Money Changers and Baptized Capitalism?

Jim Ketchum, a writer for the Times Herald of Port Huron, MI said this:

Remember the Bible story about Jesus driving the moneychangers and other first-century capitalists from the temple in Jerusalem?

They were selling animals for sacrifices and padding their pockets doing currency exchanges.

Guess what: They're back.

Only this time they're in the United States.

There's no denying you can transform a product's desirability by slapping the adjective "Christian" on it - Christian books, Christian music, Christian clothing lines - as opposed to "pagan" or "heathen" books, music and clothing lines, I guess.

The word implies that buying the product in question somehow will help extend the kingdom of God and propagate the faith. What it really does is help pave someone's personal financial streets with gold.

Now while I agree with him on some parts of his article, I took umbrage with his mischaracterization of Jesus' temple thrashing, so I wrote him the following letter.

Jim,

I had to smile after reading your recent article on the sort of baptized commercialism in the market these days. Baptized inflation, you could call it! However, I'm not so quick to lampoon it seeing as similar things could be said of Jewish and Muslim markets. (Ever noticed the Kosher mark on foods, Jewish dating sites, or the recent increase of Halal markets?) Regardless, I do want to challenge you on one aspect of your criticism. You said that Jesus was attacking 1st century capitalists. While there was probably some up-market pricing, I don't think you have a good view of what was happening.

Jewish pilgrims from across the Greco-Roman and Persian world came to Jerusalem at the Passover to worship in the land of their ancestors (much as Muslims still go on hajj today). While the Torah instructed them to bring animals from their own flocks, many of these urban dwellers were no longer directly involved in herding and farming. Even if they had been, it would be quite impractical to drag an animal from home all the way across the desert sands or the Mediterranean Sea just to sacrifice it in Jerusalem. (What would happen if it died on the way?) Therefore, providing a service to their fellow Jews, certain people set up places where people could buy animals when they got to Jerusalem. Were the prices higher than what you would get elsewhere? Yes. But having recently returned from holiday in London, I can tell you that umbrellas, film, and batteries were more expensive near the major attractions than they were at the local pharmacy. That just makes sense - the space to rent is more expensive.

As for the money changers, they also provided a service. Coins from across the realm were carried by these pilgrims. While the precious metals in the coins were easy to value, the image of Caesar (or some other divine image) on the coin made it sacrilegious to use in paying the Temple Tax. Thus, the money changers exchanged the currency so that it was suitable to use in the Holy City. Again, we do the same thing today. There's a "cut" taken by the money changers at airports, and the same was true back then. Maybe it was exorbitant...we can't be sure.

One thing we can be sure of is that part of Jesus' ire was stoked at the place where the money changers were setting up shop.* The gospel accounts note that a bazaar had been set up in the Court of the Gentiles - the only place where non-Jews (commonly called god-fearers) could worship the true God on the Temple Mount. The court in which all this noise and hustling (literal and metaphorical) occurred was the only court of access for Gentiles when they wished to pray or meditate in the temple. They ought to have been able to worship in peace. Perhaps we could go so far as to say that they had the right to worship in peace. Instead they found themselves in the midst of a noisy bazaar. That's why Jesus specifically says that the Temple was to be a house of prayer for all nations.

*"It is erroneous to suppose that Jesus' action is an attack on the whole sacrificial system. His motive was one of reverence for my Father's house, and of deep concern that the spirit of worship should thus be dissipated at its very door...A place that should have stood as a symbol for the freedom of access of all nations in prayer to God, had become a place associated with sordid pecuniary interests" Wright, quoted in Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1971) p. 195, fn. 68.

Killer Bees invade Palestine!

Yet another salvo from the religion of peace. This time, they're training their children to become jihadist martyrs through television programming.

Here's a transcript, if you can't open the viewer:

Saraa, child host: Who are you, and where did you come from?

Nahoul the Bee: I am Nahoul.

Saraa: Nahoul who?

Nahoul: I’m Nahoul, Farfour’s cousin.

Saraa: What do you want?

Nahoul: I want to continue the path of my cousin Farfour.

Saraa: How do you want to do this?

Nahoul: I want to be in every episode with you on the Pioneers of Tomorrow show, just like Farfour. I want to continue in the path of Farfour – the path of Islam, of heroism, of martyrdom, and of the mujahideen. Me and my friends will follow in the footsteps of Farfour. We will take revenge upon the enemies of Allah, the killer of the prophets and of the innocent children, until we liberate Al-Aqsa from their impurity. We place our trust in Allah.

Saraa: Welcome, Nahoul...

Well done, thou good and faithful servant!

Professor Harold O. J. Brown fell asleep on Sunday night and woke up in glory. He'd been on a slow decline from terminal cancer. When a former student asked him how he was a few weeks ago, he said: "In view of my swallowing and speaking difficulties, my short-term prognosis is unknown but the long-term prognosis is good."

Dr. Brown influenced me indirectly through my friendship with several of his former students. His book on the history and function of heresy in the church (originally titled Heresies: The Image of Christ in the Mirror of Heresy and Orthodoxy) changed the way I view the nature of orthodoxy and heresy. And his ardor in the fight for the Right to Life kindled a flame that has been burning ever more brightly in the past decade. He was a scholar of the highest caliber, holding his BA, BD, ThM, and PhD from Harvard. He was imminently sensible, cautious, and informed in his writings. He was unashamed of being a Christian and a part of Western Civilization.

Above all, his students tell me, he was a pastor. He shepherded his family, students, and two fledgling seminaries into maturity. And now, having himself put away childish things, he sees face to face and knows as he is known.

Almighty and everliving God,
whose goodness it is ever to raise up pastors and teachers for your church,
receive, we beseech thee, the soul of Joe Brown.
Before ever he was an undershepherd to thee, O Christ,
he was a lost sheep which you found.
As he enters the company of the saints triumphant,
grant him rest from his burdens,
reward for his labors,
and the full measure of thy good pleasure,
Thou in whom he didst glory and worship,
in the power of the Holy Spirit. Amen.

Put that in yer pipe and....well

I was inspired by Toby's recent ruminations to revisit the bane of my wife, pipe-smoking.

Here's a poem by R. F. Murray, taken from The Scarlet Gown: being verses by a St. Andrews Man on the subject:

THE BEST PIPE

In vain you fervently extol,
In vain you puff, your cutty clay.
A twelvemonth smoked and black as coal,
’Tis redolent of rank decay
And bones of monks long passed away—
A fragrance I do not admire;
And so I hold my nose and say,
Give me a finely seasoned briar.

Macleod, whose judgment on the whole
Is faultless, has been led astray
To nurse a high-born meerschaum bowl,
For which he sweetly had to pay.
Ah, let him nurse it as he may,
Before the colour mounts much higher,
The grate shall be its fate one day.
Give me a finely seasoned briar.

The heathen Turk of Istamboul,
In oriental turban gay,
Delights his unbelieving soul
With hookahs, bubbling in a way
To fill a Christian with dismay
And wake the old Crusading fire.
May no such pipe be mine, I pray;
Give me a finely seasoned briar.

