geekery.of.all.sorts

Notes from John 2:13 - John 3:20

2011-09-27T22:06:00.000-07:00

The setup

Although there’s a chapter break separating them, I think that the story covered in John 2:13-3:20 reads as one piece. Jesus had just busted up the temple courts and made a big splash in Jerusalem around passover, claiming to be able to rebuild the temple in three days, etc.

I think that the cleansing of the temple is actually a preface to the story of Nicodemus. It sets up the circumstances of his visit, as does the statement that Jesus knew what was inside a man (John 2:25).

That’s the opening statement to Nicodemus’ story. Jesus knew what was in his heart, and spoke to that, rather than to the surface of how he approached Jesus.

Nicodemus: seeker or pharisee?

John 3:1-2
Now there was a Pharisee, a man named Nicodemus who was a member of the Jewish ruling council. 2 He came to Jesus at night and said, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the signs you are doing if God were not with him.”

John 3:2 has been commonly interpreted to mean that Nicodemus was a seeker that came to Jesus on his own, to interact privately with Jesus despite his role as a Pharisee.

Some time ago I was reading John, and was greatly frustrated by how incoherent this passage of scripture was. The traditional focus on being ‘born again’ didn’t bring the pieces together, everything Jesus said was disconnected from everything else, and I didn’t recognize Nicodemus the seeker at all.

Nicodemus speaks in the first person, plural...Greek: oidamen - ‘we know’. I hesitate to make a huge deal of that, but who is ‘we’? On whose behalf is he speaking, if not the Pharisees?

More importantly, (and not requiring any knowledge of greek) Nicodemus doesn’t approach Jesus as one who has a question, or who wants to know more. His words in vs. 2 are bold and declarative - ‘Rabbi, we know...’

Lastly, the placement of this story comes right after Jesus cleared out the temple - just as his public ministry began and the miracles had started.

So Nicodemus claims to know that Jesus is a teacher who has come from God, based on the miracles Jesus did.

Those aren’t the words of a disciple looking to be taught - that’s the assessment of a religious leader - an authority - which is exactly what Nicodemus was. He came to offer Jesus his stamp of approval.

Nicodemus wasn’t a seeker that snuck off to inquire of Jesus, he was an envoy from the Pharisees, offering Jesus political credibility. I think it’s likely the next thing Nicodemus would have done was ask Jesus to tone it down some, try not to be so destructive, etc. He didn’t get a chance to do that, though...

That’s pretty different from the traditional telling of this story...but I think Jesus handles Nicodemus in a way that bears this interpretation out.

Divine confusion

So how does Jesus respond? By thanking Nicodemus? (What would your response to flattery be, if approached by an important church official?)

Does Jesus agree with Nicodemus? Disagree? Actually, Jesus did neither. Instead of responding to what Nicodemus says to him, Jesus abruptly changes the subject.

John 3:3-8
3 Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again.”
4 “How can someone be born when they are old?” Nicodemus asked. “Surely they cannot enter a second time into their mother’s womb to be born!”
5 Jesus answered, “Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit. 6 Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit. 7 You should not be surprised at my saying, ‘You must be born again.’ 8 The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit.”

Instead of ‘Thanks, but I’m not just a teacher...’, or ‘My miracles aren’t the important thing...’, Jesus says ‘you have to be born again’. Nicodemus takes him literally, is confused, and instead of really explaining what he means, Jesus chides him for being suprised.

Then Jesus changes the subject yet again. He equates those born of the spirit to the wind, as if that might somehow help to clear things up. It seems Jesus is intentionally confusing Nicodemus - but why?

On the face of it, all of this seems totally disconnected - to me, there’s no flow to this conversation, no logic, no thread you can follow to understand what’s happening.

It especially does not follow from the conversation Nicodemus attempted to have with Jesus in the first place - ‘Teacher, we know you come from God...’ but it is connected, if you know the subtext that hides behind Jesus words.

Why babies and wind?

Assuming that Nicodemus came to Jesus as an envoy of the Pharisees, and was full of pride in his role as one with religious authority, Jesus had a hard task to accomplish. Nicodemus came to talk, not listen - Jesus had to short-circuit Nicodemus’ agenda, soften his hard heart, and move past his preconceptions to bring him to a place where he could hear from Jesus.

Jesus did that by using the thing that I think Nicodemus prized the most - his own knowledge of scripture. By this, he cleverly redirected the conversation in a way that disarmed Nicodemus’ authority and gave Nicodemus the chance to be taught, if he would listen.

The key to all this is found in Ecclesiastes 11:5 -
As you do not know the path of the wind,
or how the body is formed in a mother’s womb,
so you cannot understand the work of God,
the Maker of all things.

Assume for a minute that Jesus and Nicodemus both knew this verse. Jesus first says ‘you have to be born again’ - and Nicodemus is confused. But he closes off his ‘born again’ discussion by comparing those born of the spirit with the wind...I think Nicodemus had a sudden dawning when Jesus said that.

Nicodemus thinks ‘Babies...wind...’ and finishes the statement for himself. “...Just as I don’t understand these things, I don’t know the work of God?” And what he says in response to that dawning realization is ‘How can these things be?’

I don’t think he was amazed by the comparision of the born again believer to the wind - I think he was amazed that Jesus implied that he could not understand the work of God. This brings into question his credentials, his authority, and I think Nicodemus really felt that, caught in a trap made perfectly for him. He was disarmed in a way that Jesus knew would leave him questioning and ready to hear more.

The rest of the passage (John 3:10-21) is Jesus teaching him about what the work of God actually is, now that he’s ready to listen.

Some Thoughts and Application

When I discovered this, I had spent about three weeks puzzling over Nicodemus and Jesus with no solution in sight. I was frustrated and bothered - strongly bothered - over this passage, as I am with most of John. I personally find that in the book of John, Jesus speaks in riddles, circles and non-sequiturs, and there’s often not much to go on to understand what’s really going on.

I was frustrated and just couldn’t understand...and I asked God at that time for something that would unlock it - I knew there must be something that could help me make sense of it. In frustration, one day I grabbed a spare bible off the floor at church and flipped it open to Song of Songs - on the facing page was Ecclesiastes, and my eye fell on verse 5. Bingo - there it was! Babies...wind...work of God!

So I feel like from a personal standpoint, even finding an answer to my questions was nothing short of a miracle - it took actual revelation and a divine moment, using someone else’s Bible, to bring me to understanding. If I was reading my same old Bible the same old way, I'd never have found it.

So if any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask God. He might not show up right away, but He loves to give revelation if you’re hungry for it.

Proverbs 25:2 - It is the glory of God to conceal a matter;
to search out a matter is the glory of kings.

We all have a mandate to search out the things of God. So I’m praying for more love of scripture, more holy frustration and hunger, and more revelation to match.

Finally...let Jesus change the subject

Another application, perhaps less personal and more practical, is that Jesus is the same person now as He was then with Nicodemus. He still knows what’s in your heart, and he still knows how to sidestep your agenda and change the whole framework of a conversation.

Like with Nicodemus, Jesus is not afraid to leverage our own confusion if need be to get us in a position where we can listen. If we come to him with an agenda (which is most of the time) we can count on him disarming us in love, and then speaking to us about what’s really at issue.

In Nicodemus case, what was at issue was his misplaced pride, and the assumption that he knew what God was about. For me it might be different - believing some lie, some compromise or sin in my life, or any of the other things Jesus might want to talk about with me.

It’s a frequent occurrence that He wants to talk about a different subject than I do - and He knows how to change the subject and get me listening. If i'm smart, I'll come to him without an agenda. If not, he is able to lovingly adjust the conversation and uncover what’s in my heart - as long as I’m willing to hear.

Jesus is the word of God

2010-08-30T11:05:00.001-07:00

I've been thinking about Jesus and his title 'The Word of God', for a while now...here's some notes.

I was first introduced to this as a serious angle of study and major theme of the New Testament ( rather than a nice verse in John 1 ) when I read 'Prayer' by a German theologan named Hans Urs von Balthasar. http://www.amazon.com/Prayer-Hans-Urs-von-Balthasar/dp/0898700744 This is probably as difficult a book as I've ever read - but it was transformative for me in a variety of ways. I need to go back and find a copy and see if it stands up after 10 years.

Jesus is represented in scripture as the Word of God - a title that needs to be understood 'as the scripture says', not from the definition our church culture has put on it. Good evangelical protestant types tend to worship the Bible like it's part of the trinity (usually replacing Holy Spirit).

When we say 'The Word of God' we usually are referring to the Bible. Now, the Bible is a great gift to us, but if we pay attention to how the Bible uses that phrase 'The Word of God', it's not used as a reference to scripture anywhere (that I'm aware of, at least. I'm probably wrong...)

Word of God often refers to the spreading of the Gospel, but it's highest, most important usage is in reference to Jesus himself.

