Current Events

So Farah Fawcett died this past week. Farah Fawcett goes to heaven and meets St. Peter, and St. Peter says, "Farah Fawcett, you seem like a good person who's led a good life, and I'm also secretly a big fan of Charlie's Angels, so I'll grant you one wish." Farah Fawcett shuts her eyes and thinks for a minute, then says, "I just wish there were something that could happen that would make all the children of the world safe."

Man Things

I noticed a few days ago that the men's bathroom at work has a bank of four urinals. In accordance with man law, it's very bad form to take a urinal adjacent to someone already peeing: protocol dictates one empty stall as a buffer. So why then would you design a bathroom with an even number of urinals in a row? You're basically wasting a space because only two people can pee in a bank of four, whereas two people could still pee in a bank of three and maintain the necessary one stall separation.

Recently, I went to a social gathering with the men from my church in Saratoga. We ate wings and drank beer and for this particular Monday night, the men gave sound wisdom and supportive prayer for one of them who was about to get married. I generally like these guys, and I realized that I felt somehow that they were more real, genuine people because they were at ease with themselves and because they drank, smoked, and cussed about as often as I do, which is something you rarely find in a group of men who take their faith and their church seriously. The pastor was there and everything. Now, it's obviously true that these vices or habits have nothing to do with being either authentic or pretentious, or even good or bad. But it's interesting that I had to consciously recognize my thought as an errant misconception. Winston Churchill's quotation, "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice," came to mind, and while you can debate its truth, I think the perception is a powerful one.

I know a lot of strong Baptists out there who would flip out at the presence of alcohol at a church gathering, and I tend to opine that you shouldn't add extraneous rules to biblical living: just because you don't like alcohol or you think social drinking is a bad idea doesn't mean you can make it a biblical principle not to partake. And the same with smoking or cussing or gambling. And I hate the idea that what separates us from the world is anything other than the redemptive grace and salvation of Jesus Christ, as opposed to the stereotyped behaviors of not-smoking, not-drinking, not-cussing. But at the same time, one has to pause upon reading Romans 14, which says that even the perception of sin can easily lead fallible people to real sin. And while it's not the case for me, could some people be motivated by the desire to be perceived as a "cool Christian" as opposed to a churchified square? Because doing anything solely for that reason would also be a bad thing.

Things to think about at tomorrow night's poker party, and by think about, I mean think about while I'm possibly smoking, drinking, and gambling.

Vive La Compagnie

I am the one who encourages other believers to step outside of their comfort zones and to push past Christian convention. But here is something else that is true: it's always a palpable blessing to come home to a fellowship of believers.

My friend Mithun reminded me of that truth in his recent blog post:

"Much of it has to do with, I believe, the assumptions that pervade my environment. In law school, all of my reading, all of the class time I attend, and most of my conversations with friends have an implicit secular assumption. Behind each word lies the quiet whisper of 'there is no God, there is no God, there is no God….' Here, the opposite is true. The reading and lectures, as well as all the conversations with my 109 fellow Blackstone legal interns, have a common premise which is not at war with my deepest beliefs, but instead is in harmony. Every word has in its background the growing declaration of 'Christ is Lord, Christ is Lord, Christ is Lord….' I am beginning to re-view the law, society, and culture, from a Christian perspective."

There is great value in a questioning mindset, and there are definite problems with camping in a sheltered Christian comfort zone. But the follower of Jesus Christ is often best set up for success in the company and encouragement of other disciples. As Ephesians 4 explains,

"And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting, but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head -- Christ."

By default, I tend to push for the consideration of alien ideas, for re-thinking theology through different perspectives and paradigms, for syncretistic thinking. These approaches have their place and their benefit. But reflecting on Scripture, there are multitudinous key passages that warn the reader: build your house upon solid ground, vice shifting sand (Matthew 7). Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ (Colossians 2). Do not despise prophecies. Test all things: hold fast to what is good (1 Thessalonians 5). O Timothy! Guard what was committed to your trust, avoiding the profane and idle babblings and contradictions of what is falsely called knowledge (1 Timothy 6).

Scripture is clear and consistent on the point that there are a lot of false ideas and philosophies out there that would ask you to believe in their veracity; Scripture is adamant that we hold fast to Jesus Christ and His gospel, and it commands us so because God knows we are easily distracted and confused, and that by leading us away from life, false ideas lead to destruction. Strong fellowship in community with other Christians is one of God's great safeguards for us.

My friend Bonnie asked my opinion about her possibly dating a friend with firm agnostic beliefs and remarkable six-pack abs. And what I told her was this: that you can't substitute a lifetime partner who will ground you in the truth of Jesus Christ and always remind you of your first, best love for a conversationalist, no matter how good a conversationalist this boy may be. It sounds judgmental, and it's not meant to be, but I'm convinced that in marriage relationships, the goal is to look out for and promulgate the other person's welfare, chiefly in the sense of his or her relationship with God. A brilliant conversationalist makes a good friend, but Eve was formed to be Adam's helper and conjugate.

I've had these thoughts for a while, but the watershed moment for me was a few weeks ago during church service. The church I attend in Saratoga Springs includes as part of its service a time for faith stories or sharing, in accordance with 1 Corinthians 14:26, which frankly is a great practice. And one of the ladies said three words with great authority and conviction: "Father, you reign."