Clay, meerschaum, hookah, what are they
That I should view them with desire?
Both now, and when my hair is grey,
Give me a finely seasoned briar.

Armchair Theologian but Pew-packin' Participant

Armchair has some excellent Biblical thoughts about participating in local church fellowship!

Register Young People to Vote

Yes - I know that a lot of young people swing Democratic on a large number of issues. But there's one issue that I really care about where youth and I meet on the same grounds: restricting the acceptability of abortion. While most youngsters don't want the government making a complete ban on the procedure, they do support reasonable restrictions (e.g., abortion only in the case of danger to the life of the mother - which the pro-abortion, Planned Parenthood funded Guttmacher Institute reports as the cause of only 1% of all abortions sought).

Peace begins in the womb, and as the ticker on the left shows...we're doing a miserable job of being peace-seekers.

The Death of God(dess)

Dangit! It looks like the "Death of God" theology has finally infiltrated Hinduism and Nepali Buddhism.

This is worse than when Karol Wojtyla died and for nearly 12 days, there wasn't a single infallible person on the face of the earth!

Denver's Inconvenient Power-trip

Ridiculous
Remember, gang:
Carbon Neutral Macht Frei!!!

For Pastors (and Potential Pastors) Only

How cool is this? It's a breath of fresh air to those of us who are on the heady side and tend to be less effective on the administration end of our vocation. And notice that they have their priorities right - the Spiritual competencies come first, then the day-to-day stuff. It's like a free D.Min. without being part of the D-Min-ization of the church!

The baby and the bathwater

Compared to fear-mongering like this, ecclesiastical indulgences almost seem forgivable

Take My Life...PLEASE!

Stushie is way too good at hymn parodies for his own sanity (exhibits A and B). Thus, I'm providing an outlet for him here where we keep things indifferent. To start the mix, I propose my rendition of Take My Life (Hendon) in antiphonal response.

Husband

Take my wife and let me be,
Distracted by my TV
Through vacation and sick days;
Lord please help me get that raise.
Lord please help me get that raise.

Wife

Take my "love," my Lord, I bore.
I'll sleep better without his snore.
In a land where I am free
Divorce costs a tiny fee.
Divorce costs a tiny fee.

Teenage kid

Take my mommy and my dad.
All they do is make me mad.
"Get off MySpace!" "Stop that chat!"
Without them, I'd be called phat.
Without them, I'd be called phat.

Stushie is goint to outdo me on this, but I thought I'd toss in a nugget anyway.

Commenting about REALLY important news

I admit it - I'm too caught up in my own little world to blog about the important issues of the day. (Hey....what do you expect from a blog called Adiaphora?)

Anyway, I've totally missed the defining issue of our time: Paris Hilton in Jail. As my first step towards repentance, I offer this penetrating interview by the Reverend Dr. Steve Brown, Professor of Communications at RTS.

Now I'm off to my prayer closet for 10 hail Anna Nicoles and a latte.

"Hail Anna, full of grease, I am bored with thee; cloying art thou amongst women, and Birkhead is the fruit of thy womb, Dannielynn. Oh-so Scary...."

ONE Voice is getting a little hoarse

I don't know how they keep a straight face:

On the global scene, they tell secular governments and for-profit banking firms to just forget about money that was lent as an investment.

On the national level, they tell local churches that if you want to leave with the property you (and/or your ancestors) paid for, you have to pay them to do it. And God help you in the face of their righteous indignation should it turn out that the presbytery invested a penny in the physical property!



And we still wonder why the PCUSA isn't gaining members at a breakneck pace....

Another Gem from the World's Most Tolerant Religion

A glimpse into the future of our Christofascist state....

LITTLE ROCK, Arkansas -- A secular humanist was sentenced to death for purportedly insulting Christianity's founder Jesus, and a human rights activist yesterday urged Arkansas' governor to spare the man's life.

Joachin Huck, 43, was arrested in September 2005 on the outskirts of the eastern city of Bibleville after residents told police he made derogatory remarks against Christianity and Jerry Fallwell.*

On Wednesday, a court sentenced Huck to death by cream corned casserole under Arkansas' harsh blasphemy laws, which rights groups say have been misused against atheists since former President George W. Bush enacted them in the 2000s to win support of hard-line religious groups.
....
Amerika is a Bapt...er...Christian state where non-Bapt...er...Christians comprise just 3 percent of the population. Anyone accused of insulting Christianity, Jesus or the Bible can be sentenced to death.

Satire? I wish it were, for Younis' sake.

Christianity - you can call it a fable, say it's founder rots in a tomb and its moral imperatives are unjust, and you're likely to get ordained and put on the payroll!

Islam - say something less than ululatingly adulatory about their war-mongering pedophilic prophet and you're likely to be asking "watFa hit me?"

*Please don't read this as "Baptist bashing" - I have great respect for them and enjoyed every class I took at their premier seminary. I simply use it because in the South, you can't spit without hittin' a Baptist - and where I'm from, they tend to lead the charge in getting upset about moral laxity. I just wish Presbyterians had that kind of courage!

Belief in an afterlife and the Virginia Tech Massacre

Immortality-denying Harry Emerson Fosdick penned the following stanza in his rousing hymn, "God of Grace and God of Glory":

Lo! the hosts of evil ’round us,
Scorn Thy Christ, assail His ways.
From the fears that long have bound us,
Free our hearts to faith and praise.
Grant us wisdom, grant us courage,
For the living of these days,
For the living of these days.

Unfortunately, his insipid belief system (especially as it is reiterated these days) is unable to grant the kind of courage needed to face the living of these days. For that, you're going to have to go to something like evangelical Christianity.

Cultural Imperialism

The guys over at Acton are actin' up again. This time, they've pointed out the fatal flaw in mandatory "reproductive health" funding for third world countries.

...the common perception is that population growth causes poverty, so reducing population should also reduce poverty. But the facts do not bear this out. Neither do basic economics....

Statistics show no real correlation between population and poverty....

Despite the evidence, the World Bank continues lavishing American tax dollars on population control when that money could be put to better use on such things as infrastructure, telecommunications, and fighting corruption....

We know the factors that create economic growth and development: consistent rule of law for all citizens, property rights, sensible regulation, and a culture that encourages and rewards entrepreneurial behavior. These traits have never existed perfectly anywhere on earth, but the degree to which they have been present reflects the degree to which prosperity has been achieved. Conversely, where they remain absent -- as in much of the developing world today -- poverty and misery are found in their stead.

Many of the same people who protest the “cultural imperialism” of multi-national corporations like McDonalds, Coca-Cola and Wal-Mart vigorously support forcing the Western, secular sexual morality of contraception and abortion on women in Latin America, Africa and Asia -- many of whom view them as moral evils and a violation of their dignity.

People can choose whether to eat a Big Mac or shop at Wal-Mart, but when foreign aid is made contingent on reproductive health policies that include abortion -- and there is no choice -- that is real cultural imperialism. It is ironic that Europe, the very continent facing an economic crisis because of population decline, is busily promoting its own disease as a panacea for what ails the developing world.

