lingamish

Cyber-Psalm 74

David — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 05:11:01 +0000

Listen to Cyber-Psalm 74 - read by David Ker in a bizarre accent
Author insert a music with WS Audio Player
(Download) this music.

I need a miracle. Lyrical and elusive.
Mirages and memories simply won’t do.
Proximate and intimate not ancient intangible.
In your face, before your eyes, mystic magic trick.

Supernatural sight and sound. Transformation. Trick of physics.
Not a happy correlation with fuzzy causality.
Not a happenstance parking space near the mall entrance.
I’d like some boom and whoosh, Ta-da and trumpets.

Where has gone the Spirit on the water?
Why no flames and mighty rushing wind?
Has the Spirit gone into hiding?
Ephemeral, intangible, internal, unverifiable?

Faced with the facts yet still so hopeful.
Praying and believing and thanking and seeing.
God’s hand in the chaos. Christ gigantic inhabiting the heart.
Chasing Bigfoot in the forest. Seeing ships fly in the stars.

Christians are crazy. Talking-to-the-invisible-rabbit kind of crazy.
I’d like to introduce you to my imaginary friend.
This joy-filled existence is a crazy miracle I believe in.
A spirit bursting with sweet fruit where death and dark held sway.

Chewing on pearls

David — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 10:19:55 +0000

7:6 Do not give what is holy to dogs or throw your pearls before pigs; otherwise they will trample them under their feet and turn around and tear you to pieces.⁸

⁸tn Or “otherwise the latter will trample them under their feet and the former will turn around and tear you to pieces.” This verse is sometimes understood as a chiasm of the pattern a-b-b-a, in which the first and last clauses belong together (“dogs…turn around and tear you to pieces”) and the second and third clauses belong together (“pigs…trample them under their feet”).

(Matthew 7:6, NET Bible)

What’s interesting to me about this verse is that the standard exegetical methods fail to help you understand or apply this passage.

1. Look at the immediate context

This doesn’t help for a couple of reasons. First, this is a section of Matthew in which a series of parables or sayings are strung together (like pearls) but only by the most tenuous thematic string. I fail to see how verse 6 is related to verses 1-5 or verses 7-12.

2. Look at parallel passages

There are none. None of the other evangelists include this saying.

3. Look at cross references

Possibly Matthew 15 could be considered a related passage. Possibly Luke 15 and the Prodigal Son. But there is no clear thematic tie to this passage anywhere in the Bible. 2 Peter has a clear collocation of pigs and dogs:

Of them the proverbs are true: “A dog returns to its vomit,” and, “A sow that is washed goes back to her wallowing in the mud.”

(2 Peter 2:22, NIV)

4. Dig into the Greek

Possibly there is something in the structure of the passage that indicates that it is connected to what precedes or follows it. Unfortunately, the section seems to be self-contained. If most translations, and in fact most Greek editions, have put verse six at the end of the preceding passage it is only because it clearly doesn’t make sense at the beginning of the next passage.

5. Historical context

Dogs and pigs are common props in the New Testament. They are unclean, scavengers and, metaphorically, dog is a pejorative term for non-Jewish peoples.

This verse is quoted in the late 1st century in the Didache:

But let no one eat or drink of your Eucharist, unless they have been baptized into the name of the Lord; for concerning this also the Lord has said, "Give not that which is holy to the dogs."

The Didache, Chapter 9

6. Commentaries

There’s a nice selection of older commentaries at Biblios.com: Matthew 7:6. But I’m not seeing anything very helpful there. At this point I would usually dig into some modern commentaries and tools like the IVP Bible Background Commentary. IVPBBC doesn’t have any thing to offer. Morris is likewise uncertain of the position of the verse in the context and it’s interpretation.

Morris does mention an interesting reference:

An interesting use is for the utterances of a great person: “The mouth that uttered pearls…” (Qidd. 39b).

7. Grasp at straws

Ask a child what it means
Google it on the Internet
Blog about it and hope someone comments with an insight
Admit you don’t know what it means (Very progressive and postmodern position, these days… )

So, I don’t know what to do with this verse. Any ideas?

