved shirt, because the weather was almost sub-tropical that year.  I was in kindergarten, I believe.

8. When and how did you learn the truth about Santa?
My brother told me when I was 5 or 6.

9. Do you open a gift on Christmas Eve?
Used to, whenever we were able to be with my mom's family on Christmas Eve.

10. How do you decorate your Christmas Tree?
Um, no.

11. Snow: Love it or dread it?
Love, love, love it!

12. Can you ice skate?
I can, but don't ask me to demonstrate any technical wizardry.

13. Do you remember your favorite gift?
I believe it was a Nintendo.

14. What's the most important thing about the holidays for you?
Family.

15. What is your favorite holiday dessert?
Probably whatever doesn't have nuts.

16. What is your favorite holiday tradition?
The traditions have pretty much died in my family.  We kind of get together  at my grandma's house on Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day, but it's not 
really something that's laden with tradition.

17. What tops your tree?
         <<----You see all that nothing?  Since there is no tree, that's pretty much what's at the top of it.

18. Which do you prefer - giving or receiving?
To be honest, I don't know.  We've never really done much gift-giving in my  family.

19. What is your favorite Christmas Song?
3-Way Tie: "White Christmas" (but only if sung by Mr. Crosby), "O Holy Night" (especially if sung by John Berry), and "Silent Night" (my favorite 
version is, oddly enough, the one by Charlotte Church--it's odd because I'm not a great fan of Charlotte Church).

20. Candy canes: yummy or yucky?
I like the ones that are kind of chewy, but if I want peppermint I'll just stick to my Altoids.  So, mostly yucky.

21. What's your favorite Christmas movie?
Miracle on 34th Street (the original, of course).

Friday, October 20, 2006

Fri, 20 Oct 2006 18:26:54 GMT

So I think that, when I get time to seriously post, I'm going to do a series on Matthew 5. I just got done teaching Matthew 5 over the last 3 weeks in Home Bible Study, and there was a lot of stuff that I would have liked to cover, a lot of stuff that our discussion really (in my opinion) bungled--like when we were talking about vv. 21-48, the adults insisted on defining those passages as depressing, "I-can't-do-this," "hard sayings" kinds of teachings that drive us to recognize that we can't keep the law. I strenuously disagree with that interpretation (although, Jenny: I'm not sure the model proposed in Kingdom Ethics is the best interpretation, either), so I want to get some of the stuff that I would've liked to have said (if we had had more time) out there. But I think that we still had some really good discussion.

Monday, October 16, 2006

Mon, 16 Oct 2006 01:11:42 GMT

    Anyone ever hear of a stave church? Apparently they were the traditional building form for churches in Scandinavia. While the rest of Europe was building impressive cathedrals, Norwegian Christians, especially, were meeting in beautiful, simply constructed (but often well ornamented) wooden buildings such as this one:

    There are a few well-preserved specimens to be found in Norway still today. They are important cultural artifacts in Norway, though that land is now very much post-Christian. They remind even Americans that there was a time when the church building was the most important building in a village or town, for the life of the community revolved around that building.
    The Restoration Movement has always placed a certain emphasis on the fact that the people are the church, and that the place they meet is just a building--a "church building." Yet we still talk of "going to church." Perhaps we betray the fact that our lives still revolve around the church building. Perhaps our lives don't really revolve around the community of faith as much as we'd like to think they do. I wonder if the buildings we meet in actually hinder us from being a true "community of faith."

Thursday, October 12, 2006

Thu, 12 Oct 2006 01:25:47 GMT

I think everybody should check this out. Lemme know what you think. Ben Witherington, the author, is a well-respected conservative Biblical scholar. Like, as in, Harding Bible professors are fans of his and greatly appreciate his work.

benwitherington.blogspot.com/2006/10/not-so-separate-church-and-stateshould.html

Blessed are....