Read all about it here.

Parliament Funk

“A little government and a little luck are necessary in life, but only a fool trusts either of them.”

- P. J. O'Rourke, Parliament of Whores, xxv.

There's an awful lot of politicking going on right now about issues I care about. I get frustrated with Washington and with myself about how issues are framed and approached. As a member of a religion that has been oppressed, ignored, and manipulated by the government (as well as one that has used the government to oppress and manipulate), church-state relations are always kind of foggy to me.

It strikes me as odd (maybe even hypocritical) that folks who normally tell us to keep our Christianity out of politics (for example, on abortion, LGBTQ issues, what have you) see no problem with using Christianity to criticize the government's stand on immigration (SoJo, I'm talking to you!). I'm pretty sure that a lot of this comes down to how we view the perspecuity of Scripture (at least in the Christian tradition). What does it address, and what doesn't it address? Where are normative statements and where are descriptive statements? How do we discern?

In my seminary training, there was no course offered on hermeneutics - the science of interpretation. We're paying for it now that we have a little bit of biblical knowledge, a whole lot of "praxiological reflection," and no where to hang it all within a system because - other than systems theory - there is no acceptable systematic expression of life because that's a product of European intellectual hegemony. Most of my assumptions are either implicitly derived from the way confessional documents interpret Scripture or are simplistic statements that need to be parsed (such as Scriptura sacra sui ipsius interpres, which assumes that the Scriptures have both veritas and claritas). I've been supplementing my training by reading folks like Craig Blomberg, but it would have been nice to have this in the curriculum.

What to do....

NCC Holds the Line...in contempt

Can someone please tell me why the anti-Trinitarian heretics of the Swedenborgian Church were granted admission to the NCC?

Can someone please tell me why the PCUSA is funding the NCC so extravagantly while we starve our own missionaries?

Correspondence on discipline and doctrine

Here's my initial email.

Rich,

I'm heartsick as I write this, but I don't know to whom I should turn.

Is Holston Presbytery aware of the theological positions of John Shuck? He broadcasts them on his blog, casting vitriolic derision on anyone who asks why a Presbyterian minister denounces the bodily resurrection of Jesus, the unique/ontological divinity of Jesus, and the inspiration of the Scriptures. Many (if not most) of his "theological explorations" end up equating God with the universe, or some other panentheistic concept. This is most repugnant because it represents a thorough collapse of Trinitarian Godhead. Given the level of misuse and neglect of the Trinity throughout our denomination (on both "sides"), the last seems especially troubling.

Am I alone in my concern for both him and the sheep entrusted to his care? I've gone to him personally, and communicated privately and semi-publicly. I'm not sure what else I can do

--
Chris

Here's the response I got.
Chris,
Thanks for your email.
You ask, "Is Holston Presbytery aware of the…" I can't speak for all of Holston Presbytery… but I can speak for myself and in regard to the Constitution of the PCUSA. So, let me try to address those concerns from my perspective and the Constitution.
I am aware of John Shuck's blog site. John is free to express his opinions and theological views—although much of what is on his blog are the viewpoints of other scholars and theologians—even if they are different from yours or mine or even mainstream Presbyterianism. John (and any ordained officer or church member, for that matter) is not free to depart from the practice of Presbyterian polity or Scripture.
The examination of officers and candidates for ordination is where an individual's conduct and beliefs are tested and judged by the Constitutional standards and according to the session's or presbytery's sense of orthodoxy. Church discipline in the PCUSA is designed to bring about repentance, reconciliation and restoration for those who have acted contrary to Scripture or the Constitution of the PCUSA.
John has appropriately and Constitutionally been examined by the Committee on Ministry, approved for membership in Holston Presbytery, and John has affirmed the Constitutional Questions required of ordination. I am not aware that John has acted contrary to Scripture or the Constitution of the PCUSA. (Just as I am not aware that you have acted contrary to Scripture or the Constitution of the PCUSA.)
I and the Committee on Ministry are charged with the responsibility of caring for pastors and congregations. Ideally, as the entire body of Christ, we all care for one another. So, my answer to your question, "Am I alone in my concern for [John] and the sheep entrusted to his care?" would be "No, you, Chris, are not alone."
Richard L. Fifield

I've sent comments along to other ministers within our presbytery, asking them to talk with John or the COM or the EP. No response has been given.

I was always proud (in a good way) to be from Holston. Good work is going on there. The gospel is being faithfully proclaimed (in word and in deed) by presbyters, deacons, and "laity." But when it comes to exercising discipline (formal or otherwise) against "troubler(s) of Israel," I'm guessing this is going to go in pretty much one direction.

I imagine that my CPM will see this as further evidence that I'm too adversarial to lead a church. Maybe. I doubt that the "heretics" at the various congregations I've served would say so. I'll talk Spong and Borg with them, and gently express what criticisms (and true statements) I find therein. But they are church members. Sometimes they are officers - but none are ministers.

As I read Paul's instructions to Timothy and Titus, the most pastoral approach to take with people that are unsteady in their doctrine is an educational one backed up by prayer for illumination and kindness. But this is not acceptable with those who would teach and lead. To turn a blind eye or deaf ear is not only unloving to the person who is stumbling in their doctrine, it's downright hateful to those who are under their teaching authority.

When I spoke with a friend in the Renewal network, I was asked if this was a hill I was willing to die on. The answer is "yes." I will risk my future in the PCUSA in order to clarify our denominational position towards those who mock the bodily resurrection of the Lord Jesus and decry God's merciful provision of salvation through Christ as mere exclusivist provincialism.

To that end, here are my public questions of complaint.
1. I'm not a polity guy, so there are things that aren't always clear to me. But my reading of the "shall" statements in our Directory for Worship (especially 2.2007, 3.3101(1), and 3.3401d) seem to necessitate that sermons be based upon the Scriptures. Would that mean that sermons based on the Gospel of Thomas or the Gospel of Mary are acts contrary to our Constitution?

2. If doctrine doesn't matter, why would Timothy be instructed to watch both his life and his doctrine , because his (and his hearers') salvation was impacted by it?

3. Is preaching about the rotting body of Jesus an acceptable position within Holston Presbytery?

The problem isn't that Mr. Shuck reads and posts about these things. I'm all for that sort of freedom. The problem is that he believes them - so convinced is he of the truth that the Bible is not inspired (a belief he sees as sentimental at best, spurious, pernicious, and moot at worst), Jesus' body is still in the grave, and that there is no afterlife that he PREACHES these doctrines from a pulpit of Holston Presbytery. He veers dangerously close to (if not into) gnosticism, docetism, and unitarianism. If these doctrines - which are condemned by the Church catholic - are acceptable in a Minister of the Word and Sacrament in our denomination, then I need to know now before vows bind me any further.

As for me, there seems to be a veiled implication of my activity that is contrary to Scripture or our Constitution. I must admit that I have acted contrary to both. When I see the standards of righteousness and justice set before me in the pages of Holy Writ, I know that I not only fail to meet them but in many cases I willfully transgress. When I led a catechism class through the Westminster commentary on the Decalogue, I caught a renewed sense of my error (both in omission and commission). I was also driven even more forcefully to Christ as my only righteousness before the Godhead (and a foreign righteousness, at that).