Wish you were here

David — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 14:10:52 +0000

Chocas del Mar, near Nacala, Mozambique

No related posts.

Please leave a message at the beep.

David — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 15:56:03 +0000

Beep

No related posts.

Jesus, the sinner

David — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 05:08:33 +0000

I’ve been chewing on a comment I heard in a sermon on Sunday. The preacher claimed that Jesus by perfectly fulfilling the Law was able to be the perfect sacrifice for our sins. His sinless life is clearly affirmed in the epistles. What is interesting is that the Gospels present quite a different picture. He is called a friend of sinners. “Are we not right in saying that you are a Samaritan and have a demon?’ Jesus seemed to go out of his way to break as many commandments as possible. He touched dead people. He touched the sick, leprous and demon-possessed. He went far from the Jewish homeland to hang out with unclean tribes. He broke the Sabbath at every opportunity. He used the sacred name in public. He claimed divinity and direct descent not from Abraham but from God. He’s also presented in the Gospels as more human than God. He gets angry, exasperated, loses his temper, shouts down religious leaders, calls a foreign woman a dog.

Even though the Gospels appear first in the New Testament they were actually composed after the epistles. There’s something counter-intuitive about this. Memories grow rosier over time. Saints become more saintly and flaws are suppressed. But here the opposite has happened. The epistles of Paul and Peter strongly affirm Jesus’ divinity and underplay his humanity. Then the Gospels come out and they do just the opposite.

I hear resonances of this in the Old Testament. Have you ever wondered why all the “saints of old” are painted in such a negative light? Abraham, a liar. Jacob, a deceiver. Moses, a reluctant and angry leader. David, a murderer and adulterer. Even in the New Testament the “hall of faith” might just as well be called the “hall of shame” or a rogue’s gallery. The genealogies of Jesus in Matthew and Luke are quite the list of shady characters, loose women and blackguards. What’s going on here? Compare this to hagiographies during the Middle Ages where there is an atmosphere of tinsel and fairy tales that is far from the rough reality of the Bible.

Jesus was remarkable not for being a cardboard saint but for being a bad boy. He was a rebel and an outsider and his followers loved him for it. Jesus was the Che Guevara of his generation and he’s most potent as a counter-culture symbol of revolution not perfection.

Legendary photos from the Hippo House

David — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 05:30:28 +0000

In March 2000, a mere nine years ago, Benjamin came into our family, and then all the big kids got puppies in May. Eleanor is holding Sunshine. Henry is holding Dziwa Bzako (Nyungwe for “Mind your own business”) and Andrew in the red hat is holding Abigail.

Alas, Abigail disappeared soon after. But Dziwa lived for many years. Now Sunshine is the only one left and she lives a lonely existence out at the Croc farm. We’d like to have her nearer but she’s cranky and has a special fondness for biting children in school uniforms…

Sorry for this but I’m playing with photo galleries and discovered these pictures when looking for pictures of my Dad!

As for the story of the Hippo House, that will have to wait for another day.

[Show as slideshow]

[View with PicLens]

Things I like about my Dad

David — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 17:05:18 +0000

I like the way he says “buh-dup a dup bup bup” when he’s backing up the car.
I like the way he falls asleep watching movies.
I like the fact that I’ve never heard him swear.
I like that he ran his first marathon at age 50.
I like the way he treats my wife like his own daughter.
I like how he can make conversation with anyone.
I like it that he’s always reading new books.
I like how he watched me make a lot of mistakes in high school and college.
I love him for still giving me a kiss on the cheek.
I like it that we have the same shoe size so I can steal his slippers.
I like it that he drives an old car but put four kids through college.
I like it that he likes the Beach Boys.
I forgive him for tricking me into grabbing the electric fence when I was little.
I love the fact that he has supported me 100% from the very start in my call to missions.
I like how he has always written me letters.
I’m glad he’s a cheapskate (but will spend thousands of dollars to visit me in Africa).
I’m amazed that he understands how to fix cars.
I like how he and his wife complement each other.
I like being able to tell my sons, “Be like Pappa when you grow up.”
I like his weakness for jelly beans.

Happy Father’s Day, Dad. I love you and admire you.