I've posted a lot of words and thoughts on this blog, and I've spoken and listened to even more with other thinkers, but sometimes, when someone speaks the truth, all it takes are three simpler words conveying one simple concept, and you're left with nothing but awe and appreciation. Because to that point, it had been a long, long time since I'd stopped to admire God for who He is, to dwell in the truth of "Father, you reign."

We do love the notion of being called to remote places as lone emissaries of the gospel. We pray the prayer of Isaiah when he declares, "Here am I, Lord, send me." We use the words "stranger in a strange land" and "in but not of the world" with considerable frequency. Sometimes, God does call us to leave our comfortable place and go to Nineveh alone. And it's true that Jesus, in His final hours on earth, was very, very alone in His path.

But I like to think that Jesus's time on earth wasn't a lonely one. He was certainly relegated to a human body and away from His rightful place with His Father. But do you think He felt alone surrounded by lepers, prostitutes, and tax collectors? Or do you think He felt joy to live in communion and proximity with His beloved creation, whom He had foreknown and for whom He gave His life? I think Jesus took real joy in fellowship with His disciples in particular. It was certainly good motivation to bring the fish and the bread to Lunch Bunch.

Like a King, I may live in a palace so tall
With great riches to call my own.
But I don't know a thing in this whole wide world
That's worse than being alone.

All this to say, while God may sometimes call us to a wilderness time, I'm happy to have found a church in Saratoga Springs.

The Two Hour Interlude

I spent most of today making a delicious meat stew, partially in hopes of bartering for some birthrights, but I got no takers, which is probably what I deserve for using beef in lieu of venison.

The other night at Bible study, I realized how much it matters to me that I approach Scripture in a way that I can really legitimately and usefully understand it. My current job involves a lot of technical instruction and training from written operational procedures and technical manuals, and a lot of them are incorporate a lot of glaring inconsistencies, shaky assumptions, shady explanations, or loose approximations that engender a lot of indignant protest from the exacting engineering major being trained. But for the sake of consistent training and operation, we have to go with the flow and accept what's written in the technical manuals: we have to hit the metaphorical "I Believe" button. Well, I realized I have a really hard time just letting things go with Bible study. When someone says, "Oh, I read this article online that said this is the answer, so there we have it" and considers the matter settled, I have a hard time not pushing the issue because I view the study of Scripture as an imperative pursuit of truth. I want to make as few blind or unfounded assumptions as I can. So the thought crossed my mind that we shouldn't have an "I Believe" with the Bible. A second later, I thought that sentence was hilarious, and so far, nobody else has found it remotely funny.

But on the topic of unpacking assumptions and textual understandings of the Bible, some of my friends from my old Messianic Jewish congregation sent me a link to a two hour sermon entitled The Hebrew Yeshua vs. the Greek Jesus. The title doesn't really apply until the last fifteen or so minutes of the 2 hour video -- a more descriptive title would have been "Rejecting the Exclusivity and Arbitrary Nature of Rabbinical Authority." If you have two hours free, absolutely watch the video. Watch it with a grain of salt (some of his facts and conclusions are a little dubious), but also watch it in the context of how you interpret truth from Scripture. It's a very compelling message.

I jotted down some notes, some observations to supplement the heavy-handed cases made in the sermon.

-- Gordon makes the case that the Pharisees, by expanding the Torah into a legalistic and hypocritical system, transformed the Law from something doable to something impossible to obey. But according to many passages in Romans that comprise a lot of the basis for how we generally understand the gospel, Jesus's sacrifice on the cross was necessitated by the truth that we as sinful humans could not uphold the holy and perfect Law of God. Even if the Pharisees added a lot of legalism and hoops to jump through, the Law that taught us what right and wrong are was never achievable for our flawed natures.

-- It makes sense that Gordon would omit the aspect of grace inherent in the gospel of Jesus. As a Karaite Jew, he would understand things in the more transactional paradigm of the Torah. For anyone to make it, either the Law has to be doable for a human being, or substitutive atonements have to be made. I guess that's still true in our understanding of the New Testament, but we more or less jump to the conclusion that we fall short of the Law and that Jesus was our ultimate and complete atonement.

-- In the same sense, Gordon concentrates solely on Jesus as a Rabbi, a teacher of the Torah. It's a reasonable distillation given Gordon's background, but again a narrow focus that needs to be recognized and taken into account.

-- The whole discussion of how the Pharisees decided that they had the exclusive right to interpret Scripture with a degree of infallibility decidedly recalls a lot of Catholic arguments for Papal authority in certain levels of magisterium.

-- It's true that legalism and the Pharisees' system of earning your righteousness is antithetical to the gospel of Jesus, but there's also a danger to be recognized in completely throwing out tradition, adaptation, and convention. The gospel is meant for the whole world and thus has to translate into different cultural manifestations: some good and beneficial practices will not find their bases explicitly in Scripture. Also, Scripture is sometimes very difficult to read and interpret. While Gordon mentioned that it was meant to be understood by the practice of reading the scrolls aloud to masses of Israelites, there are also a lot of passages about believers who have received the gift of teaching for the edification of others. It's at once very simple and at once very abstruse.

-- Gordon's final challenge to the audience is true, to some degree. Given a Hebrew Yeshua who corroborates the Torah and a Greek Jesus who updates the OS (or some variety of hybrid or halfsie), we Christians do have a choice to make about whom we're following.

And then again, at a certain point, you have to stop chasing rabbit holes and live your life, and it's at those times that you need an "I Believe" button.