That's why resurrection is such a big deal to me. I sin in my body and in my mind. And Paul declares that Jesus was raised for my justification ( Rom. 4:25). If Jesus is just a man, then he died for his own sins and not for mine - and that leaves me with a vain faith and no hope.

I have spoken with Mr. Shuck personally. I have communicated with him electronically. A number of ministers and elders from around the country have communicated with him and he still does not recant. I have no other option but to ask the church to intervene - for his sake and for the sake of his hearers. And if this action is considered unloving, mean-spirited, or arrogant then I need to go somewhere else, because I can almost guarantee that at some point in the future, I'll need a loving rebuke too.Hier stehe ich; ich kann nicht anders. Gott helfe mir! Amen.

Like momma always said

Sin can be forgiven, but stupid is forever.

*p.s. - I shouldn't have said "stupid." That was wrong-headed and petty. It was also inaccurate. The reason I think he's responsible - in fact morally culpable - for the teaching of heresy is because at Princeton he would have been taught the history of them.

Bibliolatry canard

When debating religious liberals (notice I'm not saying "liberal Christians"), you'll often have the claim of "bibliolatry" thrown up in your face if you provide Scriptural references for why you disagree with them.

I came across an interesting section of Deuteronomy that addresses the issue:

“You came near and stood at the foot of the mountain, while flames from the mountain shot into the sky. The mountain was shrouded in black clouds and deep darkness. And the Lord spoke to you from the heart of the fire. You heard the sound of his words but didn’t see his form; there was only a voice. He proclaimed his covenant—the Ten Commandments—which he commanded you to keep, and which he wrote on two stone tablets. It was at that time that the Lord commanded me to teach you his decrees and regulations so you would obey them in the land you are about to enter and occupy.

Notice that the voice is not idolatrous - it's doing things the voice says not to do that ends in idolatry (see commands 1 & 2). Passing on to others what the voice has spoken is commended. Trying to create impressions of it is not.

We believe that Jesus is the Word of God, the rationalizing principle of the universe. Words help us re-member Jesus. "Bibliolatry" is simply a way to construct ones own Jesus - a Jesus who is accountable to us (what we can "know" and "historically reconstruct") instead of the other way around.

Come thou what?

I'll admit it...I long to be the Weird Al Yankovic of Church music but I'm just not talented enough. That's why I'm enlisting your aid. Help me be the melodical satirist I think I am. Here's a starter:

Come, thou Fount of every blessing
Give me what I want today.
Entertainment never ceasing
Paths of comfort line my way.
Not a song penned by some geezer;
Sung in days of hymn and chant;
But a sure-fire people pleaser,
That will make the elders rant.

I leave it to you talented musicians and lyricists to complete the hymn. When we're finished, I fully expect this to become the next great classic of the faith and be included in The Presbyterian Hymnal v. 2.1.

Cheers to the Religion of Peace

Is anyone* really convinced that Islam is a religion of peace?

I'll tell you someone who isn't: Ismail Radwan, the spokesman for Hamas.

For a healthy dose of reality-laced satire, go here. (If the high-brow approach suits you, read this.)

By the way, does anyone else laugh at Eleanora Giddings-Ivory's suggestion that we remove religious language from political dialogue, saying that we should instead talk about peace and justice? After all, she spends most of her time telling us that we should make peace and justice our moral and religious priorities (and not those side issues like abortion and homosexual activis...I mean civil rights.).

*[I mean anybody outside of Iran and these thirteen "religious leaders" (yes! Thirteen - a landslide)]

Avoiding Hell

Since our society is fond of top ten lists, what better way to introduce the subject of how people can avoid hell than in a top ten list format. Take a look at the list below & see if you have ever heard anyone use any of these reasons or ways to avoid & even deny hell.

Top Ten ways to avoid hell…

10. Claim hell was only a trash heap outside of Jerusalem (see Gehenna)

9. Claim hell was an invention of the Western Greek Hellenistic mindset

8. Claim hell was an invention of Pharisees to threaten people into obedience

7. Claim hell was an invention of Roman Catholicism to threaten people into obedience

6. Claim hell was an invention of Right-wing Fundamentalists to threaten people into obedience

5. Claim hell was an invention of fill in blank , with whatever group you hate.

4. Claim hell was an invention of Paul after he high jacked Jesus’ message of “love”

3. Claim hell is just a way for self-righteous people to feel like they are special

2. Claim hell is just a way for self-righteous people to condemn others

1. Claim hell doesn’t exist

Shamelessly ganked from thekingdomcome. It doesn't mention that Hell was really an invention of Zoroastrian dualism - just like Paradise.

Or you can just get one of these:

Prayer for Illumination - Easter 3C

Inspired by the texts for the week:

Self-revealing God,
Because it has pleased you that
the same sun which melts the ice
also hardens the clay,
grant that our hearts may be made
more responsive to the light of Holy Scripture
as it witnesses to the Sun of Righteousness,
even Jesus Christ, the Light of the World,
who, along with you and the Holy Spirit,
are due all praise and glory, honor and power,
wisdom and strength, now and forever. Amen.

I'll be preaching on Rev. 5:1-14 this Sunday. Orare pro mihi.

Environmentalism in the inbox

Received this today from a friend and verified it at Snopes.com and several other blogs (including Canada's own Treehugger.com).

LOOK OVER THE DESCRIPTIONS OF THE FOLLOWING TWO HOUSES AND SEE IF YOU CAN TELL WHICH BELONGS TO AN ENVIRONMENTALIST.

HOUSE # 1:

A 20-room mansion (not including 8 bathrooms) heated by natural gas. Add on a pool (and a pool house) and a separate guest house all heated by gas. In ONE MONTH ALONE this mansion consumes more energy than the average American household in an ENTIRE YEAR. The average bill for electricity and natural gas runs over $2,400.00 per month. In natural gas alone (which last time we checked was a fossil fuel), this property consumes more than 20 times the national average for an American home. This house is not in a northern or Midwestern "snow belt," either. It's in the South.

HOUSE # 2:

Designed by an architecture professor at a leading national university, this house incorporates every "green" feature current home construction can provide. The house contains only 4,000 square feet (4 bedrooms) and is nestled on arid high prairie in the American southwest. A central closet in the house holds geothermal heat pumps drawing ground water through pipes sunk 300 feet into the ground. The water (usually 67 degrees F.) heats the house in winter and cools it in summer. The system uses no fossil fuels such as oil or natural gas,and it consumes 25% of the electricity required for a conventional heating/cooling system. Rainwater from the roof is collected and funneled into a 25,000 gallon underground cistern. Wastewater from showers, sinks and toilets goes into underground purifying tanks and then into the cistern. The collected water then irrigates the land surrounding the house. Flowers and shrubs native to the area blend the property into the surrounding rural landscape.

HOUSE # 1

(20 room energy guzzling mansion) is outside of Nashville,Tennessee. It is the abode of that renowned environmentalist (and filmmaker) Al Gore.