Photos from January 2000

Since Veggie Tales went out of business

David — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 04:47:48 +0000

I’ve decided to come out with my own vegetable praise album

Here is a tentative list of songs. See if you can come up with some more:

The Brocs cry out
Lettuce go to the house of the Lord
Olive you is more than enough for olive me
Amazing Grapes

Outside of a dog

David — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 06:33:29 +0000

Outside of a dog, a book is a man’s best friend. Inside of a dog it’s too dark to read.

Groucho Marx

I’ve been tagged by several people for memes. Memes are what bloggers did before they had Facebook. But now they’re back.

The latest two I have received are:

I can’t think of noblesse oblige without Bertie Wooster coming to mind. And if I am some sort of nobility of the blogosphere I have inherited it and people keep me around like the embarrassing nephew who is always besmirching the family name.

2. Books that influenced my reading of the Bible

I do want to respond to this second meme. I enjoyed reading the answers of others and their answers made me realize just what an uneducated bumpkin I am.

1. The Children’s Living Bible

I saw this Bible recently on my kids’ bookshelf. It was my childhood Bible. Not one but two of my sisters had crossed my name out of the inside and put their own name in before I rescued it. The illustrations, the binding, everything about this edition, oozes God’s love for little children.

2. The CEV Contemporary English Version of the Bible

I know this is supposed to be a meme about books that have influenced my reading of the Bible not the Bible itself but for those who consider a translation a commentary on the Bible not the Bible itself this should come as no surprise. My a-ha moment was in reading this clear-as-living-water translation with my children and realizing that they were understanding God’s word in a way they never could when I read the NIV to them.

3. Better Bibles Blog

I loved the messy, noisy wide-open interaction of a blog where anyone could contribute rather than the exclusive btrans mailing list that I had previously followed. The diversity of contributors and especially commenters broadened my view of the Bible, leading to…

4. Bible bloggers

John Hobbins, Bob MacDonald, Iyov, Doug Chaplin, James McGrath and more continually shook my foundations. Only in writing and responding to these people did I begin to reconcile the disparity between my stated beliefs and my heart’s core and discover a reverence for God’s Word that transcends fundamentalism and infallibility.

5. African story-telling

Only in reading and hearing stories about Rabbit did I understand Jacob, the antihero. And it was in seeing history turned to myth sometimes within hours of an event did I begin to appreciate the Bible as literature rather than an apologetic collection of proof-texts.

Cyber-Psalm 73

David — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 04:34:15 +0000

Praise to Jesus. Praise the son.
Praise the Conqueror, victory won.
Praise celestial come to earth.
Praise the lowly praised at birth.

Glory, praise and thanks eternal.
Rescued from all foes infernal.
Ever thanking, ever praising.
Ever hallelujahs raising

High to heaven praises fly.
Here on earth praise fills the sky.
Hoping though broken.
Guilty yet pardon spoken.

Loving fiercely through the hating.
Faith fading in the waiting.
All I’ve wrecked, God’s grace remaking.
Heavenly imagination in the making.

Glory bursts out from within.
Song of life redeemed from sin.
Glory all to shining king.
Song and life and tribute bring.

Go ahead and use a Mac

David — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 20:13:33 +0000

But stop trying to get me to use one. A computer is a hunk of electronics not a Tickle Me Elmo for grownups.

Free yourself. Let go of your idol. Gather around the bonfire and toss that white gleaming image into the flames and watch the fire envelope your digital demon. Apple is a cult. All the signs are there:

Fierce loyalty to a “Book.”
Constant proselytizing of unbelievers.
It’s all you think about.
When others make fun of you, you lash out excessively.
When your image lets you down you blame yourself.

This site features a lot of satire. I’ve made fun of missionaries, evolutionists, feminists, cat owners, and KJV Only advocates, but never, I mean never, have I got the kind of hate-filled emails like when I make fun of Apple. Just today, a Facebook friend unfriended me (I’m not joking) because I made a rude comment about Mac. Ouch. Either I’m an insensitive jerk or somebody’s a little bit touchy.