Two major passages unpack Jesus identity as the Word - Everyone knows John 1, but Hebrews ch. 1 and 2 are a parallel rendering of the same thoughts. Hebrews expands upon and elaborates what is a pretty compact presentation of these ideas in John 1.

Here's a map of the relationship between those two passages:

Jesus is the Word, God's primary means of communicating to us
John 1:1
Hebrews 1:1-2

Jesus is God, and the Son of god
John 1:1
Hebrews 1:3

Jesus made the universe
John 1:3
Hebrews 1:2
Note - God SAID let there be light...and it's implied in John, Hebrews, and elsewhere that Jesus was the one that went and did it, performing the activity of creation.

Jesus came to bring many sons into the kingdom.
John 1:12-13
Hebrews 2:10-15

Jesus was God, but came as a man...
John 1:14
Hebrews 2:14

There's lots of cross-references that might inform this topic - Colossians 1:17 is one, another ,

Posted via email from dsayswhat's posterous

Mysteries...

2010-08-15T14:51:00.000-07:00

My good friend Will commented on my last post, sharing 3 essential problems that make studying eschatology. I can't speak to the first without further study, can't argue at all with the second - but the third I have thoughts on. Here they are:

He said that regarding eschatology, it is the realm of mystery, and 'mystery remains mystery'.

Here's my response:

Mystery didn't remain mystery for Paul, who stated that the mystery of gospel which had been held since the creation of the world had been revealed, so that the Gentiles could share in the salvation that comes from Christ. See Romans 16 and Eph 3.

Daniel was told to seal up his the words until the time of the end - it's spoken twice in Dan 12, the second time affirming that the mysteries shown to Daniel would be sealed until that time. The use of the word 'until' indicates to me that those mysteries would be UNsealed when the time came.

It's consistent with the unfolding nature of divine revelation that as the time draws near, mysteries will be revealed. God makes a habit of unfolding his plan and showing off how awesome it is. Adam had less understanding than Noah, who had less than Abraham, who had less than David, etc. He likes interacting with us and displaying his personality, mind and plan to us.

So It is the glory of God to hide a matter, and the glory of kings to search it out. So I'd agree that the end times isn't a simple picture that you can come to by some numeric formula - this many years, that many days, times, time and half a time, etc. But by the spirit, it can be studied. Ya hear that? STUDY by the SPIRIT.

Daniel understood from the scriptures that the desolation of Jerusalem was to last 70 years...at some point, in the same way it will be revealed to the Body the revelation of these mysteries about the end of the age. As sure as he's coming back, that's going to happen, cause the Book says so.

None of that comes by reason alone, but reason enters into it, or else he wouldn't have posed these puzzles in spiritual words that can be read and studied - Paul heard things that were unutterable, and so didn't write them...similarly, John heard seven thunders, but was told not to write them down. Those will have to be re-uttered to the generation that sees the Lords return, in some form or fashion.

However, our record of prophecy about His return and the nature and shape of his kingdom at that time in history WAS uttered and written down...so study has to enter into it somewhere, as long as the Spirit isn't left out of the process. There are propositions, clauses, facts, numbers, and poetic language for us to sift, weigh, consider, marvel at and be perplexed by.

So I want to enter into the blessing of those who take to heart the words that are written in the book of Revelation - and I want the victor's crown of righteousness that's offered to those who have loved his appearing...plus it's super interesting.

The main reason I'm into this stuff is that the subject of the end times is the study of the kingdom, and especially of its King. It's the Revelation of Jesus Christ, not the revelation of some stuff that happened or will happen or might be all symbolic or whatever. When we study these things, Holy Spirit reveals Jesus to us. That's the best part.

the one they have pierced...

2010-08-10T21:58:00.000-07:00

I'm a bit interested in Eschatology. For those of you who don't know what eschatology is, it's the study of eschat.

Really, no, I'm just kidding. I don't even know what eschat is...

But I heard some fairly convincing stuff from a preterist this last week. Preterists believe that the last days described in the Bible happened in the first century, and that it's all done.

Well, I don't think that's right. So I've been thinking on that. Here's a bit of it:

Preterists take the time words very seriously - the statements that are made in Matthew 24, Revelation 1-3, and elsewhere, where Jesus says that 'this generation' would see the kingdom, or that 'the time is near', or 'these things must soon come to pass'.

I was challenged to take those seriously as well - I had not given them as much thought as other elements of those same passages...but I find the strict preterist interpretation simplistic, as I understand it.

Based on the small amount of study I've done thus far, it appears they hang their hat on the 'plain meaning of scripture' selectively. Some passages get 'plain meaning', others get ignored because they don't fit the starting assumption and satisfy a first century interpretation.

I'm therefore challenged in my own self to try and harmonize those disparate pieces and make sense of the puzzle.

It's legitimate to say that Peter, Paul and John, and the writers of the gospels, all indicated Jesus was returning right away. And their assumption of the soon return of Christ made it into scripture, so you have to wrestle with the fact that He doesn't appear to have returned in any way we can see or hear or touch. The world continues on like it always has.

Another strong argument in favor of preterist thinking is that Revelation offers comfort to oppressed Christians, with words like 'a little while longer' and 'endure for 10 days'. If we apply the 'plain meaning of scripture' principle there, we're looking at the need to interpret at least Revelation 1-3 as being primarily a 1st century document - perhaps like we look at the epistles of Paul.

But I'd like to look at Revelation 1:3 and 1:7.

Revelation 1:3
Blessed be the one who reads the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear it and take to heart what is written in it, because the time is near.

That sets the context for the rest of the letter to be a near and soon to be fulfilled occurrence.

Revelation 1:7
Look, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him, and all the peoples of the earth will mourn because of him.

So contextually, the time is near for Him to return on the clouds.

Other verses corroborate that.

Matthew 24:30,34
At that time the sign of the Son of man will appear in the sky, and all the nations of the earth will mourn. They will the Son of man coming on the clouds of the sky with power and great glory [...] I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.

That's a pretty strong time indicator, and pairs well with Revelation chapter 1. Plain meaning of the verses: Jesus is coming back right away - within a generation, however long that is.

The preterist viewpoint is that the scary stuff spoken of in Revelation and Matthew 24 was satisfied by the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD. And it's a pretty satisfying conclusion. It fits the facts described in Matthew and Revelation pretty well.

It's also important to note that 'all the nations of the earth will mourn' can also be translated as 'all the tribes of the land'. Nation is not 'ethnos' here, it's 'phule' - clan or tribe. And the earth is 'ge', which also translates as land, rather than 'oikoumene', which would more clearly indicate the gentile nations, the entire populated earth.

All that supports a local, Israel-and-Jerusalem-focused application of the passages listed above.

It's interesting to note another occurrence of these same ideas, this time from the Old Testament. It might even be suggested that Jesus and John were quoting Zechariah 12 when the reference 'all the nations of the earth will mourn', and 'look upon the one whom they have pierced'.

Zechariah 12:10-12
And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son. On that day, the weeping in Jerusalem will be great [...] The land will mourn, each clan by itself [...]

So Jesus and John were paraphrasing Zech 12 - and quoting Daniel 9 in reference to his coming on the clouds of heaven. Two huge eschatalogical passages are tied together in Matthew 24 and Revelation 1. It's clearly written or spoken to Israel and Jerusalem, both in Zechariah and Matthew.

Now we've got the case for a a localized, immediate ( within a generation ) fulfillment of Jesus' words. Common sense seems to back it up, it's simple, clear. Pretty convincing to me thus far.

This is where the Preterists take a left turn. They say that because Jesus is prophesying how bad it will be in Jerusalem at that time, and they equate that with the 1st century destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans.

The preterist position writes Israel off, calls them 'judged' and says that 'true Israel' came into the Church at that point. The Old Covenant is gone, and the temple destroyed. End of story. I heard it described last weekend as that generation's rightful judgement for the rejection of Jesus.

But here's the problem: When quoting Zechariah 12, Jesus was quoting from a narrative that shows Judah destroying the nations, Jerusalem receiving security from its enemies, and the tribes of Israel restored to their land from exile. It's entirely the opposite of the preterist position. A 'plain meaning of scripture' reading of Zechariah 12 puts it in the context of a repentant, victorious Israel, with a spirit of grace poured out on it.

That hasn't been fulfilled yet, and certainly stands opposed to anything that might indicate Israel is permanently rejected by God. That's one of the many weaknesses of the preterist viewpoint - it rejects the promise of Israel's restoration by lumping Israel in with the church, ignoring massive promises that the Old Testament prophets gave about God restoring Israel.

I find myself struggling to avoid using terms like 'weasel out', 'anti-semitic' or 'doctrine of demons' when I consider the implications of writing off Israel. I appreciate the preterist viewpoint, I'm challenged by it, there's much to learn from it.