HOUSE # 2
(model eco-friendly house) is on a ranch near Crawford, Texas also known as "the Texas White House," it is the private residence of the President of the United States, George W. Bush.

So whose house is gentler on the environment? Yet another story you WON'T hear on CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, MSNBC or read about in the New York Times or the Washington Post. Indeed, for Mr. Gore, it's truly "an inconvenient truth."

Any guesses as to whether or not this will make a difference to the lefties?

Didn't think so....

Something Truly Indifferent

Alright. Adiaphora are supposed to be truly indifferent, and I haven't blogged much on inessential things (or much of anything). To that end, I offer this post:

Where is the Red Dawn equivalent of the War on Terror? I mean, there have been a few movies that obliquely reference the Iraq War (normally posing as generic middle east conflict/conspiracy or - following the M*A*S*H route - are set in a different conflict or a parallel reality). But this is not high schoolers taking up arms against the enemy.

(This was prompted because I just found Red Dawn at Wal-Mart for $5.50! What a bargain!)

Unmistakable Truths

Hmmm... dig up the corpse of Jesus and you get to claim that your faith is not beholden to fact because you can make it a metaphor or just dump the whole "realism" project. (Not to mention that everyone else who disagrees with your interpretation does so from intellectual dishonesty or, worse, moral bankruptcy.)

Dig up something an anthropologist claims is a human ancestor and you demand that everyone's faith claims have to change in accordance with that "fact."

Anyone else smell inconsistency? (Hint: it smells kind of lemony.)

Evolution and relativism = "unmistakable truth" over which only the mentally deficient can disagree.

orthodox Christianity = misogynistic powerplay for privileging a narrow "western" view.

A most fascinating hermeneutic....

The Baby and the Bathwater

At the dawn of the Middle Ages, Western Christendom began to teach that it was immoral to bathe. This has a long history in the ascetic branches of the church (and its predecessors in Judaism - cf. John the Baptizer). In fact, two of the Seven Ecumenical Councils actually wrote Canons (laws) against public baths (Laodicea and Trullo). In practice, it was far from uniform. One bishop is remembered for two things: his wit and the fact that he bathed twice daily (Sisinius, the first sissy?). Meanwhile, St. Augustine was asked if it was okay to use baths that had cultic connections (cf. 1 Cor. 8).

The real reason, as Clement of Alexandria (2nd c. AD) demonstrates, was a condemnation of licentiousness. Baths were seen as lusty both to the senses and to the sex. They were indulgent, and thus to be avoided (even though some room was left for acknowledging their benefits). Avoiding baths became rather extreme (such that in the Arabian Nights, a Muslim suggested that once Christians were doused with baptismal water they felt entitled to avoid bathing for the rest of their lives).

What we need is an encyclical or ecumenical council or something that says it's pious to bathe. That way, the French can claim they don't wash because they like staying secular.

Online Evangelism

Below is a transcript of a conversation I had this morning. A 13 year old boy (TW) raised by Wiccans has apparently had a friend telling him about Jesus. He turned to me for some answers. Please pray that God uses the planted seed to the salvation of this young man.

TW: Hi

TW: my name is Xxxx

Me: Hi, Xxxx.

TW: I found your profile on the yahoo members page, and I think it said you were a minister......or at least a christian

Me: Yes.

TW: ok

Me: The least of Christians, perhaps.

TW: really?

Me: Probably not - I’m a big guy. What can I do for you?

TW: I had a few questions if thats ok

Me: Sure

TW: ok

TW: What do you worship as a christian?

TW: one God.......instead of a God and Goddess right?

Me: One God, that’s correct.

TW: ok

Me: It’s not exactly accurate to say God has a gender, though God has revealed as a Father.

TW: ok

TW: So is Jesus another name for God?

TW: or someone seperate

Me: Ah...it looks like you are asking for some clarification on the greatest mystery of the faith.

Me: The Doctrine of the Holy Trinity, correct?

TW: im not sure what that is

Me: Fair enough.

Me: There is only one “thing” that can be called “god”

TW: im 13, and my family is wiccan, so I know nothing about christianity

TW: but i am curious and maybe one day I want to become christian

Me: It’s okay - I was actually Wiccan during college.

TW: wow

TW: and your a minister?

TW: for a christian church

Me: One of the greatest heroes of our faith, a man named Paul of Tarsus, was a persecutor of the early church (in the decades following Jesus’ death).

Me: Nevertheless, God used Paul to write nearly half of the New Testament (the portion of the Bible that deals explicitly with Jesus).

TW: ok

TW: Ive read some of John in the new testiment

Me: God uses all kinds of people, and his greatest delight is in making his enemies his friends.

Me: John is a great place to begin.

Me: It not only tells the story, but it also talks about the importance of those events.

TW: thats what I was told

TW: are you parents christian

Me: Yes.

TW: ok

Me: I was raised a Christian and believed in “god” but didn’t want to accept Jesus as the focus of God’s work in the world.

TW: ok

Me: To go to your original question, you were asking what Christians believe about the nature of God.

TW: right

Me: We believe that there is only one God - one entity, if you will - that is God. And that God is all powerful, all knowing, all loving, all holy, all GOOD, etc.

Me: However, God is also three persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

TW: ok

TW: I think I understand

Me: To be honest, we can say more about what we know God is not rather than what/who God is.

TW: ok

TW: what is God not

Me: To illustrate: There are not three Gods, but only one God. God is not “made up” of three persons; rather God is three persons.

Me: God doesn’t “switch hats”: now acting like the Father, then acting like the Son, and sometimes acting like the Holy Spirit.

Me: Rather, each of those persons is fully God.

Me: One of the most ancient - and beautiful - explorations of God is called the Athanasian Creed.

TW: ok

Me: Another place to look for why Christians believe this doctrine is found here.

TW: ok

TW: thanks

Me: No problem.

Me: Here is a helpful analogy, comparing the Trinity to a book. For example, a book has length, width, and thickness. The length is not the book’s width, the width is not the book’s thickness. These three dimensions can be described separately, yet they are connected together. If you remove one dimension, you are no longer describing a book. In the same way, the Godhead has three separate members that are connected together, and if you try to remove one you no longer have the Godhead.

TW: ok

Me: Does that make sense?

TW: i think so

Me: Don’t worry if you find this perplexing.

Me: Any honest Christian will say the same thing.

TW: ok

Me: God is so much greater than we are - it’s impossible for us (trapped in bodies, experiencing time in a linear fashion, of limited mental/spiritual capacity) to truly understand a God who is infinite.

TW: ok

Me: The important thing to know is that God loves us, and we see that love in the person and work of Jesus Christ.

Me: Have you ever felt guilty?

TW: maybe

Me: I have. That’s because we know that there are some things that are right and some things that are wrong.

Me: Even the Wrede teaches that to harm another is to bring harm to yourself and the world (three-fold harm)!

TW: right

Me: Yet we say nasty things to each other, and sometimes do nasty things to each other.

Me: And we heap the same abuse upon ourselves.