Missionaries should not use Macs. They are luxury items for the rich. Missionaries should drive old cars and use Toshibas or Dells. A car is for getting you from A to Z. A Hummer is an idol. A computer is for getting work done. Here’s the honest truth. No Bible translation software runs on an Apple. All the software is for Windows. So if Apple owners want to be translators they have to spend still more money and buy software to make their computer act like a cheap computer that they could have bought off the shelf for the price of a 32GB iPod.

Maybe Mac owner=cat lover without a cat. That’s all I can guess. Does someone else have a better idea of why people gush over these things the way they do?

My dirty secret

David — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 20:17:12 +0000

Sometimes I read Jim’s blog. I try not to. But I can’t resist.

No related posts.

Psalm 26 in the hotseat

David — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 05:38:13 +0000

John Hobbins has been posting a series of translation comparisons of Psalm 26:1-3. (1, 2, 3, 4, 5). I considered writing a scathing review of his review but that’s hardly the way to begin your week. And in fact much of what he is saying, despite pounding us with cryptic terms like “syntagm” and other high-falutin’ phrases, is right on the mark. My question is more practical: How would you preach Psalm 26? My first inclination was to say that this is a classic depiction of self-righteousness that proceeds from observance of the law. The whole Psalter provides a spectrum of self-righteousness. It begins with the proto-good guy of Psalm 1 and ends with exaltation of God in Psalm 150. I think that’s a good picture of how our faith should progress. Certainly a realization of the moral standards of a holy God should cause us to flee wickedness and strive for holiness. But a better still is to take our eyes off people both good and bad and turn them on God. Every creature and with every means at our disposal should sing Hallelujah to the one in heaven who is alone righteous.

If I were preaching Psalm 26, I might mention Luke 18, in which Jesus lampoons Pharisaical smugness and instead praises the contrite unholy. The tax collector of parable becomes flesh and blood in the person of Zachaeus in Luke 19 and his story is, it turns out, the climactic moment of Luke’s Gospel. “For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost.”

Still if we merely use Psalm 26 as a counter-example for justification by faith, we miss an important truth of this Psalm and the whole Jewish worldview. This Psalm is based firmly on a notion of God’s goodness, his theodicy working itself out in our practical striving for perfection in the expectation that his justice demands our acquittal.

The puzzle of Psalm 26 is the opening, “Judge me.” How best to translate this in English? With Hobbins, I think “vindicate” or “acquit” is the wrong metaphor here. God is a judge in a heavenly court of sorts but he is not passing judgment on the Psalmist’s innocence but rather mediating between two parties in conflict. The metaphor here is of Moses deciding cases between Israelites in conflict in Exodus 18. This verb in Hebrew is commonly used in the sense of “mediate between” two parties. “

Psalm 26:1 jingles

I’m a righteous dude / But I’m being sued

Get me off the stand / I’m an innocent man

I’m in the hot seat / I’ve got a rap to beat

Clear my name / Don’t let me take the blame

John mentions metaphorical language outside the realm of the judicial and I found that very helpful. One metaphor that intrigues me is in verse two:

proba me Domine et tempta me ure renes meos et cor meum (Vulgate)

Lord, preue thou me, and asaie me; brenne thou my reynes, and myn herte. (Wycliffe)

Prove me, O Lord, and try me; burn my reins and my heart.(Douay-Rheims)

Examen me O LORDE, and proue me: trie out my reynes and my hert. (Coverdale)

Most English translations say something like “examine my heart and mind.”

Following Alter’s “Burn pure my conscience and my heart,” Hobbins suggests, “with fire refine my heart and core!” I like that a lot. It reminds me of Yeats’ “I feel it in the deep heart’s core.”

After all of this I’m still not sure how I’d preach this Psalm. Perhaps I need to pound a pulpit and see what I say.

Landie Love

David — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 14:02:26 +0000

It’s that time again for a little bit of Land Rover worship. Not just one photo but several stretching back more than a decade.

1999: Here I’m dragging a dugout canoe through Katsanya. After that the people stuck the boat in the water and then listened to the Nyungwe translators read Scripture portions in Nyungwe. Cool!

2000: Heading off on our first big trip into the interior of Mozambique. Action Packers and jerry cans on the roof. You can see baby Andrew peeking out the back door.