However, it appears to be married to an anti-semitic doctrine of demons that weasels out of respecting God's plan for Israel by spiritualizing his promises to Her and making them irrelevant - or else excusing themselves from the table whenever Romans 9-11 comes up for discussion.

I was looking for supporting material for the Greek references I made in this post. and happened across a document supporting the preterist view. I encourage you to read it at http://www.allthingsfulfilled.com/pdf/EveryEyeSawHim.pdf.

By about the third paragraph, it becomes clear the author isn't actually reading Zechariah for what it says, since he seems to think that Zechariah is talking about a judgement on Israel. Read Zech 12:3.

Now, I'll admit to ONE verse in Zech 14 that looks kind of bad for Jerusalem - there's rape and exile mentioned in 14:2 - but then the Lord goes out and fights against the nations of the earth and rots their tongue in their mouths. So that turns out ok for Israel in the end.

You'd have to be seriously preoccupied with a foregone conclusion to read Zechariah 12 that wrongly. I think that a truth may be hidden in the preterist viewpoint, but it's obscured by their assumptions about the nature of God's relationship with Israel - Anti-semitism is a problem that goes back a long way in the history of the church, resulting in Sunday worship, rejection of Passover and introduction of paganism into the church. We're only starting to come out of it, none too soon.

Now, I don't have a solid answer for the problem of Jesus' statements about a first century return - hopefully I can arrive at something that my heart will accept as the truth without resorting to some writhing shenaniganery - and hopefully I won't have to write off huge portions of scripture to do it.

Tuesday in DC

2010-07-13T18:26:00.001-07:00

Hi to all

I'm sitting here in my hotel room, and thought I'd write a little about my trip so far.

I'm having a really good time. When I'm on a trip by myself that usually meansI wander wherever I feel like going until I'm ready to keel over. Here's a map of my wanderings today...

View Darren's Tuesday walk in a larger map

On the way home both yesterday and today, I emerged from the Metro just in time to get POURED ON by a huge thunderstorm. I'm about 12 minutes or so from my hotel, so on Monday I waited the storm out. But tonight, it was just drizzling, so I dropped into a 7-11 to buy some peanuts, and then about halfway home it turned into a cloudburst. Yikes - thunder started happening more and more frequently, storm moved in closer, and I got SOAKED. woo hoo.

So my jeans, socks, shirt and shoes are drying on the chair, and I'm relaxin'.

Later...

Posted via email from dsayswhat's posterous

Tuesday in DC

2010-07-13T18:20:00.001-07:00

Testing out posterous.com cross-post to blog and facebook

Posted via email from dsayswhat's posterous

Boil the Milk, Make-a the sauce...

2009-12-27T20:25:00.003-08:00

Jennifer, Davin and I watched Julie and Julia the other day, just before Christmas. For those of you who don’t know, it’s a sweet movie about a woman who decides to spend a year cooking her way through Julia Child’s Mastering the Art of French Cooking.

The film is about her self-discovery as she blogged her experiences cooking all these recipes, interleaved with biographical sections of how Julia Child wrote the cookbook during the 10 or so years she lived in France. It’s a neat movie, especially if you’re into food. Which I am.

I made the comment to Jennifer that I’d never really experienced Julia Child firsthand, either on television or via her books, so I didn’t know much about her. I knew she was a big deal TV chef, probably the first one ever, and that she had a big, high voice, but that was about it.

Well, Jenn went and bought me the cookbook for Christmas. Here’s my first status report:

I cooked a ham on Christmas day, on Christmas day, on Christmas day…and lo, there were leftovers. Apparently, I tip my head to the side when glazing ham. This was the best of the 4 pictures Jennifer took, and all of them had me in the same gnarled position. I’ll have to work on my technique. (I'm actually on the phone...)

So we wanted to do scalloped potatoes, since that’s a favorite leftover ham dish in our family. Sometimes I think we should skip the massive joint of meat and go straight to the leftovers….that’s another whole blog post, but you can read more in The Supper of the Lamb by Robert Farrar Capon.

He describes leftovers as ‘ferial’, or ordinary cooking, and proceeds to build an ethos around enjoying the everyday pleasures of God’s world all the time, as a matter of worship. I received it for Christmas last year, and I recommend it enthusiastically. But I digress…

Scalloped potatoes require white sauce. White sauce is basically fat and flour mixed in about a 2/3 ratio over heat until it bubbles.

This is called a roux ( pronounced ‘roo’…it’s french, naturally ) and is the basis for a number of saucy things, from country gravy to gumbo. You add liquid to the roux, and it becomes one thing or another, and then you eat it. Yum.

I’ve made white sauce before, and have had wise women from both sides of my family and Jennifer’s talk about roux, gravy, and all things lumpy. It has been my process to add liquid to the roux in small amounts to avoid causing lumps, which doesn’t always work.

Here’s where Julia Child comes in. In her chapter on sauces, she gives a recipe for white sauce, grandly titled Bechamel sauce, but it’s just roux and milk.

Julia says ( imagine finger pointed in the air, pronounced ‘JOOOO-leea says’ ) to boil the liquid while you’re prepping the roux, and then add it all at once, once the roux is ready. I hadn’t heard that one before, so I was interested to see how it worked.

Jenn was looking on as I grabbed the pan of milk, said ‘here goes nothing’ and dumped it all in. I expected lumps galore, cause when you add that much liquid to a roux, that’s what you get…but it came out perfect.

It’s hard to describe my child-like glee – HOLY MOLY! IT WORKED! ARE YOU KIDDING ME? I was grinning like an idiot over a suspension of flour, butter and milk. I was practically dancing around the kitchen. ( I know. I KNOW…It’s just gravy, man. Get a grip already… )

Anyway, it came out great, and now I can see why people push up their glasses, wave their index fingers in the air, and say ‘Julia says…’

There’s probably a lesson in that last sentence about the relationship between experience, trust, and faith…I’ll let you ponder or sermonize at your leisure…

Gospel or gospel?

2009-09-21T22:05:00.001-07:00

I've decided to throw a grenade today. I think I've been taught for too long that the Cross is the whole point of God's plan. I’m taking a stand today and saying salvation by grace through faith is not THE BIG TRUTH of Christianity.

That rumbling you hear is Luther and thousands of protestant church fathers rolling over in their graves.

Now, before you go siccing Hank Hanegraaff on me for preaching a different gospel, I'm not disavowing the cross, or the gospel, or anything. Jesus died on the cross to save me. His blood paid for my sins. His work on the cross is finished, sufficient, and total. I am saved by grace through faith in the Son of God.

Now, what am I trying to do by baiting you this way?

The gospel isn't about reconciliation to God. It's natural to think that salvation is the center of God's world, since we're the ones getting saved...but salvation isn't the main thing on God's mind.

The gospel is about the Kingdom of God. Jesus ( and John the Baptist, and the Law and the Prophets ) preached that the Kingdom of God was near, in or upon you.

If the Kingdom is what's on God's mind all through the old and new testament, then we have to confront the fact that the cross is not the endpoint of history - it's a means to an end, a necessary evil. Jesus despised the shame of it for the joy set before him - that joy is described as both a bride and a kingdom, given to him as a reward for his sacrifice.

So the cross is a waypoint - THE single most important event leading up to the advent of the kingdom. But it's not the endpoint of the plan. The REAL gospel is the 'gospel of the kingdom' (Matt 24:14), not the gospel of the cross.

By far, the majority of the 'Gospel' presentations I've heard are about what's in it for the sinner - get reconciled to God, go to heaven forever, OK!

When's the last time you heard an altar call that focused on the kingdom? What's wrong with this picture?

Peter's sermon in Acts 2 doesn't stop in verse 21 ( Acts 2:21 ). Verse 36 is the culmination of what Peter preaches, and it is in response to the statement "God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ" that the crowd was cut to the heart and cries 'Brothers, what shall we do?' ( Acts 2:36 ). The point of the pentecost sermon is the resurrection and kingship of Jesus, not the 4 spiritual laws.

Acts 5:30-31 shows them again preaching His resurrection and kingship, and consequently His power to save them. The good news in Acts 5:42 is that Jesus is the Christ - the anointed one who was to be the king of the Jews and usher in God's Kingdom on the earth.

Peter's sermon to Cornelius' household in Acts 10 shows him identifying Jesus as the judge of the living and the dead, and saying that forgiveness is offered to anyone who believes in His name. ( Acts 10:42-43 )

The gospel presentations in those early chapters of Acts point to the authority of Jesus as King ( Christ, Messiah, Judge, etc ), and appealing to the hearer to believe and be saved.

How different is that from the 'God loves you, and wants the best for you, has a plan for your life, wants to bless you...' version of the gospel that we hear on a regular basis? In fact, that skips all the most important parts of the real Gospel.

To gentiles like me, without a context for who the messiah is, it requires more explanation...here goes.