TW: ok

Me: The things that we do to hurt others and our world is called “sin.”

Me: Sin breaks our relationships with other people, with ourselves, with our world, and - most importantly - with God.

TW: ok

Me: God does not want us to miss out on who he is - all of his goodness.

Me: So Jesus - who is God the Son in human flesh - came to earth.

TW: ok

Me: He taught us how to live, he healed the sick, he fought the powers of darkness, and then - at the appointed time - he died on a cross.

Me: The Bible says that the wages of sin is death.

Me: That means that when we sin, we’ve earned death.

Me: But the gift of God is eternal life. God the Son takes our punishment for us.

Me: The debt for sin - which is death - is paid for in his death on the cross.

Me: God proved to us that the sin-debt was canceled by raising Jesus from the dead.

TW: ok

Me: Because of Jesus Christ, we can have peace with God.

TW: awsome

Me: When we have peace with God, we begin to change from the inside out.

Me: God restores all those relationships that we messed up with our sin.

Me: He makes us able to love him and know him, for the first time.

Me: He makes us able to really love other people - for who they are, rather than what they can do for us.

Me: Peace with God means we can have peace in ourselves, too.

TW: what makes you think I cant already love people for who they are?

Me: I didn’t say you couldn’t.

Me: Genesis - the first book of the Bible - tells about how God made the world.

Me: When God made humankind, the Bible says that he made us “in his image.”

Me: That is - there is something inside of us that resembles God.

TW: ok

Me: And when we are able to love God, we can love other people in a deeper sense because we understand that they carry the image of God in themselves.

TW: ok

Me: You’ll understand - hopefully - one day when you have children.

Me: I have four children, and when I look at them I see something of myself reflected back at me - yet with their own distinctiveness.

Me: And I love what I see - myself and my wife in them, as well as the unique person they are.

TW: sooo

TW: whats your name dude jw

Me: My name is Chris.

Me: Christopher, actually. It means: “Bearer of Christ” or someone who carries the message of Christ into the world.

Me: My mother named me well.

Me: Brent, let me just say that it is a real privilege for me to get to speak with you.

TW: thanks

TW: but why

Me: Why? Have you got your Bible?

Me: Or the Gospel of John?

TW: i know of an online bible

Me: Read this: http://tinyurl.com/32ll8t

Me: It’s a privilege for me to share with you what little I know about how much God loves us in Jesus Christ.

TW: ok

Me: That link was to Jesus’ words.

Me: The sin in our lives keeps us from even being interested in learning about God.

Me: So when someone has these...stirrings...it can only be because God is already at work in their lives.

Me: God brings us to himself, draws us into his embrace.

Me: And it’s a real privilege for me to see how God is already calling out to you.

TW: i gotta go

Me: God bless you!

TW: later

Me: Keep reading that gospel of John

Keep going out into those information highways and byways, folks!

"May the Lamb that was slain receive the reward of His suffering!"

Esoteric Presbyterianism

A certain minister in good standing with my presbytery has a church member who actively promulgates (in writing, lectures, etc.) the following doctrines:

• The infinite and eternal Godhead manifests through a cascading hierarchy of divine entities, energies, and laws. The divine entities include the Solar and Planetary Logoi, Sanat Kumara, the archangels and angels, the Hierarchy of Masters, and ourselves. A cosmic entity of even greater power and consciousness than the Solar Logos is associated with the star groups: Ursa Major, Sirius, and the Pleides (sic; Pleiades, ed.).
• At every level the divine force is expressed first through a triplicity and then a septenary. The triplicity is referred to in Christianity as the Trinity. The septenary consists of the seven rays. Together, the triplicity and septenary can be compared with the ten sephiroth of the Kaballah.
• The Christ--the World Teacher--is the head of the Hierarchy of Masters and the embodiment of divine love on Earth. Two thousand years ago the Christ overshadowed the Master Jesus to create the "historic Christ."
• The Hierarchy of Masters owes its origin to an impulse from the star Sirius, which forms the heart center of the cosmic entity mentioned above.
• The great dramas of human history, such as the life of the Historical Christ, are part of a larger story that also includes the world's myths and legends.

I'm left shaking my head in wonder that a Presbyterian minister endorses this stuff without any mention that the whole idea of "emanations" from the "pleroma" of the Godhead is nothing more than a rehashing of the Gnostic heresy. (No news yet as to whether this guy is the new Sunday School Supervisor.)

I understand the fascination with mystical and esoteric thought. In fact, I did an independent study in Jewish Mysticism while an undergrad, and further work on Merkabah Mysticism in a class on Apocalyptic Literature in seminary. But to broadcast approvingly with no guidance as to where it crosses the line and steps outside of Biblical Christianity - especially on a blog that's part of one's teaching ministry - seems rather...incomplete.

Don't get me wrong. I like John as a person. We have a tremendous amount of stuff in common. He's a damn-decent human being. But that doesn't stop me from being critical of heresy - and this one is full of it.

What makes Jesus so unique?

James Tabor's article makes the same mistake that all heretical movements make: Jesus is the messenger, but not the Messiah.

The message he carried wasn't vastly different from the message that other rabbis preached. It wasn't really different from that found in the prophets or in the Torah.

What makes Jesus unique is the claim he makes about himself as the particular summation of God's saving acts in the world. Jesus' claim to be the Savior - to be God in the flesh - is what was distasteful to his contemporaries. His "I AM" statements, his exclusive claims to access to the Father, his ability to send the Spirit - all of these make him unique (not his teaching or his healing ministry). It is Jesus' ontology rather than his deontology (who he is rather than his moral teaching) that makes him the Savior of humankind.

Liberalism's problem (well, one among many) is that it sets up a mindset that distinguishes Jesus based on differentiating him from his contemporaries in such a way that little can be found in common. It was precisely this mindset that led to German scholarship being so derisive and dismissive of the Israelites (thinking of their religion as Primitive whereas Christianity is an enlightened opening of that Urreligion). It sets the Jews up as scapegoats - rejecting the religion of enlightened peoples and thus worthy of contempt. (sho'ah, anyone?)

I'm not saying this doesn't happen within "conservative" circles. Certainly, dispensationalists are quite dismissive of the faith of the Hebrews (despite Hebrews 11-12!). But the Reformed (i.e., Biblical) Christians take a different view: Adam was equally a member of the same Church as Paul.

Why? Because their faith was centered in The Coming One, the Serpent-trodder (Gen. 3:15), their Savior who was displayed to them in types and shadows until the time was fulfilled.

The message was there in the Torah all along. They weren't waiting on the message or even a new messenger - they were waiting on a messiah - the Mediator of the everlasting covenant.

Maranatha! Come, Lord Jesus!

Lamentations 2:14

"Your prophets have seen for you
false and deceptive visions;
they have not exposed your iniquity
to restore your fortunes,
but have seen for you oracles
that are false and misleading." (esv)

Silence about sin is not a good thing. Exposing sin allows people to turn from it. Exposing sin allows it to be recognized for what it is, so that we can walk in obedience. Reading through Lamentations, I get the sense that the narrator who bewails Jerusalem's razing would like nothing better than a chance to recognize sin in time to do something about it.