Tue, 03 Oct 2006 07:25:27 GMT

"Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down to us from the Father of Lights...." (James 1:17)

        I hear people talking about how God has blessed America all the time. We feel richly blessed--we live in a "land of plenty" in which certain freedoms are guaranteed. There's nothing wrong with being thankful for the "good gifts" God gives, of course, nor is there anything wrong with desiring God's blessing. Christians are told that "we are given every spiritual blessing in Christ" and we often remind each other that our God is the "fount of every blessing." But just what are the "good gifts" that God gives?

        Israel always perceived that God had blessed the rich. So ingrained in Israelite culture was this idea that the common, poor, landless Jew of Jesus' day was completely oppressed: being poor and uneducated, he was completely dependent upon the Temple system for the blessing of God--and much of the Temple system was nothing but a forum for spiritual abuse.

        Jesus saw the sickness. In his Sermon he turned the world of the Israelites on its head:

"Blessed are you poor, for yours is the kingdom of God. Blessed are you hungry, for you shall be satisfied. Blessed are you who weep, for you shall laugh. Blessed are you when men hate you, and ostracize you, and insult you, and scorn your name as evil, for the sake of the Son of Man. ...But woe to you rich, for you are receiving your comfort in full. Woe to you who are well-fed, for you shall be hungry. Woe to you who laugh now, for you shall mourn and weep. Woe to you when all men speak well of you, for their fathers used to treat the false prophets in the same way." (Luke 6:20-22, 24-26)

Our Lord and his disciples never speak of wealth as though it were a blessing--they seemed instead to think it perilous. This is hard teaching for us, who are rich. We think ourselves blessed with our riches and our freedoms--things our Lord never spoke of by way of blessing. Christ's message is consistently one of surprising grief for those who are wealthy and comfortable; he always seems to shock the poor and persecuted with hope, with a message of God's favor. It is precisely the people who are in the most dire of straits, whose backs are hardest against the wall, that our Lord calls "blessed."

Does Jesus overturn any of our tables when he pronounces as woes the very things we consider blessings? What does it say about who we are and what we value when we call our rich and free land "blessed"--though Jesus often seems to say the exact opposite? Perhaps God's "good gifts" are not what we thought, after all?

Behold; he turns the world upside-down!

Peace. Holla!

Faith, Faithfulness, Discipleship....

Tue, 19 Sep 2006 18:18:19 GMT

Faith is....?

    Consider a tree. Its roots dig into the earthen ground. Its bole climbs up, up towards the sun; it throws its branches out into the free air.

    As a disciple of Christ, I am a tree; at the root of who I am is my faith, which is "grounded" in Christ. The trunk and branches--all that you can visually see--are my life of discipleship, which grow up from the root of my faith. If my faith is strong and deep, the tree will not easily be moved. If my discipleship is strong, the tree will be tall and broad and fertile.

Authority in the Life of Faithful Discipleship

"All authority has been given to me in heaven and on earth; therefore, go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey all that I have commanded you. And lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." (Matthew 28:18-20)

    Too often, we allow ourselves to be rooted in the epistles of Paul, John, Peter, et al; in the heritage of the churches of Christ, we have appealed to them more than to Christ himself--as though they were the authority. But what were they but the first messengers who teach us to obey all that Jesus commanded, show us how to interpret Christ's death, and work out the practical dimensions of being Christ's "city on a hill"?

    Discipleship is rooted in faith in Christ's authority to command. We do what he says because we believe that he had the authority to say it. Loving your enemy doesn't make sense; turning your head and offering your enemy your other cheek to slap doesn't make sense; giving more to those who would rob you than they ask for doesn't make sense; such suffering and "carrying your cross" doesn't make sense. Christ's commands don't make sense unless he has the authority to command.