God is setting up a kingdom on the earth.
The king he's setting up is a jewish king.
The king's name is Jesus
He's going to depose every government on the earth
He's going to restore all things to the way God intended them to be
He will bring justice and peace to the earth.
If you want, you can be saved from your sins and be a part of this kingdom.

We tend to skip everything but point 7 in our rush to make God palatable to the world.

'The gospel' ( lower case here is intentional ) without 'of the kingdom' part is really not the Gospel at all. No kingdom, no gospel.

Blessed are the poor in spirit

2009-09-07T21:09:00.001-07:00

…for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

John 5:19-21 says that Jesus could do nothing by himself. I somehow learned that verse wrong. I’ve quoted it wrong countless times, saying ‘Jesus only did what he saw the Father doing, only said what he heard the Father saying’.

What Jesus actually says there, and again in John 5:30, is that he COULD NOT DO ANYTHING ON HIS OWN.

Does that strike you as odd? The word used here is ‘Dunamai’:

to be able, have power whether by virtue of one's own ability and resources, or of a state of mind, or through favourable circumstances, or by permission of law or custom
to be able to do something
to be capable, strong and powerful

Jesus says he’s not capable. Unless the Father does it. ‘Only did’ and ‘could not do’ are totally different to me.

This connects well to Philippians 2:5-11. Jesus did not grasp equality with the Father. It seems to indicate that his choice to humble himself and take the form of a servant wasn’t a matter of attitude or self restraint. It was a real choice to lose control and power - The word really became flesh – this is the tension where Jesus is 100% man and yet 100% God.

Could do nothing. That’s the very definition of poor in spirit. And Jesus became poorer in spirit than me…or any of us.

This also makes sense with respect to the second clause in that beatitude – possessing the kingdom.

Philippians 2:5-8 says that Jesus became poor in spirit – by choice – even unto death. Philippians 2:9-11 completes the idea by declaring that because of his obedience unto death – his voluntary poverty of spirit.

God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,
that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.

So the poorest in spirit becomes the king. It’s echoed again in Revelation 5:9-11 – He is worthy because with His blood he bought men for God from every tribe, tongue and nation. Blessed is Jesus ( the poor in spirit ), the kingdom belongs to him. And to the extent that I want to share in his kingdom, I need to stop being so capable and self-sufficient. Ouch.

saxophono!

2009-08-08T16:10:00.000-07:00

So I went shopping today to find a saxophone for Katy.

Now, cheap saxes run about 600 - 6 bills is a lot of dough for the Dad, on any day.

But I walk into ye olde pawn shoppe here in town, and play 5 or 6 horns, looking for something that will work good - and I find something interesting.

First thing that spots my eye is the case - it's way niftier than the usual brown case that student model horns come it - it's a real case, with natty cloth in an interesting pattern - looks something like this:

The cloth on the case is a dead giveaway that we're looking at something that's a few years old.

So I crack it open and to my suprise I find a brand of saxophone I've never seen before -

The first thing I notice is that the scrollwork ( carving ) and decorations are very ornate - old school, as it were.

It appears that this horn was made in Italy, and it has a low serial number - in the 8000s, rather than 20000s. That's a good bet that it's pretty old indeed.

So I write down some information, and then I play the thing. It plays like an old horn - the keywork isn't exactly the smoothest - the word you're looking for is ergonomic - and the pads are leaky, so it doesn't play about half the notes the way its' supposed to.

However, I have the sneaking suspicion that theres something here - old horns sound better, made from better materials, blah blah blah.

the guy at the shop says - Oh? you're interested in the Italian job? I'll give it to you for $200.

Hmm.

I go home. I research. I look up brands and serial numbers. I decide this might be a really good horn.

And if it's not a really good horn, it's a 3rd of the cost of the average, boring horns I played today. So really good horn, or really good deal, either way, I'm in.

So here is the new Petersen alto saxomaphone, direct from Italy circa 1967.

It needs work - but it's way more special than anything the other 6th graders will be playing, I garontee.

What you can't read there is 'Ida-Maria Grassi - Milano - Italy - fabrico strumenti musicali italiano'

It even has that vintage horn smell that my wife likes to complain about when I've been playing my King Super 20 Baritone - which is about the same age as this thing.

I'll see how busy the repair shop is this week, and we'll see-a how she cleans-a up. I betcha she cleans-a up good!

Darren

Intro to the Beatitudes

2009-06-23T22:52:00.001-07:00

The setup:

So I’m walking today, clearing my head before the next big thing I had to do. I was praying, telling God I wanted to know Him, wanted to have the Holy Spirit teach me ( John 14:26 )

So I start thinking about the Beatitudes. I grew up having to memorize the Bible at school, so ‘Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven’ is pretty drilled into my head. Some of the others are harder to remember, but the first few are usually right there.

So I got a big lightning bolt about the Beatitudes...

Right. What's a beatitude?

The Beatitudes are found in Matthew 5:1-12, at the top of the sermon on the mount. ( Beatitude means ‘blessedness’, meaning that this list of things is about how to be blessed. )

There are some in the Church that have noticed these verses are important – hey form sort of a contract about how a Kingdom mindset works. The Beatitudes can be seen as the basis of God’s value system.

The Beatitudes are a good thing to have in my back pocket. Since He’ll be judging my life and rewarding me ( or not ) according to HIS rules, it’s helpful that He laid those rules out where I could find them.

That's the kind of teaching I always hear about the Beatitudes - Jesus is telling you how to act, so you can be blessed.

What I learned today

As I was walking, the Holy Spirit taught me something. Up til now, the Beatitudes have always been about me…I’m poor in spirit, so I need Jesus to save me, I’ll be comforted when I mourn, sometimes I hunger and thirst after righteousness ( well, not really ), stuff like that. Always with the personal application.

But I got lit up last night by the Holy Spirit dropping a whole different perspective straight into me. It might have taken a minute total. Here's the big thing.

The Beatitudes aren't all about me. They're all about Jesus.

Some of you are yawning...'Yes Darren, everything is about Jesus'. No really. The Beatitudes are ALL about Jesus.

I've always been taught they are a progression of maturity in the faith

Recognize your poverty of spirit
Then mourn
God produces meekness
You get hunger and thirst for righteousness
etc.

All that is secondary.

First it's about Jesus, second it's about me.

Chew on that...film at 11.

i'm blogging from my phone.

2009-06-19T15:38:00.001-07:00

I found an app for my phone that lets me post to my blog directly. more geek-fu for the darren.

galatians 1 part 1

2009-06-16T13:41:00.000-07:00

comparison of different descriptions of the Father and Jesus in galatians 1

Galatians 1:1 god the father...

Galatians 1:3. Our father

Galatians 1:1 father raised jesus from the dead...

Galatians 1:3 jesus gave himself according to the will of our father

observation

Paul could have said 'i am astonished that you are deserting ME'. But instead, he writes '...the one who called you by the grace of jesus christ', which is waaaay longer. What's so important about that identifier that Paul took the trouble?

Journaling the Bible...

2009-06-15T12:56:00.000-07:00

I've been talking with my oldest daughter about how to read/journal the Bible. Here's some notes from our conversations.

Instructions:
Take 30 minutes to read and think and write. ( Katy is starting Galatians Ch 1. )

You should have:
A bible, pencil, journal, and a dictionary.

Goal:

As long as you're busy thinking about about what you're reading and writing down what you think, you're using your time well. Use the act of writing to keep your mind focused.

Before you start to read:

Take a minute to get quiet in your heart.
Ask Holy Spirit ( H.S. ) to come and reveal the truth in the Bible to you. ( John 16:13 )
Expect that H.S is going to do what you asked. ( Matthew 7:7-11 ). When you ask, expect to receive. Expect a good gift. Believe He is alive inside you, and ready to teach you.

How to read a Bible verse

Have pencil and paper ready while you read
write down all the important words in the verse

For each of those important words, ask yourself:

Do I know what this word means? If you have any questions at all, look it up and write down the definition. It's better to look it up than think you know what it is.
Why is this word here? Why did the author of the book use THIS EXACT WORD, and not something else?
How does the writer feel? What emotion is being expressed? What reality is hiding behind the words on the page?
What does this word remind me of? Let the Holy Spirit fire your imagination to get at the truth you're reading.

For the whole verse, ask yourself:

Does this tell me anything about God? Say it back to him as praise.
Do I believe what this verse says? Ask God to increase your faith to believe it.
Does this verse ask me to do anything? Ask God for power to obey the verse.

Go slow.

Think about what you're reading.

Use your Holy-Spirit-empowered imagination to make it real.

Talk to Jesus, and listen to what he says back to you.

IMPORTANT: If you can think of a way to use the Bible verses as prayers, then pray them.

Go slow.

more bible-fu

2009-06-12T05:00:00.000-07:00

So logos.com isn't such a bad site after all...

Back when I was on staff at East Hill Church and looking into buying bible software, Logos was the Rolls Royce of the various software options. It had all the bells and whistles, but was also the most expensive. I never looked much further than price...