That's part of why I stay in the PC(USA). I believe that it is an imperative for those who minister to sound the warning. But it's equally important for me to hear denunciations of my own sin. There are times when I let sins that society endorses (pride, greed, etc) sneak up on me - heck, sometimes I even relish them. And it's at that moment that I need somebody with a different perspective to point me to a broader reading of the Scriptures with a chance to repent.

May God continue to send instruments of his hand - sharpening irons - in my path. Amen.

Trendy Bracelet Slogan for PoMos

I was ruminating the other night about all the zany alternatives we came up with for WWJD at several Presbyterian youth/college meetings back in the mid 1990s. It started me thinking about what kind of slogan I'd have to use now that I'm cemetary edumicated. Here's my stab at it:

What Do You Think Jesus Might Have Done In a Given Situation, Recognizing Our Limited Knowledge as Finite Human Beings and Our Distance from the Historical Context?

Of course, how you get WDYTJMHDIGSROLKFHB&ODHC on bracelet (or even a belt) might require more power than even the God of Open (pan)Theism wields!

Discovering Divine DNA

Okay...they've tested the DNA of the Talbiot tomb and found that the woman named Mariamene and the man they claim is named Joshua (the name is scratchy and hard to make out) are not related on their mother's side. Big whoop.

If the skeptics want me to believe that it's really Jesus of Nazareth, they're going to have to show one convincing bit of evidence: haploidy. Of course, if he's really virgin-born would we even be seriously considering that his bones would be on earth?

10 Things the Process/Open Theism God might say

(Why I Am Not An Open Theist)

1) Oops!
2) I think this will work.
3) Wow – I won’t do that again.
4) Uh-oh.
5) Huh?
6) There’s always plan B, C, D, E, ....
7) Let me get back to you on that...
8) Whoa! I didn’t think you’d do that.
9) C’mon, c’mon, c’mon – YES! I love it when a plan finally comes together.
10) Dude – no way! (exclamation of incredulity upon learning something new and unexpected)

Holston Heretics

John Shuck, a Nicodemite MoWaS in my presbytery of care, has made the bold claim that fundamentalism (of the "Jesus got up bodily from the dead" type) is a heresy and that orthodoxy has never made the claim of a carnal resurrection.

Thus, I've asked him to take me to court and let us see who the church deems heretical. Here's my response:

Fundamentalism is a heresy? Orthodox faith never claimed a bodily resurrection?

Do you say this out of ignorance or resistance?

• John underscores Jesus' resurrection in a body with physical form in two post passion narratives;
• a panoply of confessions from the Bible;
• Irenaeus confesses a bodily resurrection and ascension in the 160s;
• the Apostles Creed places Jesus' passion and resurrection in history by lumping it with Pilate's reign - then insisting on a resurrection of the body / flesh / carnis / sarkos
• Calvin, in the Consensus Tigurinus says that the ascended body of Christ is physical and thus locally removed from the sacramental elements
• the Scots Confession puts it as strongly as it can by sayin he was resurrected and ascended in "the selfsame body which was born of the virgin, was crucified, dead, and buried, and which did rise again (which is what the rest claim or assume, but is here set forth explicitly).
  

Tell you what, John. How about you put me on trial at the June presbytery for being a fundamentalist. In turn, I'll ask you to defend your position on the physical resurrection of Jesus. You can even go first.

It'll be great! (You did enjoy Gawain and the Greene Knight, didn't you?)

Talpiot Tomb Tricks Truant

I just posted the following at John Shuck's blog. No claims to originality - most of this was culled from various readings and some outright copied from Ben Witherington.

A couple of things:

1) Craig Evans has written a recent (2003) article on Jewish burial traditions, focusing on how they illuminate the Gospel narratives. You can find it in a PDF file here.

By following his footnotes, you can find a wealth of information. Take a look at the Anchor Bible Dictionary or the Encyclopedia Judaica (you can read the old article on burial here). You'll find that the Gospels reflect intimate acquaintance with these traditions.

You'll also discover that the tomb of the family of Jesus would not be in Jerusalem. It would be somewhere in Galilee or Bethlehem (either the one in Galilee/Zebulun or the one in Judea/Judah).

2. The tomb was discovered in a suburb of Jerusalem back in 1980 by arcaheologists of the Israeli Antiquities Authority (though outside of the Jerusalem of ancient times, as all burials had to be done outside the city). Amos Kloner and Joe Zias, two of the original archaeologists involved in the project, have openly repudiated the findings of the show in strong terms, both on television and in the public forum.

Let's face it - if Jews could prove that they had the body of the man Christians say was resurrected (and Muslims say ascended without death), why would they sit on it for twenty years?

3) It does seem to date from before the second century, and it is a very nice tomb belonging to a middle-class (or better) family. It was decorated from the outside and on the inside with a strange rosette shape, indicating the attention was to be drawn to it rather than being a secret.

Do we believe that Jesus' family was well-to-do? Do we believe that anyone associated with Jesus and his family closely enough would want to draw attention to his burial place? It could hardly be argued that any of his disciples would want to do so.

4) The names are a big problem for those who believe it's the biblical Jesus. Some names are in Hebrew, others in Aramaic, and the one of Mariamne is in Greek! That suggests it's a multi-generational tomb (rather than everyone being piled in there at roughly the same time).

5) History of the names - Richard Bauckham provides the following statistics. Out of a total number of 2625 males, these are the figures for the ten most popular male names among Palestinian Jews. the first figure is the total number of occurrences (from this number, with 2625 as the total for all names, you could calculate percentages), while the second is the number of occurrences specifically on ossuraies.

1 Simon/Simeon 243 59
2 Joseph 218 45
3 Eleazar 166 29
4 Judah 164 44
5 John/Yohanan 122 25
6 Jesus 99 22
7 Hananiah 82 18
8 Jonathan 71 14
9 Matthew 62 17
10 Manaen/Menahem 42 4

No mention is made in the documentary of the fact that though we only have a few hundred ossuaries with inscribed names, there is in fact another ossuary with the inscription 'Jesus son of Joseph'. Apparently this was not a rare combination of names at all.

For women, we have a total of 328 occurrences (women's names are much less often recorded than men's), and figures for the 4 most popular names are thus:

Mary/Mariamne 70 42
Salome 58 41
Shelamzion 24 19
Martha 20 17

At one juncture we are told that the name Mariamenon is found in Hippolytus a second century church historian. Two problems with this. Firstly so far as I can see, that name never occurs in the works of Hippolytus [I'm using the Lightfoot The Apostolic Fathers vol. i, part ii (London, 1889-1890)]. Secondly, Hippolytus died in about A.D. 236. He comes to us from the end of the second century A.D. He could never have known any eywitnesses or even second-third generation followers of Jesus. Even if he did mention the name in question (the one on the ossuary found at Talpiot), he provides no early second century evidence for this name, much less for the theory that this name is one way of referring to Mary Magdalene.

