Threads from Henry's Web

Author: henry

  • Ash Wednesday 1A – Psalm 51

    I wrote a blog post some time back with an outline I made from Psalm 51, along with links to a pamphlet that discusses repentance.

  • Ash Wednesday 1A – 2 Corinthians 5:21

    The whole passage (2 Cor. 5:20b-6:10) is great, but I’m just going to link to a few notes I’ve written on the key verse in 2 Corinthians 5:21.

    The way you understand the phrase “righteousness of God” will color much of the rest of your understanding of Paul, I think.

  • Lent 1A: Psalm 32 and Repentance

    This is just a very short note with a link. I’d like to tie the repentance described in Psalm 32 to Leviticus 6 (5 in Hebrew). I wrote about that previously on my Participatory Bible Study Blog. This passage describes the priestly doctrine of repentance.

  • So Wrong Divine Intervention is Required

    In my recent reading from the book of Job I came across the following from Zophar. I’ll quote just a bit:

    “Shouldn’t the multitude of words be answered?
    Should a man full of talk be justified?
    Should your boastings make men hold their peace?
    When you mock, shall no man make you ashamed?
    For you say, ‘My doctrine is pure.
    I am clean in your eyes.’

    But oh that God would speak,
    and open his lips against you,
    that he would show you the secrets of wisdom!
    For true wisdom has two sides.
    Know therefore that God exacts of you less than your iniquity deserves.
    (Job 11:1-6, WEB)

    I once preached a sermon in which I labeled the three friends of Job with modern denominational labels. I didn’t do this because I had tagged a particular one of them with denominational characteristics. In fact, I can’t remember what label I put on each. What I was trying to illustrate is that Job’s friends have their disciples in our modern churches.

    Have you ever had an argument, or to be kind, a ‘vigorous discussion’ with someone, only to have it conclude with your opponent saying something like “I’ll pray for you!” By the tone, you know they won’t be praying for your health. What they’ll be praying for is that God will straighten you out. Now I don’t mind having someone pray for me, and I’m sure God can handle whatever they ask, but often the underlying meaning of that phrase is something quite different. To go to the title of this post, what you’re being told is that you’re so wrong (and so stubborn) that only divine intervention will suffice to set you straight.

    Notice how Zophar first assures Job that he doesn’t understand, then wishes God would explain things to Job, but in the final line of the quote, he says “But know this …” Zophar is sure Job doesn’t understand, but he, Zophar, has it straight. If you continue reading the chapter, Zophar brings up many things that Job doesn’t understand. The implication behind the speech, however, is that Zophar does.

    When Job responds, he says:

    “No doubt, but you are the people,
    and wisdom shall die with you.
    But I have understanding as well as you;
    I am not inferior to you.
    Yes, who doesn’t know such things as these?” (Job 12:2-3, WEB)

    It’s possible for an appeal to God or an appeal to prayer to be an act of humility. You’ll probably know by the tone. But generally such calls come from someone who is so sure he or she is deep in the counsels of God and doesn’t need instruction. But you do.

    As you’re thinking about that, however, consider how many debates you’ve been in, in which you were the one with a tame god on a leash, ready to be sic’d on your opponent. Then try Job 38:2 on for size:

    Who is this who darkens counsel
    by words without knowledge?

  • I Get Latin Books

    A member of my Sunday School class gave me a Latin grammar and dictionary. Is this a sign from God that I should revive my Latin?

  • Populating Hell

    … is not really my business. I recall one of my college professors who said that it was very liberating for him when he realized that it was not his responsibility to figure out who was going to be saved and who wasn’t. That’s basically my position. I tend to apply 1 Corinthians 2:9 (eye has not seen, etc) to the other side as well. We don’t really know. I suspect that when we do know what God has done, we will understand that to be just.

    But raising the questions is a good thing, in my view. I’m not going to comment on Rob Bell’s forthcoming book which I haven’t seen. I just don’t find the advertising for it offensive. If you can’t discuss the questions it raising openly and reasonably, it’s time to learn.

    I  want to link to two friends who have made intelligent and challenging comments on this issue, Bob Cornwall and Allan Bevere. Both are thoughtful and challenging.

    I’ll also link to a story I wrote that I hope challenges some thinking about hell, Hell Fire and Damnation. Yes, I’m using a popular story to plug something I wrote. 🙂

     

     

  • Motorists Detained for Paying Toll with Large Bills

    … like $20, according to this story.