2003: Notice the tire on the hood. That is so macho. At least until it cracks the hood. I’m talking on the cell phone next to my Landie in Dinthi. Life is good.

2005: A rare shot proving that Hilary does occasionally take photos. She’s got her feet up on the dash because the tail pipe runs right under her feet bringing temperatures up to toe toasty levels.

2007: Check out the branch hanging from the grill. The boys are whacking each other with sticks. We camped at the farm by the river and I was sick all night from my undercooked hamburgers. Fun!

2009: Back in the saddle again. Heading down a road in Malawi on the way back to Mozambique after six months in the US. It’s so great to drive in a vehicle that growls.

That’s a little taste of Landie Love. Thanks for bearing with me.

Tomorrow we get in the Landie and travel jillions of miles over bumpy roads and through shark-infested swamps with Amazonian warriors shooting poisoned darts at us. So thanks for praying that we get there safely.

Esteban Vázquez is now at WordPress

David — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 10:16:57 +0000

That guy that used to blog over at Blogger has moved up the next link in the evolutionary chain and is giving away a book in celebration: http://voxstefani.wordpress.com/2009/06/10/in-which-you-reap-the-benefits-of-my-covenantal-blessings-or-a-giveaway/

Now I don’t have to deal with that dreaded Blogger comment system and those devilish captchas. But then what would I have to say about any of the esoteric subjects that EV posts on. Well, I like to keep an eye on him since he broadens my horizons and is one of the most ~~amiable and well-written Bible bloggers~~ dangerous heretics out there.

The biggest excitement is that he has changed his avatar to better reflect his proud ethnicity. See image.

P.S. If you think I posted another post about this same subject but with a different title and subject matter you’re just plain wrong. Never happened.

P.P.S. No need to send me the book, amigo. I don’t have the foggiest idea what it’s about and I don’t care. Ignorance is bliss.

Oswald Chambers, CS Lewis and the Patriot Bible

David — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 15:08:23 +0000

My post Christian patriotism is up at ThinkChristian. It looks at the religious/patriotic writings of Chambers and Lewis in wartime. I stumbled on this scary picture while looking researching the post.

Mr. Popper’s Creationist Penguins

David — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 07:17:38 +0000

Although I am at my core a Creationist, my role in our homeschool is to be the resident skeptic. My ears perked up when from the other room I heard young voices saying, “Science can’t PROVE anything.” What kind of twaddle is this? I came growling into the room demanding to know what sort of anti-intellectual nonsense they were swallowing. The textbook being used by my children is “Exploring Creation with General Science” by Jay L. Wile. And in big black letters across page 38 is the phrase,

**Science is NOT a means by which something can be proven.**

That surprised me. I thought science had proven gravity, the structure of the atom, how to predict the course of the planets, what happens when certain elements are combined. But according to the philosophy of this book, “all conclusions that scientists draw are tentative.” (p. 38) The basis of this viewpoint is the work of Karl Popper (p. 39) who proposed a system of empirical falsification rather than inductive inquiry. My gut reaction was that Popper’s ideas were being twisted by Creationists. Darwinism, they say, can tell us a lot about variation of species but it can never tell us about ultimate origins since there is no way to scientifically prove their claims. And a little digging does show that Wile is definitely a Creationist and a young-earth Creationist at that. According to his LinkedIn profile he does have a PhD in Nuclear Chemistry from University of Rochester and claims to have written numerous articles in peer-reviewed journals, but the overwhelming evidence is that he’s an apologist for Creationism.

But back to Popper, I wonder if his work is used by Creationists to undermine the credibility of the mainstream scientific community. Martin Gardner is skeptical of Popper’s theories. While J.C. Lester is skeptical of Gardner’s skepticism. I’ve added Popper to my list of authors that I’d like to read. His theory seems to address my own skepticism of the scientific method. I have a tendency to dismiss scientific explanations because it’s entirely possible that they’ll be overturned as soon as new evidence comes to light. But Popper says that any theory that gives the best explanation at the moment is an advance in our knowledge of the world even if it is later proven to be based on bad information. That is a more constructive philosophy than postmodern skepticism.