In fact the Acts of Philip, at best a fourth century document is the basis of the theory of Prof. Bovon that Mariamenou Mara= Mary Magdalene, but nowhere in that document are the two equated. The woman referred to in that document is an evangelist in Greek who is the sister of Philip (whether Philip the apostle or the later Philip the evangelist found in Acts 8, is up for debate).

In sum, there is a reason that every Biblical archaeologist, save possibly one, interviewed either in the Discovery Channel special or in the hour long debate thereafter repudiates or is unpersuaded by the findings of the show.

It's not the tomb of the biblical Jesus of Nazareth.

If you want to find his body, you'll see it come together (usually on Sunday mornings) to be fed on the Word and then sent out into the world.

Or you can ask John Dominic Crossan to point to some fossilized dog turd to find the remains of a Jewish rabble-rouser that people falsely called God.

Kanye West and Katrina Konniptions

You'll remember rapper Kanye West's outburst at how the callousness of wicked white folks (especially George Bush who "doesn't care about black people" so much that he's appointed more African Americans to high level cabinet positions than any prior president) prevented aid from reaching non-white victims of Hurricane Katrina. (video here) He said that he would contact his business manager "to see how much I can give" because the government wasn't doing enough.

Apparently, his business manager now thinks that so much money has been spent rebuilding the lives of those effected by the disaster that Kanye can afford to spend nearly $5,000 dollars on one meal flown in to New York from a restaurant in Cardiff, Wales.

Folks, you can't make this stuff up.

Global Warming again

I'm not a scientist (2/3's of an undergrad pre-med education - which doesn't qualify me jor jack squat). I don't play one on TV. So I when I want to know about science, I ask a scientist.

Timothy Ball is a climatologist with impeccable scientific credentials. He has championed a thorough-going review of global warming claims. A recent interview has some gems for those who are skeptical of the claims made in the last decade. He also suggests a number of websites to read about further critiques. Here's a sampling of some of his inconvenient truths:

“...consensus is not a scientific fact.”

'[T]hey have switched from talking about global warming to talking about climate change...since 1998 the global temperature has gone down -- only marginally, but it has gone down. In the meantime, of course, CO2 has increased in the atmosphere and human production has increased. So you've got what Huxley called the great bane of science -- “a lovely hypothesis destroyed by an ugly fact.” So by switching to climate change, it allows them to point at any weather event -- whether it's warming, cooling, hotter, dryer, wetter, windier, whatever -- and say it is due to humans. Of course, it's absolutely rubbish.'

“[T]he world has been warming since 1680 and the cause is changes in the sun. But in their computer models they hardly talk about the sun at all and in the IPCC summary for policy-makers they don't talk about the sun at all. And of course, if they put the sun into their formula in their computer models, it swamps out the human portion of CO2, so they can't possibly do that.”

Something I really appreciate is how he reminds us of things we should have known - like how the earth has warmed since the Little Ice Age and how beneficial the Medieval Warming Period was for human civilization (wiki articles - ymmv). Similarly, Archimedes Principle suggests that claims of low-level inundation are grossly inflated. I agree with him that the most likely player in terran climate change is the sun. This is backed up by repeated scientific observation and solid historical correlative data.

Anyway, it's something to look at. One thing I know for sure - I don't trust politicians playing scientists.

God of the oppressed and the oppressor

Why do people act as if God has an agenda of salvation for the poor/oppressed and damnation for the rich/oppressor? (Especially odd in folks who would never suffer anything that clear-cut in terms of non-economic/political morality.) Ecclesiastes 4:1 seems to lament that both oppressed and oppressor need a comforter (paraclete?). Moreover, it was a fundamental tenet of the Mosaic law that you don't give impartial favor to anybody - poor or rich!

Jesus ate with poor outcasts (prostitutes, etc.) and rich ones (e.g., Zaccheus). And let's not forget that he supped with Pharisees - the righteous orthodox - on a regular basis. Now that's the table-fellowshipping Jesus we need for today!

Global Warbling

After reading this article, I have but one choice: VEGETARIANISM.*

*Not because I love animals, but because I hate plants.

Seriously, I think that there are a lot of people rushing to judgment 0n this issue. It's getting to the point where dissent is not tolerated - even when it's well documented and reasonably argued. Where's the humility at the complexity of terran climatology?

Free to be Offended and Offensive

Selwyn Duke makes some excellent points in his recent article about offensive speech.

Let me whet your appetite:

If you can’t defeat your adversaries in the arena of ideas, you have to keep them out of the competition; if you can’t refute what’s argued, you must stop it from being spoken.

The voicing of the unpopular, being the very soul of free speech,
the right to give and take offense shall not be infringed.

Sometimes I think it is time to insert the above into our First Amendment.

So, first you demonize speech refutative of your agenda by labeling it “offensive,” which cultivates social codes and attendant social pressure facilitative of the change you desire. Then, as these social codes become more widely accepted and entrenched, expressing them through rules and laws becomes more acceptable. This leads to the next stage, the organizational expression of them – the speech codes in various private institutions. And once sufficiently inured to these, it’s time for the last stage of this imprisoning of ideas: The legislative expression of these social codes known as hate speech laws.

Thus, there is a lesson here we ignore at our own peril. You can have freedom from being offended or you can freedom of speech, but you cannot have both.

This is why I have no tolerance for the Offensiveness Ploy. It is manipulation by the mediocre, victory for the vacuous, derision by the dull.

I encourage you to read the rest of the article. I firmly believe free speech is losing ground in academia and will soon be non-existent in the public sphere.

Resurrection Fun

Okay - it's Lent. That means that we're preparing ourselves for one thing: EASTER!!!

I understand that our repentance (which should be continual, but is especially intentional in this season) is often accompanied by a somber turn of character. However, in the interests of keeping Lent a truly proleptic time of anticipation (kinda like Advent), I encourage everyone to repent of their unbelief in the true, bodily resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Sure, there are people who don't believe it and say as much (some of whom who should really know better). But there are plenty of folks that would confess belief in Jesus' triumph over death, yet the accompanying joy of that fact never reaches their hearts (much less their daily living). Folks, there is only one response to Jesus Christ having been raised for our justification (Rom. 4:25) - a more profound ALLELUIA!!

As James Dennison reminds us:

Eschatological death is past for us—Jesus paid it all.

Eschatological judgment is past for us—Jesus endured it all.

Eschatological wrath is past for us—Jesus bore it all.

Eschatological righteousness is present for us—Jesus has it all.

Eschatological forgiveness is present for us—Jesus gives it all.

Eschatological life is present for us—Jesus lives it all.

Even now to those who are in Christ Jesus—no condemnation!

Even now to those who are in Christ Jesus—no more wrath!

Even now to those who are in Christ Jesus—no more death!

Even now to those who are in Christ Jesus—you are justified!

Even now to those who are in Christ Jesus—you are forgiven!

Even now to those who are in Christ Jesus—you have been raised from the dead!

In that spirit, I encourage you all to take this whimsical test by Gary Habermas.

They Might Be Giants - Minimum Wage

This is the referent to the last title.

test for backup

What date does this show? Is it added to blogarithm