I ran into bible.logos.com the other day, and my first impression is that it works more nicely than biblegateway.com. One of the things I spotted was this continuous scrolling that it uses.

Want to read through Galatians? ( I do. ) In biblegateway.com, you'd have to click 'Next chapter' to jump between Galatians 1 and Galatians 2. Want to scroll backward from Romans 1:1ff into Acts 28:31? Biblegateway: no way. Bible.logos.com: No problem.

So that's cool - but they also do this other handy thing:

http://www.logos.com/reftagger is a service that notices bible references in your website and shows the bible verses on your site. You stick a bit of javascript into your blog, and all the plain text bible references on your blog turn into links, pointing to that bible verse on bible.logos.com.

So I'm about to install reftagger. If it works ( and I think it will... ) you'll see that the bible verses referenced above are 'live'. Let's head to the workshop and see if reftagger works as advertised...

Update:

The reftagger thing works like a charm. So I type Romans 1:1 in plain text - I didn't link it or do anything. The reftagger script I just added to my blog makes that plain text into a link.

If you want to add reftagger to your blog, the instructions for blogger.com can be found here.

Visit the reftagger.com site to find other tutorials for installing it on other blog systems, regular web sites, etc.

So there's your weekly biblegeek-fu for ya.

bible-fu meets geek-fu

2009-06-04T06:09:00.000-07:00

So this post is a combination of bible-fu and geek-fu.

Note: ( relative ) mastery of a specific skill may be referred to as I do above, by suffixing the topic with -fu, as in kung-fu. Example: My kitchen-fu was particularly strong today, as I whipped up a perfect chocolate souffle...

The focus of my geek-fu today was bible study. Sometimes it can help to view things from a different angle...I'm starting to talk Bible with my oldest daughter, and was thinking about how to enter into a conversation about Galatians with the greatest ease.

And a thought hit me - 'you should tag cloud it'. So without further ado, here's a tag cloud of Galatians, courtesy of the handy dandy TagCrowd online service. I pulled the text of Galatians from bible.logos.com and massaged it a little with my geek-fu before dropping it into TagCrowd to get the following result:

created at TagCrowd.com

Surely my sorrows he carried…

2009-02-23T21:26:00.001-08:00

I’ve been struggling with anxiety of late. There’s a project that I despair of every getting done with, and of ever getting right.

I’ve spent hours agonizing over it, and have had many ( I say that intentionally – many ) conversations with God asking if the current condition of the project were my fault. While I can see areas where I could have done things differently, for the most part He doesn’t seem to be worried at all.

I was washing dishes yesterday, going back over all the reasons why my project was going to fail. I was feeling horrible and attempting to repent, or else resigning to myself that I would take whatever consequences might come. In the middle of all this self abasement, I took a moment to see what Jesus might have to say.

I took a moment to slow down sufficiently, so that I could recognize His presence living in me…and instead of hearing him say something to me, I perceived that He was sad. So I asked Him why.

He said to me: “Why are you still carrying that grief?” – it seems he was sad that I was torturing myself with these circumstances. Even as He said that, I knew he was referring to Isaiah 53, so I went to look it up and see afresh what it might say to me.

As I read the first few verses, I had a brief moment of revelation – surely He carried my sorrows. Now, I’m not claiming deep theological understanding, or doctrinal clarity – but it seems His word to me is that my grief, sorrow, etc is/was carried by Him. Apparently I don’t have the right to carry it…so there’s nothing for me to do but proceed.

Now that doesn’t mean everything is going to work out perfectly according to my wishes – that doesn’t imply that there aren’t consequences for actions I have or haven’t taken. But I see a separation between discipline on the one hand and sorrow on the other.

So Jesus carried my sorrow. I spent today using that reality to fight off my discouragement.

Smarter and wronger.

2009-02-15T22:35:00.001-08:00

I haven’t blogged for a long while…missed me? I know I have.

Today’s blog is about exercise. I don’t exercise much. But Jenn started Jazz-ercising the other day, and I’d already been thinking about my recent lethargy, and the need to de-lethargificate my life. ( I’m easily as impressed with my use of the word de-lethargificate as you are. We’re both in wondrous awe. ) In response to this de-lethargificationariffic urge (!) , I bought a pass to the local pool and decided I’d start swimming again.

Swimming is on the short list of things I might actually enjoy doing that involves an elevated heart rate. ( No, I’m not going to list any other items on that very short list. You’ll have to go somewhere else on the internet to get that kind of content. Shame on you. )

The prospect of burnishing my physique presents a big challenge…I’m always telling Katy to ‘Go Hard’ and respond strongly to challenges. ( Somebody give me a roll of tape for my mouth, please ). Back in my childhood someplace, I figured out that my favorite way to address such a challenge was to attack it hard.

To a large extent I believe that to be a response based in fear. My mindset is “You’re not going to see me fail, so I’m gonna be sure to crush it”. I don’t know whom I think is watching me all the time…but clearly my fear of failure is immense – ( BTW: fear of failure = pride).

I’m especially prideful with regard to my athletic ability. This is counter-intutitve, since for the most part I’m not a good athlete. In fact, I’d rather not exercise than face how lousy I feel about being mediocre. HUGE pride. Huge. HUUUUUUGE.

Self-disclosure aside, last week I went by the pool, towel in hand and decided to take a dip. In one sense, it’s good that I want to exercise. However, forces were at work, unseen within me. Invisibly, my huge ego was fully in control as I approached the water.

It’s only in retrospect that I can articulate all this. I had been dreading getting into the pool all day. I just KNEW it was going to be horrible…my pride and shame were in high gear, telling me so. And I, consistent to a fault with my ‘ATTACK THE DANGEROUS THING! YOU MUST NOT FAIL’ mentality, hit the pool at Mach 3 with no warm-up.

Three laps later, it hurt to breathe. It hurt to move. My arms were cramping. I didn’t have a good time. I slunk to the locker room, slunk to my car, slunk it out of the parking lot and slunk home. So much for that.

Later in the week, my friends William and Heidi were very helpful, once they stopped laughing at my misfortune – Note: misfortune is defined here as ‘foolish prideful behavior’. In particular Will told me to just spend a half an hour in the pool, no matter what I was doing. Just put in the time, and try to do something you enjoy while you’re there.

In that same vein ( ‘vain’ ) while watching Battlestar Galactica on Saturday, one of the main characters had a conversation where he was told “sometimes you’re so busy doing the right thing that you don’t do the smart thing”. I am fond of his response - “I’ll try to be smarter...and wronger”. So I’m going to do the smart, wrong thing – or at least the thing that feels wrong and is smart – I’ll just swim, just because.

With that in mind, I hit the pool in slow motion today, in full, grudging acceptance of my limited ability to be awesome. And I had a great time. I didn’t try to do anything other than enjoy swimming. There was exercise, and fellowship with Jesus, and I even want to do it again.

So that’s a nice change. The whole thing is still a tiny bit excruciating, if only for the very clear revelation of how my heart actually is wired. I need a tune-up before I actually injure myself while trying too hard at something.

Bread.

2008-12-15T21:53:00.001-08:00

The smell itself had a powdery sweet reek that seemed to suggest mold – but I wasn’t sure. It was Monday, and the fresh start of a new work week seemed like a good time to clean out the cabinet.

So I steeled myself. As I peered into it’s dark recesses of the break room cupboard, two or three possibilities caught my eye: a nondescript, unmarked tin of something, a box of bran cereal, and a half-eaten loaf of bread. I chose the bread.

The plastic bag was neatly twist tied, and the printing on the bag helpfully obscured the contents inside. So I reached up and grabbed it to get a better look. Perhaps this was the source, perhaps not...

The inch of bread crust visible through the bag was fairly innocuous. It looked bread-ish enough. Still, I was suspicious. So I opened the bag to see what was inside.

To my surprise, it was not green, spotted or otherwise obviously moldy. I was initially concerned that it didn’t look quite right, but the color of the bread was uniform – not brown bread, not white bread – just sort of tan.

I had an immediate decision to make here: is this the normal state of the bread in question? Without direct experience with this brand, I resorted to reading the label to see what I might be dealing with. Hmmm….multigrain. That’s distinctly unhelpful.

I say to myself: “Multigrain bread can be a variety of colors – it can range from coarse brown to barely tan.” Without any other options left to me, I decide to take a little whiff.

That first bout of retching was very nearly unproductive. It was more of a cough/spit thing than actual throwing up. So I stood up from the trash can and took a deep breath to steady myself. Wrong move.

Of course, the bag was open. And the air was full of spores and nast. So I caught my breath, and that did me in for real. No more of this playing around…we mean business. Full vomit. Malt-O-meal, coming right up.

Now, if you’ve never tried to close a bread bag with a twist tie immediately after two waves of nausea, let me just mention that it can’t be done. Plus I had to hold the bag up closer to my face than I was really comfortable with. It wasn’t really working for me.

