Abstinence is Too Easy

"If you asked twenty good men today what they thought the highest of the virtues, nineteen of them would reply, Unselfishness. But if you had asked almost any of the great Christians of old, he would have replied, Love. You see what has happened? A negative term has been substituted for a positive, and this is of more that philological importance. The negative idea of Unselfishness carries with it the suggestion not primarily of securing good things for others, but of going without them ourselves, as if our abstinence and not their happiness was the important point. I do not think this is the Christian virtue of Love. The New Testament has lots to say about self-denial, but not about self-denial as an end in itself. We are told to deny ourselves and to take up our crosses in order that we may follow Christ; and nearly every description of what we shall ultimately find if we do so contains an appeal to desire. If there lurks in most modern minds the notion that to desire our own good and earnestly to hope for the enjoyment of it is a bad thing, I submit that this notion has crept in from Kant and the Stoics and is not part of the Christian faith. Indeed, if we consider the unblushing promises of reward and the staggering nature of the rewards promised in the Gospels, it would seem that Our Lord finds our desires not too strong, but too weak. We are half-hearted creatures, fooling about with drink and sex and ambition when infinite joy is offered us, like an ignorant child who wants to go on making mud pies in a slum because he cannot imagine what is meant by the offer of a holiday by the sea. We are far too easily pleased."

~ Clive Staples Lewis, "The Weight of Glory"

Today is the Day

....for a sweet song and so-so music vid. Enter the low-budget video world of Apollo Sunshine for a few minutes and soak in the goodness this Easter.

Clang

In some of the circles I travel in, I hear snippets of Scripture uttered in a kind of "and that's that" tone. And while that is that, I do think that sometimes "that" isn't too carefully considered. I'm thinking specifically of the Proverb that reads "As iron sharpens iron, so one man sharpens another." In my experience this is interpreted by many as a handful of like-minded dudes sitting in a coffee shop sipping joe and asking each other questions that they either already know the answers to, or have been asked by thousands before them; the question only posed to prove the inquirer's piety.

Call me a literalist, but I can't get away from the idea of, you know, IRON sharpening IRON. It doesn't evoke images of Grandpa gently honing the edge of his pocketknife with a whetstone. If two pieces of the same material are brought together, the result will be violent and unpredictable. Large chunks that you thought were an integral part of your being can be broken off without warning with a harsh noise and bone-rattling vibration. The process of sharpening described here seems to be a bit more chaotic and intense than amiable discussion including questions like "How's your walk bro?"

Another thing to consider is that this Proverb isn't an instructional imperative. We're not told, "Take heed my son and do not follow the fool, who sharpens with moss." This is an observation, much like the preceding line "A quarrelsome wife is like a constant dripping on a rainy day; restraining her is like restraining the wind or grasping oil with the hand." These are the facts. Yet we don't see women running out of the house intent on being as unrestrainable as the wind to their husbands. That being the case, this could be read that iron sharpening iron isn't an inherently good thing.

Here are a few other translations of the same Proverb, just for fun:

King James: "Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend."
NRSV: "Iron sharpens iron, and one person sharpens the wits (or face) of another."

Overheard, But Not By Me

My friend Jason just shared this little narrative with me, overheard by him at a coffee shop in Boulder, Colorado:

"What happened between Good Friday and Sunday morning when Jesus descended into hell?"

"Jesus was kicking ass. That's what was happening. The details, we won't know for a while."

A List of Pictures That Never Need to Be Taken Again

• Statues of the Virgin Mary
• Anyone holding a can of cheap beer with his hat on crooked
• Babies
• A ray of sunshine, inspirationally poking through stormy clouds
  

Please add as you see fit, as I'm sure this list isn't exhaustive.

Not Your Promises, But Mine

So I don't think that the great Muse Lucidity was with me when I wrote this, but I'd had the idea for a while and finally punched out a little essay for my Bible as Lit class. If you're familiar with the stories, just read the last two paragraphs for the meat of the essay.

Not Your Promises, But Mine

Seeing as how our text takes the time to point out specific instances of child sacrifice in the Old Testament, I thought I’d offer my take on what God may be trying to convey here. In order to do so, I’d like to first lay out the three instances of paedo-sacrifice we’ll be working with by briefly summarizing and highlighting relevant aspects of each.

Abraham and Isaac

Undoubtedly the most well known occurrence of child sacrifice in the Old Testament, the story goes that God told Abraham to “Take now your son, your only son, whom you love, Isaac, and go to the land of Moriah; and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I will tell you.” Abraham took two of his servants along with Isaac on a three day journey to the place God told him. When he could see the mountain, he left the two men and gave Isaac the wood to carry for the burnt offering, telling them to stay with the donkey and that “I and the lad will go yonder; and we will worship and return to you.” As father and son trekked onward, Isaac became aware of something missing, namely the lamb to be sacrificed. When he asked Abraham, “God will provide for Himself the lamb for the burnt offering, my son,” was the reply. When they reached the place, Abraham built an altar, arranged the wood, and bound Isaac atop the whole structure. As he drew his knife to slay his son, an angel of the Lord called to him saying “Do not stretch out your hand against the lad, and do nothing to him; for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from Me.” Abraham then saw a ram caught in a thicket, and offered the beast up as a burnt offering in place of his son. (Genesis 22:2-13)