    Now the story brings up interesting issues of profiling, and whether toll station workers were legally permitted to detain anyone. I think those are good questions. The Florida DOT’s coverup should also be investigated.

    But here’s something that got me:

    Although FDOT refused to comment because the Department expects to be sued, internal e-mail justify the program because of counterfeit bills. However, in a 2 and a half year period the DOT got $16,000 in counterfeit bills, while at the same time it collected close to $2 billion in tolls ($1,523,825,404).

    The Department also spent $32,000 on forms used to catch the $16,000 in funny money. The department also says in e-mails, the program will help law enforcement catch counterfeiters.

    Irrespective of all the very valid legal issues, as a businessman, I would say this should raise red flags. A program that spends $32,000 to prevent $16,000 in losses is not very profitable. Of course, it will be less profitable if FDOT loses the lawsuit.

     

    Related articles
    Enhanced by Zemanta

  • When Will Teachers Sacrifice like Wall Street Execs?

    A very funny clip from The Daily Show:

    I would normally have a serious problem with comparing the two situations, with Wall Street execs paid by private organizations while teachers are paid by the state, but the waters are muddied by the bailout. Under normal circumstances, I’d support people getting whatever pay is determined by the market.

    But what the market determined was that some major financial firms ought to fail. There’s a caveat in that one as well. What role did ineffective or even harmful regulation have on that situation.

    But all these caveats ruin the humor.

     

  • Lent 1A – Theme

    Well, I’m back again on one of my irregular forays into lectionary blogging. I hope visitors in the meantime have found value in the links to other people’s lectionary blogging found in my sidebar.

    It’s not hard to find a theme in this week’s lectionary texts, nor to imagine why those are the texts for today. I think the Romans passage ties the theme together nicely, and if I were to teach this myself, I’d probably start from that point.

    Paul tells us that one sin made everyone into sinners, and thus one obedient man, or one act of obedience (carried throughout his life) could make us right with God again. Our texts simply point to the pieces of the puzzle. In Genesis 2:15-17; 3:1-7, we have the original temptation and fall. Here the first couple are placed in the Garden of Eden, but directed away from the tree. Yet they eat in any case.

    In Matthew 4:1-11, we have the opposite effect. Note that in Matthew 4:1, it is the Spirit that leads Jesus into the desert to be tempted. Even more so than Adam and Eve were directed away, Jesus was directed into the test so that he could pass and show that he would reject divinity, improperly offered.  Adam and Eve were human and wanted to be gods. Jesus was God and accepted humanity (Phil. 2:5-11).

    The final element of this puzzle is Psalm 32 which, in my view, connects us to the other two. It describes guilt, repentance and forgiveness. It is repentance, a turning to God and away from evil, that allows us to be incorporated into the family that Christ represented in his act(s) of obedience. Lent is not just about the fall and redemption. It is about us becoming part of that new family of faith, incorporated into God’s family, established by the obedience of Jesus Christ.

  • Do You Need Biblical Languages to Understand the Bible?

    Rod Decker presents a quote in which a famous person suggests you do. Well, sort of. Really he seems to be suggesting that it’s much, much better if you understand the biblical languages. I’ll let you go read the original post to get the quote and find out who wrote it.

    I’ve written on this before. I’d like to note here that the answer to this question isn’t binary. There are advantages to knowing the biblical languages. There are ways to improve what you can learn without them, such as using multiple translations and reading good commentaries by people who do know them.

    In addition, however, knowing and not knowing biblical languages isn’t binary. There are wide differences in knowledge and how well that knowledge is maintained. This also presents a problem for the person who is looking for good commentary. Is the work you’re reading written by someone with good facility with the language, or someone who pieces together bits of information from various reference sources without really understanding the source text?

    One of my professors in graduate school was extremely proficient in the languages. I took Aramaic from him, for example, and got the workout of my life. I really appreciated that workout. He expected us to read unpointed Aramaic texts, and to be able to produce on demand any form of a verb that he might demand, not just the one that happened to occur in the text. (Reading unpointed texts in Hebrew and Aramaic is extremely valuable, but was not required by any of my other professors. When you work on inscriptions or try to apply some knowledge in a language like Ugaritic, you come to really appreciate that foundation.)

    At the same time, he interpreted with denominational blinders, which was extremely frustrating. I wouldn’t have taken his word for the interpretation of a passage, but I would have wanted his evaluation of each of the nuts and bolts that went into that interpretation.

    Many things go into reading and understanding. It’s not just knowing or not knowing the languages.