So instead I decided to throw up again. In retrospect, I don’t know if that was the best choice…but it seemed appropriate at the time.

With three bouts of nausea under my belt, I felt it was best in the end to just throw the whole bag of un-bread away and tie the garbage bag shut. When I tried to untie it later, I found that I’d pulled the knot so tight that I couldn’t undo it. Adrenaline is like that, I guess.

In the future, I think I won’t actually attempt to see if the thing I’m throwing away is the actual culprit…I’ll just start chucking ( no pun intended ) things and see if the smell starts to go away.

I am the sink.

2008-11-25T20:56:00.001-08:00

24 hours ago, I was totally undone.

It was Monday night. I'd been fighting my drippy sink off and on for about 30 hours, with the help of my good friend William. Three trips to the hardware store, who knows how many little O-rings later, and I was no further than when I started.

Now, you have to understand, I've become sort of medium-handy around the house.

I'm well acquainted with minor plumbing repair.
I can do basic electrical if I have to.
I can deal with washer, dryer and dishwasher issues without help.
I repair kids bikes. ( adult bikes are not in my repertoire, just ask Jenn... )

When I looked up faucet repair, all the trustworthy sources and tutorials said this was the easiest of home repair tasks. Confident in my growing home improvement-fu, I decided to knock it out on Sunday afternoon. 30 hours later, I was reduced to a shell of a man.

My frustration wasn't all about home repair. Really, it was about all the major side projects that I'm working on. Jesus says I can do it. I feel helpless and out of control. So when I plan to quickly fix my sink, if it doesn't work out, I'm immediately in crisis, cause I'm now behind - or so I feel.

Jesus says that I am to lean on Him in these projects. He wants to be my friend...He asks me to let Him call the shots, and let Him bear the burden. I've got work to do, but somehow, He wants to bear me up in this.

Apparently, this season isn't about working hard. It's not about discipline, it's about walking in your gifts, and in the favor of God.

I hear you amen-ing out there. That's all very easy to talk about, but hard to walk. I'm constantly finding myself back in fear and anxiety over this stuff.

Well, after my failure to progress in plumbing 101, I was in full anxiety. Angry, depressed, mad at God, afraid of failure, curled up in a ball. Completely non-functional, and totally not about the sink at all.

I asked Jenn to listen with me, to see if Jesus wanted to talk with us about anything. We listen for a minute, and here's what she says to me:

'You know that african violet that just started blooming on the counter in our bathroom? Jesus says that's me. And He says that you're the sink.'

What? I'm the SINK? The drippy, unfixable, permanently broken and hopeless SINK?

I told her that prophecy was supposed to be comforting and edifying, and she clearly wasn't hearing the Lord on this one. So He said it again to her.

Now that's just mean - talk about kicking a guy while he's down. Tell me I'm the SINK! Now you can add MAD! to my list of swirling emotions.

So I process all this a little more, and make a satisfactory truce with my emotions and with Him over the fact that He's in control and I'm not...and Jenn agrees to call the plumber in the morning.

Well, after Tuesday AM prayer at Glory of Zion, William and Marcus ( my brother in law ) decide over breakfast that they're going to replace the sink. Apparently Marcus keeps really nice white porcelain sinks in his backyard in case Holy Spirit gives him the unction to suddenly install them. Which is what happened.

So by noon today, I had a brand new sink. It fit the hole in the counter, and everything worked out really really fine, really really fast.

Seems I need object lessons to reinforce what God is doing in me ( and the Body at large, I would bet ) I was totally undone over a hopeless situation, little though it was. Ready to give up and call the plumber. Did everything I knew how to do...and was totally ineffectual.

Then the Lord surrounded me with the two guys in my life that love me the most, fixed my problem ( well, almost - still a little more to deal with... ) and gave me a new sink, faucet, garbage disposal and arrangement of pipes.

So I'm the sink. In a matter of a few hours - overnight, even - He says I'm going to be different, better and new. And it won't happen because I was able to work it out or make it happen.

I guess Jenn heard right.

100+ chapters about the end times....

2008-11-24T08:13:00.000-08:00

The folks at the IHOP like to say there's about 100 chapters in the Bible related to end times events. That number is old though - They may have counted as high as 150. Here's a link for those who are interested.

http://www.ihop.org/Forums/Messages.aspx?ThreadID=1000000065

Again...

2008-11-07T11:25:00.001-08:00

So I'm a sick boy this week. I took some time between sneezing and naps to read my Bible, and had a moment I'd like to share with my faithful readers. All two of you.

I was chewing on Hebrews 12:26-27...

At that time his voice shook the earth, but now he has promised, "Once more I will shake not only the earth but also the heavens." The words "once more" indicate the removing of what can be shaken—that is, created things—so that what cannot be shaken may remain.

The author of Hebrews says in vs. 27 that 'The words "once more" indicate the removing of what can be shaken...' Um, no they don't.

From where I stand, the words 'once more' indicate 'again', or 'one more time', another. Once more does not equal removal.

Time to search it out. Off to my greek lexicon, to find out why 'once again' indicates the removing of what can be shaken.

The short version of that is that there are two greek words that translate as 'once more' - and the one used here is transliterated 'hapax'.

It seems that hapax is a counting word - like once, twice, three times a lady, or once upon a time. It indicates a single instance. Once more indicates the removal of what can be shaken, because hapax is a word that refers to a single instance. Once more, meaning one last time, not yet another.

The OTHER greek word translated as 'once more' is interesting...I had to look to see which of these two was used in 12:26. It helped me to figure out what I was looking at to investigate both words.

Where hapax gets used most in the New Testament indicating singular things, ( beaten with rods, payment for sins, etc ) this other word is used to indicate cyclical, repetitive things.

Where hapax is a counting word, a singular word, translating most often as 'once', this other word seems to come up translated as 'again' most often.

Our word of the day is 'PALIN'. Strong's number 3825.

Now, I've been the least excitable person I can think of lately, regarding politics and the recent election. I voted my conscience on the abortion issue, and because Sarah Palin is someone who believes the same things I do about God. I tried to vote for righteousness, despite the outcome.

Lots of us are wondering what happened, and whether we did anything wrong as a church, did we miss God...Dutch Sheets' site addresses those questions, I think. In the end, we made a wrong choice as a nation...and we'll all have to live with that.

Still, wondering what the heck went wrong is a natural reaction. I'd been wondering how we as believers would address the fact that we'd put God's stamp of approval on the loser of the election. It's different when you put God's name on the losing horse, you know?

So with that in the back of my mind, as I'm reading greek words trying to research Hebrews 12:26, my eyes nearly popped out of my head as I'm reading her name on my screen. It's not the first time the Lord has ambushed me with one thing when I was studying another. Sometimes he sneaks up on me.

So Palin means 'again'. Maybe there's more down the line for her. Or for us. Anyway, on a less grand scale, I was encouraged just to know God is aware of what I'm thinking about, and that he bothered to include it in exactly the right place for me to see today, when I was thinking about it.

Thanks for reading.

What the Shel?

2008-11-03T20:36:00.001-08:00

I'm experimenting with facial hair. So far, my best identifiable target is famous poet ( and composer of 'A Boy Named Sue' ) Shel Silverstein
.

Strangely enough, Jenn likes it. And Amanda likes to feel it absently while I'm holding her. It seems to help her think.

I've begun to hear 'As-Salamu Alaykum' on a regular basis from one of my work colleagues. Another thinks I must be Jewish. I'm getting the orthodox rabbi thing a lot at church...

My business partner Greg refers to it as 'THE BEARD OF POWER'.

Last but not least, a buddy of mine recommends I decorate it for the holidays, so that the family can gather around and sing 'O Christmas beard, O Christmas beard' while it twinkles away.

I find it fascinating, the reaction it's provoking from the folks around me...I've never been called 'hirsute' before...google it.

Well, beard does rhyme with weird...

google widgets are handy...

2008-11-01T10:19:00.001-07:00

I just finally set up my google homepage to hook my blogger account, so I'm posting from my google homepage.

Google has an iGoogle homepage widget that hooks to your blog to let you do a quick post...kind of nice.

TA-DAAAA!

Small multiples

2008-10-03T15:25:00.001-07:00

There's a fellow named Edward Tufte ( long 'E' - Tuff-tee ) who is the expert regarding how to make pictures that mean things. If you're into graphs ( aka 'information graphics' ) Tufte is your man.

One of his concepts is that when you want to represent variation between similar things, you should take little snapshots and stick them side by side - he calls them 'Small Multiples'

Here are some examples:

Alex Rodriguez batting over three years

Example showing payroll expenses for groups of departments

As you can see, in both examples multiple similar pictures are grouped together to highlight the differences between them.

So in true geek fashion, I will now explain my affinity for romantic comedies.