On the surface, this story seems to be nothing more than a testing Abraham’s faith. God asked for the thing most precious to Abraham to be killed by his own hand for Him. If we look back a few chapters to Genesis 15 however, we find some important context for this scene. Abraham seemed distressed that he was unable to have a child with his wife Sarah, and that his heir would end up being one of his servants. God assured him that “this man will not be your heir; but one who shall come forth from your own body, he shall be your heir.” As He led him outside, God promised Abraham “Now look toward the heavens, and count the stars, if you are able to count them. So shall your descendents be.” What I’d like to focus on here is the initiation of a promise being on God’s side. He approached Abraham and made an unconditional covenant with him. This will be further explored after introducing the next two stories.

Mesha

Mesha, king of Moab in the 9^th century BC, provides us with another account of child sacrifice, one that doesn’t end so merrily. Once Israel’s supplier of sheep, Mesha later rebelled against King Jehoram, inviting the army of the northern kingdom to lay siege to Moab. Surrounded in the chief Moabite city of Kir-hareseth as a final refuge, Mesha made one last military push through the Israelite army to Edom, but was forced back. As a last resort he takes his eldest son who would inherit his kingdom, and “offered him as a burnt offering on the wall.” While the text isn’t clear as to who Mesha offered his son to, the Moabite Stone has an inscription attributed to Mesha reading, “Chemosh drove him before my sight,” apparently referring to Jehoram at this battle.

Here, the emphasis seems to be on the weightiness of child sacrifice. A son offered to a foreign god still has enough magic, oomph, whatever you call it to drive back the Israelites. The text is a bit cryptic in describing their reaction, saying only that “there came great wrath against Israel, and they departed from him and returned to their own land.” Yahweh or Chemosh (or both) was impressed with this action to the point of preserving Moab. (2 Kings 3: 4-27)

Jephthah and his Daughter

The last tale of a child being offered to a god comes to us from the book of Judges. Before going to war against the Ammonites, Jephthah the Gileadite made a vow to the Lord saying “If Thou wilt indeed give the sons of Ammon into my hand, then it shall be that whatever comes out of the doors of my house to meet me when I return in peace from the sons of Ammon, it shall be the Lord’s, and I will offer it up as a burnt offering.” The text follows that the Lord gave the Ammonites into Jephthah’s hand, and he returned home. Ironically, the first thing to come through Jephthah’s door was his daughter, his only child. He tore his clothes grieving that “I have given my word to the Lord, and I cannot take it back.” His daughter, seemingly wise and calm beyond her years or circumstance, replied in the affirmative, saying “My father, you have given your word to the Lord; do to me as you have said, since the Lord has avenged you of your enemies, the sons of Ammon.” She asked only for two months to “bewail her virginity” upon the mountains, after which Jephthah “did to her according to the vow which he had made.”

(Judges 11)

In this instance I’d like to again point out the origin of the promise. This time it was Jephthah who proposed the covenant to God and constructed the agreements for both sides.

My point is two-fold: first, that God seems to be very interested in promises being kept. In His dealings with Abraham, He initiated a covenant between the two, one that required His direct influence in keeping by making Sarah fertile to bear Isaac. When Abraham was commanded to offer Isaac on the altar, he knew that if Isaac died, his line would die with him, nullifying God’s promise of descendents. The test was certainly one of faith, but more so the faith of God’s word. In Jephthah’s case, he, a man, made a deal with God on Man’s terms with Man’s foresight. Both parties kept their ends of the deal, but Jephthah’s honor came a much higher price.

To put it more clearly, while God is interested in keeping vows and promises, these stories seem to be here for the purpose of showing us whose promises are worth keeping. Or better, who should be deciding the terms of an agreement between the Divine and Man. Abraham and his descendents are a picture of a kept promise on God’s terms. Jephthah’s misery is the folly of Man striking up his own deal with God.

The second point I’d like to discuss briefly relates more to the story of Mesha. As I said earlier, the gravity of a child sacrificed seems to the overwhelming theme. While I still hold firmly to that, I don’t think that the idea can be fully appreciated without a look towards Christ, and mention of my previous point concerning promises. Taking the Old Testament’s prophets as God’s promise to Man for a Savior, we have a union of the weightiness of child sacrifice with the perfection of God’s vow. There is no doubt that the offering of a child is a powerful thing, as demonstrated by Mesha. At the same time, God has proven that not only will he keep his word, but that his word kept will result in unimaginable good.


I’d like to end with Solomon’s thoughts on vows from Ecclesiastes:

Do not be hasty in word or impulsive in thought to bring up a matter in the presence of God. For God is in heaven and you are on the earth; therefore let your words be few. For the dream comes through much effort, and the voice of a fool through many words. When you make a vow to God, do not be late in paying it, for He takes no delight in fools. Pay what you vow! It is better that you should not vow than that you should vow and not pay.