    Discipleship grows in the knowledge that Christ does not command us to do anything that he did not do himself. If he did not live what he taught (and thus show us how to do the same), then his commands to love your enemy, to turn the other cheek, or to carry your cross are absurd. But here is the man who loved even the Roman soldiers who put him on the cross, even Pilate (who gives a human face to the inhuman Roman Empire) who oppressed the Jews and massacred them when they attempted to protest peacefully, even the Jews who put the prophets to death with the sword and condemned him to the Romans though he was one of them; here is the man who "did no violence" (Isa. 53:9), who refused to defend himself or those of his own nation who did not know the ways of peace (Luke 13:34, 19:41-44); who did not protest the punishment to which the powers sentenced him, but took up his cross and died upon it. Behold the Man on the cross who "suffered as an example to us, that we might walk in his steps" (1 Peter 2:21-23)! The cross to which he calls us is not any and every kind of suffering, sickness, or tension; it is not inexplicable or unpredictable; it is not an inward wrestling with self and sin. The believer's cross is the end of a path freely chosen after counting the cost; it is the social reality of representing in an unwilling world the Order to come, and his people will experience in ways analogous to his own the hostility of the old order: "The servant is not greater than his master; if they have persecuted me they will persecute you." (John 15:20)

Wednesday, August 30, 2006

Wed, 30 Aug 2006 18:09:36 GMT

Before I begin, let me say that many of you know that I have problems reconciling Christian discipleship (life in the kingdom) with political participation (the goal of most Christians who participate in politics seems to be to use Caesar's means and methods--political power--to try to accomplish kingdom ends). Most of my readers do not have such qualms. So I write this article for them, knowing that I cannot enforce upon them my philosophical views concerning political participation and office-holding and war, yet believing that if a person is going to participate in politics or hold office, they need to consider each facet of the thorny problems of politics in order to address those problems in all their complexity.

Bill Clinton once famously offered his philosophy concerning abortion: "Abortion should be safe, legal, and rare."

Of course, few of my readers will agree with him when he says that abortion should be legal. I certainly don't. But I have resigned myself to hopelessness on the issue: it seems that the American people will never elect both a president and a delegation of senators who will make it their mission to secure a majority anti-abortion Supreme Court. In any case, considering the other positions of those political personages who oppose abortion, I would not wish such a combination of political power-brokers on any free society. And whether abortion should be legal or not, for at least the foreseeable (short-term) future, abortion will be legal.

So Caesar says that abortion will be legal (1973's Roe v. Wade and a couple of subsequent rulings: no state may enact a law that deprives a woman of her right, per Constitutional Amendment 4, to have done what she will with a fetus that cannot survive without her; i.e., until a fetus can survive outside the mother's body, the states cannot keep her from aborting that fetus). And Christians have been fighting to change Caesar's opinion on this issue for at least the last 30 years--and fighting very strongly for as long as I can remember. But Caesar hasn't changed his opinion very much--at least, not in any way that has actually effected legal change. Because life is at stake, all who will should keep fighting. But it is precisely because life is at stake that Christians should also take thought for those months and years in the future in which abortion remains legal.

You may ask, "Why?" If abortion is legal, as long as it remains so, then it should without question be both safe and rare. Safe, because we cannot claim to truly value life if we do not ensure the safety of those women who choose to abort (while they have the governmentally-guaranteed freedom to do so)--their lives are important too. (And seriously, does anyone actually believe that bombing abortion clinics is doing God's work?) And no one, I think, would argue that abortion should be as rare as possible under whatever legal circumstances exist.

So...what should the church do to promote the rarity of abortion? Two things. The first is to learn enough about economics to call upon our elected officials--and perhaps our Christian businessmen and women--to promote positions that lead to job creation. Check this article out for reasons why: http://www.sojo.net/index.cfm?action=news.display_archives&mode=current_opinion&article=CO_041027_stassen
The second and more challenging thing is to simply support pregnant women, especially unmarried women and teenagers. Eighty percent of abortions are performed upon the choices of unmarried women between the ages of 15 and 24--girls who are convinced that their families will not love them so wholly as before; who see in their futures expenses that they can't afford; who see all their career ambitions and hopes for stable, normal families disappear like night-shadows under the sun. But how to "support" these women?

That I think I should leave up to you. Think about all the fears and concerns of a jobless and unwed expectant mother (whose high-school or college education is incomplete), and try and think about ways in which each individual concern can be answered and each specific fear can be stilled. Jesus seems to imply in Luke 16 that his followers should be crafty and ingenious in devising Godly ways to accomplish Godly ends. For him to accomplish the work of our salvation required a cross. How inventive can you be?