When I first came bursting in the room trying to find out whether I should burn this book, my daughter said, “Well it does kind of discourage you from wanting to study science.” But since then, the children have really enjoyed the experiments in the book, and the book itself is easy to read and generously illustrated. Wile is a critic of Answers In Genesis. Whether his theological presuppositions take precedence over his PhD in Nuclear Chemistry, I’m not sure.

Bible Code in English! King James Version has hidden messages

David — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 03:27:46 +0000

This passage can ONLY mean that the Rapture of Christians will be Soon — apparently during the lifespan of Pope John Paul II, which we know isn’t very long due to his advanced age!
This is truly GOOD NEWS!

Bible Code in English! King James Version has hidden messages.

In my analysis I have also discovered some other amazing messages:

This can ONLY mean, “POPE JOHN PAUL WINKed while being RAPTUREd and we were left BEHIND with demonic KATZ.”

This is truly BAD NEWS!!!

Mystery sermon

David — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 05:33:46 +0000

Can you guess my text and four points?

No related posts.

antidisestablishmentarianism

David — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 07:57:32 +0000

It’s amazing how contemporary the controversies surrounding the King James Bible are. What we know as the King James Bible was a reaction to the the Tyndale Bible and later the Geneva Bible which were both noted for their anti-monarchy stance. By using, “elder” and “congregation” rather than “bishop” and “church” these translations together with their marginal notes undermined the authority of the established church whose hierarchy was essential to the maintenance of the monarchy.

The unique inspiration of the King James Bible was in fact a mash-up of the Tyndale, Matthew and Geneva Bible with reference to Latin, Greek and Hebrew. At Better Bibles Blog, I’m live-blogging my reading of Alexander Wilson McClure’s The Translators Revived, 1853 in which he lists and comments on each of the known translators of the King James Bible. These translators are unquestionably academic giants. My question has been whether they were in fact inspired or merely political appointees. Considering the vast fortunes that most of these men held due to their academic posts, it appears that politics was at least as important as piety in the selection of these men. McClure hoped to show that these men were uniquely qualified to translate the Bible into English. I came to quite a different conclusion. In an age when the Church was mistress to the State, these political appointees did very little beyond rework the truly devout and inspired work of the Tyndale, Matthew, Geneva lineage. Although the term “antidisestablishmentarianism” was coined in the 19th century it describes what the motivation of James I in sponsoring this version of the Holy Book. He was reacting against efforts to undermine the authority of the Church of England as well as the divine right of kings which he desperately wanted to assert.

We see a strong contemporary current of antidenominationalism (21 letters!) in churches across the West. This is a specific manifestation of the general trend in the West against organizations in general. As fragmented as the Christian church is it is in fact undergoing a hyperfragmentation (18 letters) that coupled with a series of economic downturns have left the major denominations scattered with echoing white elephants in the form of megachurches with microcongregations. And the community church is in worse shape still. With decaying infrastructures and falling attendance these one-time hubs of spiritual activity have now become an eleventh toe on the suburban feet. The best move at this stage is to declare insolvency, liberate ourselves from enormous debt fueled by the ambitions of prideful men and allow the “congregations” (not churches) to be scattered into the communities again as they were meant to be.

But the more pressing question in your mind is probably, “What is the longest word in the Bible?” I can’t help you with a Latin example but I do have these offerings in Hebrew, Greek and English.

Hebrew Bible

והאחשדרפנים

“of the satraps and the governors”

Esther 8:9 - source

Greek NT

προκεχειροτονημένοις

“having been chosen beforehand”

Acts 10:41

Latin (not Bible)

blandiloloquentulissimorum

of the very smooth-talking ones source

English Bible

maher-shalal-hash-baz (name)

examples from NIV

conscience-stricken (hyphenated)

incomprehensible (unhyphenated)

examples from KJV

evilfavouredness and lovingkindnesses

covenantbreakers fellow-prisoners and unprofitableness

By the way, the most common word in English of greatest length is the humble word, uncharacteristically. In German it is Rechtsschutzversicherungsgesellschaften and in Spanish it is anticonstitucionalmente.