When I look at a romantic comedy, I see small multiples. Movies like French Kiss, Hitch, 50 First Dates, Sleepless in Seattle and You've Got Mail share so many qualities that many people ( men ) will look at them and say 'Seen one? Seen them all!'.

However, I look at them and see the formula

boy meets girl
girl doesn't like boy - or does, but boy does something stupid
boy wins girl over by
- standing outside a window playing 'In Your Eyes' on a boom box
- being sweet despite ruining the business her mother built
- her discovering he's the right one at the last possible minute

Despite the basic similarity of all these films, I appreciate them because of the small variations on that basic formula - to me, mentally comparing them side by side is a sort of 'small multiples' exercise...

Let's compare Meg Ryan in French Kiss with Meg Ryan in You've Got Mail

Lives with boyfriend - gonna get married.
Meets charming, intriguing stranger ( Kevin Kline and Tom Hanks, respectively ) who irritates the crap out of her.
Falls in love with stranger, but doesn't choose to stay with him...
Stranger surprises her at the end of movie by chasing her down and smooching her.

All the same...but all different. It's the variations on the formula that make it interesting.

Yep, that's why I like them. Also, they make my heart go pitter pat. But mostly it's the analysis that gets me. Yep.

So compare your favorite two movies in this genre and see what matches up and what's different.

If we do enough thinking we might be able to come up with Romantic Comedy Bingo - then we can play it and assemble a plot that makes us a million bucks.

Hurricanes, weather, and the judgement of God

2008-09-10T18:51:00.001-07:00

Hurricanes are still relevant, though Gustav has passed.

Hurricane Ike is on the way - headed for Texas.

I find it amusing that I know an Ike...I play music with him every week. I've thought of him a lot this last week - good excuse to pray for him, since his namesake is planning on dumping 4 inches of rain on Dallas this weekend. I'm sure my friend has heard enough of hurricane jokes by now to last him a lifetime.

So given the recent posts by my friend William and myself, it seems appropriate for me to raise some of the larger questions in my mind:

Who's in control of the weather? Satan? God? Nobody? Natural Law ( the consequences of the fall )

{Your Father in Heaven} makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust- Matthew 5:45

Job 36, 37, and 38 are full of references to God's control of the weather - keeping hail in storehouses, dispersing lightning, making paths for the thunderstorm...

The plagues of exodus and the judgments of revelation also speak to God's control of the weather - if Satan had control of the weather and seasons, then rain, hail, burning sun, and astronomical phenomena would be opposing Moses and Christians, not the other way around.

In the millenial kingdom, as described in Zechariah 14, rain is withheld from Egypt and any other nation who does not go up to Jerusalem to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles.

Here's the big point, which speaks also to whether or not God judges mankind with weather events:

Job 37:11-13

He loads the clouds with moisture; he scatters his lightning through them. At his direction they swirl around over the face of the whole earth to do whatever he commands them. He brings the clouds to punish men, or to water his earth and show his love.

He does what? He brings the clouds to punish men, or to show His love.

The struggle is to then interpret what He is doing - luckily, we have the Holy Spirit in us, who will teach us all things ( John 14:26 ) and guide us into all truth ( John 16:13 ). As with dreams and visions, only He can tell us what the signs in the skies above and the earth below signify.

Baby steps to the prophetic...

2008-09-03T20:38:00.001-07:00

My buddy William got a comment the other day on his blog post about Hurricane Gustav, which asked about the journey into prophecy.

William posted a good response to that question, outlining his gradual journey into experiencing the Holy Spirit and His gifts.

The only thing I might add is that the most baby christian can exercise spiritual gifts - and I mean 1st Corinthians gifts, like prophecy, tongues, healing, words of knowledge.

My parents are seasoned and wise believers of many years, and have introduced many new believers into the things of the Spirit with some exciting results.

Praying for healing is a simple way to explore this stuff...pretty non-threatening, and less weird than jumping up and speaking in tongues in the middle of church. But you can do that too, if you want.

But here's what I really want to say:

Eagerly seeking the greater gifts, especially prophecy, is less about 'BAM' and more about 'shhh'.

My own journey into prophecy has been mostly personal, up to this point. At about age 15 I began to try and hear the voice of God - that involved a perception that my own thoughts were noisy and hard to tame, when I began to try and quiet them.

As time went on, with the guidance of my parents and a lot of journaling, I discovered that I was very naturally having an ongoing, internal conversation with the Holy Spirit.

I fell into a rhythm of walking through my life and experiencing God's presence with me, conversing, asking for dumb stuff like parking spots, talking about what was on my mind, and hearing Him speak to me internally.

I've even graduated into some pretty clear predictive and directional words from Him - He promised to double my income in a year - and he did. He told my wife and I the names of several of our children over time, and that we'd have twins, before we were even pregnant.

Some of us hear - words or thoughts in our minds, or infrequently aloud - others get pictures. That's what the Old Testament calls being a seer - see-er. one who sees.

All through the Old Testament, prophets are asked 'what do you see?' Jeremiah saw an almond branch, a boiling pot, figs...Amos saw a plumb line and a basket of ripe fruit ( Amos 7:8 and 8:2 )...Zechariah saw a flying scroll ( Zech 4:2 ) , and a lampstand ( Zech 5:2 ).

Prophets often see, and in many cases, the Lord gives them an interpretation for what they see.

Whatever way the Lord ends up speaking to you, the plain scriptural fact is that he does speak. John 10:2 has Jesus telling us that the sheep listen to the voice of the Shepherd. That's an identifying mark of being a sheep - they listen to the Shepherd's voice.

So whatever path the Lord wants to put you on, it's probably not dramatic and Hollywood-esque, at least not at first. It will be relational - the person of the Holy Spirit wants you to get to know him. One of His fruits is gentleness, so you can expect that he will be as gentle with you as you need him to be.

So take a deep breath, remember that He lives in you, and ask Him to speak to you. You might need to confess some sin, lay your cares on Him, or just be quiet for a minute to get your thoughts taken captive, so that you can hear clearly. Peace is also to be expected when He speaks to you.

After you've been listening a while, you might find that as you pray for someone, he gives you a picture to share with them, or a bible verse will come to mind unbidden...share it with them. Be brave. You'll discover getting to know the Holy Spirit is a lot of fun.

I've got one more story, but I'll post that next time. It's formative enough for me that it deserves its own post.

g'night.

Note: Gustav is only a cat 3 hurricane...

2008-08-31T21:50:00.000-07:00

As of around 12am Monday, Gustav is only a 3. I wrote previously that it was a 5...

I don't want to make a misinformed statement, especially related to sin and judgement, and then just gloss over the details.

Credibility and details matter in these circumstances...and Gustav is a 3, not a 5.

New Orleans, Sodom, and the real issue

2008-08-31T18:11:00.000-07:00

I just read a post by my good friend William - I was gonna comment on his blog, but my comment grew into a post of my own. How often does that actually happen. Congrats, William, on initiating my first blog post of substance in 10 months or so. Enjoy:

William correctly identifies that Ray Nagin and the government of New Orleans don't seem to behave any differently than they used to, despite Katrina. Now here comes Gustav, and maybe they'll get the message. To quote Chuck Pierce, 'God's going to keep washing New Orleans until it's clean'.

So I'm in agreement with that...but I'm going to bring a slight nuance to defining Sodom and Gomorrah's offense against the Lord - and hence, New Orleans' as well.

I feel like it's important to point out that homosexuality is not the scripturally defining sin about those cities.

Even though the current usage of the word 'sodomy', or 'sodomite', etc points to homosexuality as the distinctive in Sodom and Gomorrah - probably due to the Genesis 19 account of Lot and the men of Sodom - but when God looked at Sodom, the first thing on his mind wasn't just homosexuality.

Ezekiel 16:49-50 tells us that the most significant thing - Sodom's defining sin - was not taking care of the poor. The fast God has chosen from Isaiah is largely related to justice and the poor...so God is as concerned about racism ( hundreds of years of history in New Orleans on those issues ), graft and corruption ( again, fully integrated into the society of that city ), and the issues of justice for the poor as much, if not more, than he is about homosexuality.

Even Romans ch. 1 seems to indicate that homosexuality is the consequence of rejecting God, not the root of the issue.

Paul writes of homosexuality is a sign of reprobation, of God giving you over to your sin...and Paul goes on to list things that offend God that are part of a reprobate lifestyle. He seemingly does this from 'worst' to 'not worst' ending up on stuff like 'pride' and 'disobedient to parents'.

He who is without sin, right? Homosexuality, murder, etc...Everybody ready to pick up your rocks and aim them at the gulf coast?...oh wait. Whispering. Gossip. Pride. Disobedient to parents. I hope I hear you dropping your rocks. I'm working on dropping mine.

So of course I believe that homosexuality and the official government acceptance thereof is a big issue, and the timing of Hurricate Gustav is ominous and significant. Two level 5 hurricanes. On nearly the same dates. Within three years. Who can ignore that?