Ecclesiastes 5:2-5

Just What the Doctor Rx'ed

For all it's disjointedness, I can't stop listening to "The Sons of Cain" from the new Ted Leo and the Pharmacists record Living with the Living. Check it out here, or here if you don't myspace (and you shouldn't). If you're not familiar with the Hype Machine site, just click on Listen after the first song and a flash music player will launch with all the Ted Leo songs. "Cain" is the tenth track or so.

Damien Jurado put on a great little show last night, girl singer/cellist and all.

Project Reading

"One ordinary way of avoiding the conservation doctrine is by suggesting a watch-watchmaker analogy: God's relation to the universe is like that of a watchmaker to a watch he builds, winds up, and puts aside to let it run "on its own." He need not constantly manipulate the gears to keep the correct time; instead, a mark of being a good watchmaker is that the watch is fully functional on its own.

This analogy is defective to the core. What allows the watchmaker to make a watch that works without his continued involvement in its operation is the structure of the universe the watchmaker uses to his advantage in order to secure the continued operation of the watch. The watchmaker relies on the physical constituents of the universe and the physical laws governing bodies, including the watch he is making, to keep the watch working when the watchmaker ceases his activity. In the case of the relation between God and creation, there is no third thing, the structure of which God can exploit in order to secure the continued operation of the universe, should God's activity cease. Because, in Christian theology, God is the creator of all that is distinct from God, any explanation of the continued operation of the universe must appeal to either God or the universe itself, and nothing like this is present in the watch-watchmaker case." ~Jonathan Kvanig, "The Problem of Hell"

Utah!

Mas fotos up at flickr from the recent canyoneering carnival in Utah. I'm told that these pictures are being reviewed for inclusion with an article to be submitted to Backpacker and National Geographic Traveler magazines. I'm thinking about submitting the photos by themselves to some other publications. If anyone has any suggestions, I'd love to hear them. Comment here or on the pictures themselves, thanks much.

Vote for Vanity

Vote For Vanity

My good friends Joel and Amber Nass have created a great little music video for a competition put on by Epic Records. As I understand it the winner gets a record deal with Epic, and I for one am all about facilitating Joel's music. The winner is decided by a stage process, with entrants advancing by winning the most votes in a given week. Joel and Amber have picked this week from March 19th through Sunday the 25th, during which everyone can vote once a day.

You can see the video and vote here, and I would encourage you to do so. I'm also told that one may double one's vote by casting an additional ballot via text message on cellular phones by texting Vael to NATION (628466). Not having a cell phone, I don't know what that means, but if you do, do it.

Mars!

I'm off to Utah for a week of canyoneering adventures. See you soon!

The Humanity

In his series on Islam, Doug Wilson has been repeating the idea that a group of people will tend to become like whatever god they worship. Since Allah is a god of raw power and cosmic bullying, his people act the same way in whatever capacity they can get away with it, be it in their marriages or chest-bombs. Since Yahweh is Love, His people should be more and more defined by relational examples of agape.

Should that be the case, what are the implications of this?

A Problem, Resolved

Once again I found myself sitting in Education 302, this week seeking the deeper ways of the Universe through "Student Assessment Methods." As we were told of yet another presentation to be delivered by each of us on the same topic, my fight or flight instincts pressed against my soul with more urgency than ever. I was just about to pick up and bolt when we lighted upon the assessment method of Testing.

"What," the question was posed to us, "should you do if your test gets either all A's or all F's?" One of the great quandaries of all time, no doubt responsible for the division of families and fall of nations. We all leaned in, eagerly awaiting the spurt from the fount of wisdom.

"Well," (trumpets blare), "you have to be able to adjustify your testing."

How could I leave this class? It's too good...

Old Hat

Just got ahold of some pictures I took this summer and posted a few on zie flickr.

The U.S. vs John Lennon Was Maybe Worth My $2

Two things of note: In an earlier video interview with all of the Beatles during the immediate wake of the "bigger than Jesus" incident, John was asked about his political ideals. As he started to respond, both Paul and Ringo tried to nervously interject a small joke at the same time, then both took on a feeling of unease as John answered the question. It seemed that even early on there was a tension surrounding John's mouthiness about these things.

Secondly, I rarely find any humor relating to weed or being stoned to be the least bit funny. It's nothing pious, I'm not "above" it, wanting to laugh but reluctantly restrained by the Spirit. It just ain't funny. All that to say, I found a weed-related scene of this movie exspecially hilarious. John Sinclair, who was imprisoned for selling joints to an undercover cop, garnered a huge "Free John Sinclair" concert, championed by all those filthy and lit. John and Yoko made an appearance as well. In Sinclair's interview, he appeared to have changed little in spirit since the 70s, and mentioned that one of the first things they did when he got out was to "proselytize for the legalization of weed....while smoking enormous amounts of it at the same time....which I suppose wasn't the best combination....you should really just do one or the other if you want to really succeed in either..."

Senior Surveys

The spirit of survey-taking fell upon me mightily last night and I cranked through three or four asking about my University experience. Here are two of my favorite questions:

• How often (on a scale of 1-6) have you had serious conversations with students of a different race or ethnicity than your own?
• Where do you go, most often, to purchase the necessities for your costume needs?