Updated on 9/3/2008: This was written prior to me reading that Gustav hadn't made it to Category 5. He only ended up being a 3. Still, the point stands...

When we talk about 'them' in New Orleans, we should be saying 'we'. One little ( or huge ) homosexual festival in Louisiana isn't the entire scope of the problem - our reprobate behavior is deeply engrained all over our nation, from the least to the greatest.

If we actually believe that God is singling out New Orleans for anything, I would venture to say that it's a sign to the rest of the cities of America. L.A., New York, Portland, Seattle, San Francisco all have large gay populations, laws supporting gay marriage, whole subcultures and industries that are built on it...and from what I hear, an even larger number of people who disobey their parents or don't consider the well-being of the poor around them.

WE should consider whether WE want to be dealt with in the same way God is dealing with New Orleans. God is no respecter of persons...what he does for one, he does for all. Don't kid yourself that this is just about New Orleans...

thirty-eight hours minus one.

2008-08-16T19:14:00.000-07:00

So both people that will read this blog ( William and Jennifer, at this point ) already know that I worked all night to meet a deadline.

Jenn says I have to go to bed now...so I can't blog anymore. Not that I had anything to say in my current mental state.

night night.

Apparently I would jump off a cliff, if you told me...

2008-08-14T20:51:00.000-07:00

So the fine cadre of friends that I have are now all on blogspot.

So, due to peer pressure, I'm now a blogger once again.

I don't have much to say right now, as I'm deep in a project and haven't had any thoughts that wouldn't put the rest of you in a coma for several days now. Curly braces, anyone?

However, here I am, blogging away...or am I blah-ging? Ponder that, will ya?

In all truthfulness my main question is how long I can keep doing what I'm doing ( day job, side job, family, church ) without one of those taking a serious dive. It's at a point where I don't feel like I'm doing any of them well.

When I feel that way, Jesus just says 'ummm, you are, in fact, doing it...' so I guess I need to keep on doing it and not worry so much.

This season is a wonderful exercise in breathing deeply while things feel wildly out of control.

Talk about blah-ging. Go read Williams blog, or Jenn's.

Eeeeyore.

Pondering the Word of God

2007-12-17T20:20:00.001-08:00

So I'm struggling to find a quiet spot - my house is full of folks for Christmas, I'm not slowing down often enough or long enough...the external activity isn't any worse than my own internal activity. Part of slowing down is my own choice to work against the momentum of how fast I'm moving.

So. Now I am choosing to be slow.

As I said in my last post, I'm meditating on 1st John. Jesus is described as the Word of Life.

So, borrowing from a bunch of stuff that I've read, here are my thoughts about the Jesus as the Word of God.

There's a whole study of Jesus as the Logos, which goes back and looks at the pagan and jewish philosophers to understand John's reference to Jesus as the word. That's all good stuff, and worth knowing, but I don't believe that we are required to know the history of the use of that Greek idea to get what the Spirit is saying through John. The brain he equipped us with is sufficient, when inspired by the Holy Spirit, to understand what the Bible means here.

So what's a word? Essentially, it's a group of sounds that represent something - an physical object or a mental idea. The group of sounds has meaning to the hearer. When spoken and heard, it produces in the mind the image or impression of the thing it represents.

I say shoe, and you know what I mean. I say fist, and you know what I mean. Physical objects with clear meanings. I say love, and even though we've shifted to the realm of ideas, you have a concept in your mind.

Words have meaning because of the shared language between the speaker and the hearer. If you want to be understood, you use a word. It's the clearest way to communicate. A pretty nifty invention, it is.

You'll note that we're talking about speaking words - speaking comes before writing. You can write a word, but the only reason for alphabets, pencils and paper is to catch what's already flying around in the air. Words are primarily spoken and heard, not read and written.

So John's testimony about Jesus is tied up in the concept of words. Why does John choose to call him that? Was John a student of Philo, who philosophized about the concept of the Logos? John was a fisherman, last time I checked...but he might have gotten literary sometime in there, and stolen Philo's word.

I think that John chose 'Word' as a title for Jesus because he wanted to say a very specific thing about who Jesus is. He didn't choose to say bread - in the beginning was the bread, and the bread was with God, and the bread was God...although bread is an appropriate label for Jesus. Lamb, Priest, King, Bridegroom, Vine, Teacher - John could have been inspired to use any of those as the label of primary importance for Jesus. But the Holy Spirit chose 'Word'. Why?

I think the answer is in Hebrews chapter 1.

In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe. The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word.

There are HUGE parallels between John 1 and Hebrews chapters 1 and 2. In each passage, Jesus is presented as the word, the creator, God incarnate, the Savior...well worth pondering. But we're talking about the Word.

If a word is something you say which is designed to represent a thing or idea, then Jesus is the thing God is saying to us to reveal Himself. When the right time arrived, God declared Himself to us - and the thing he used to communicate and represent himself exactly, perfectly is his Son Jesus. He has spoken to us, and his word is Jesus.

That word He spoke to us contains all that we ever might need to hear from God. It exactly represents who He is, what He wants from us, what He offers us, and what His intentions are.

I am in a constant state of asking God 'what are you saying?'. I want to hear Him, and I want to respond appropriately to His word. In one sense, that's good. But there's another sense where the Lord doesn't need to say anything to me at any given moment. If Jesus is the word of God to me - the thing that He has spoken to me - then I should just stop and hear Him.

If I am afraid, what he says to me is 'Jesus'. If I am joyful, what he says to me is 'Jesus'. In pain, He says 'Jesus'. In every experience, I am to be still and know He is God. I'm looking for that new place of resting - receiving what God has spoken to me by his Son, letting the word of Christ dwell in me richly, Christ in me, the hope of Glory.

I ponder that stuff, and then I can be quiet inside.

The Word of Life

2007-12-12T20:24:00.001-08:00

I was working on reading the Bible with my oldest daughter, age 9. A couple of days ago, I had her read a little of 1st John, and we talked about it before bedtime.

As I talked with her, the Holy Spirit connected something up for me about John's writings. He starts the book by explaining that he is writing from his own personal experience with Jesus, the Word of life.

It hadn't occurred to me before this, but the picture of Jesus as the Word of God shows up at the beginning of 1st John, just as it does in John's Gospel.

Jesus is displayed as the Word of God as a primary identifier at the beginning of both books.

Like most deep things, it feels like that's a very simple thing to comment on. But think about it - John thought so much on this idea of God talking to us through His Son, he pondered it so much, that John wrote about it all over the place.

Not only that, in the Gospel of John he writes that 'in Him was light, and that light was the life of men'. 1st John speaks over and over about how 'God is light, and in him there is no darkness at all', and John identifies Jesus as the Word of life in that introductory passage.

The Word. Life. Light.

So that's what I'm pondering these last couple of days, when I slow down. I'll probably write more about that over the next few days.

I've already given some energy to meditating on that idea of 'the Word'...I already see connections from 1st John to both the Gospel of John and to Hebrews. Where do these ideas come together in Revelation, 2nd and 3rd John?

The Light and Life are concepts John ties to the Word, so I'm asking God for revelation - What did you show to John, as he walked with you? What did John understand, that led him to write about you that way, with those ideas in his heart?

What happened when I got home...

2007-11-28T20:17:00.001-08:00

Lots of stuff has happened since I got home, but one thing in particular I wanted to write about.

So, one of the many topics that was spoken of at Roundabout was the future of Germany - regaining their national identity and being freed from shame. Dudi in particular has a strong sense of the importance of walking out that process.

She, Petra and I talked about that at lunch one day during Roundabout - how Germany needs to be Germany so that the Kingdom can advance in Europe and the world. That was a stand-out topic for me while I was at Roundabout - I had thought about it a lot, and came home still thinking about it.

Fast-forward to the Tuesday after Roundabout.

I was at our early morning prayer gathering at Glory of Zion, where I go to church. Chuck Pierce is the main leader at GOZ, and was leading the prayer meeting...so he spots me and says 'Darren, when are you going to Germany?' He'd been traveling and ministering when I was gone, so he didn't know that I'd just come back.

So he called me over to pray for the trip - here's the transcript of what he prayed/prophesied:

Father we say right now, before time you sent him into Germany and Father he went there, he began to operate in what you had already planned and father now he is responding to change the course of the earth...

Lord we speak to Germany today - we say to you all of the reproach is being rolled away from you

Lord there's a new work beginning - a new time is arising over Germany

The presence of God was very strong as Chuck was praying - he didn't know much about my trip except that I planned to go. It seems like restoring Germany's identity is really important to the Lord. The topic is so much on His mind that the Holy Spirit needed to bring it up again all the way back in Texas.

So, especially for Dudi, but also for the rest of us, the Lord wants to build our faith and reinforce our conviction that He is doing something in Germany - that He is restoring something vital to both the nation of Germany and to His Kingdom.

Lord bless you...