Threads from Henry's Web

Author: henry

  • Ignorance and Opinion Polls

    Well, I’ve written about a couple of posts by Joe Carter over on the evangelical outpost when I disagreed with him, so I ought to write once in a while when I agree! This morning he posted a truly wonderful write-up on opinion polls.

    It has been said that “figures lie and liars figure,” but that is not precisely accurate. It is not that the figures lie, but that they allow us to compile and present them so as to make the combination of many truths turn into a lie. The major problem with polls I believe is that they are either poorly designed, or their results are given a meaning in presentation that they don’t actually possess.

    So many people are so weak at math, and so unused to thinking with any precision about the data that they are easily mislead. One of my favorite means of statistical deception is the “on a scale of one to ten” question. Ask any sample of people to rank some issue from one to ten and then average the numbers and you will get what appears to be a very precise impression of the views of that group of people. The impression, however, is largely false.

    I recommend a couple of books: How to Lie With Statistics, which is old, but still very relevant, and Damned Lies and Statistics, which is more recent and also covers major issues in more detail.

    powered by performancing firefox

  • Objecting to Obama

    It appears that some evangelicals don’t like the idea of Barack Obama speaking at a church. He’s been invited by Rick Warren of Saddleback Church to speak at a conference on AIDS. The reason? He supports abortion rights. (See the story on MSNBC.com.)

    I wanted to call attention to this on two levels. First is the desire of some Christians (and note “some,” not all or even most) to close down lines of communication and listen only to those people who agree with them. It is not unlikely that many of the people who listen will disagree with much of what Obama believes, not only on abortion, but also on many other issues. Any issues of partisanship should be put to rest by the invitation to Senator Brownback of Kansas, not precisely one of my favorite people, but quite correct on this particular issue. Those who protest simply hearing from someone they disagree with do not do Christianity any favors.

    There are a number of reasons why I am looking favorably at Barack Obama myself. Obviously as an independent who stays out of the primary process, I am nowhere near becoming committed to a candidate, but he has taken some interesting steps. One very positive thing, I believe, is that he is encouraging liberals to talk about their faith. There are a lot of people of faith who are liberal, but their existence is often obscured by some of the noisier folks.

    I’m also mildly annoyed that we have this lengthy story about the fact that Senator Obama will speak at this event, but that is the sole topic of the coverage. It’s amazing to me what simply announcing candidacy can do to make one newsworthy. The material to be debated at the conference and the fact of the conference itself are substantially less newsworthy than is the participation of one particular politician.

    I guess we’ll need to get used to this kind of coverage over the next couple of years. Journalists have very little feel for substance and so focus on ever minor issue and speech. Journalists are at least as much to blame as political operatives in lowering the level of public debate.

    powered by performancing firefox

  • The Camp and the Cloud

    Yesterday and today I wrote devotionals for my wife’s devotional list that drew lessons from the movement of the cloud and fire over the tabernacle in the wilderness. These devotionals are not truly exegetical exercises, but rather draw on the approach I call “listening to the conversation.” The command here is clearly directed to Israel at a specific time and place. There is no direct application. At the same time we can draw lessons by looking at how God deals with people. For this post I’m presenting the scripture once, and then combining the two devotionals.

    (more…)

  • Interpreting Away what is Clearly Taught

    In this week’s Christian Blog Carnival #CL, now posted at Brain Cramps for God, I found an excellent post from Amanda on Imago Dei titled The Limits to God’s Grace This goes back to an article by Bart Campolo on which I commented about a week ago in my post Conceptual Idolatry.

    Amanda has written a thoughtful post which is well worth reading. She has avoided some of the rhetorical heat and settled for a great deal more light than the average post on this topic does. But my interest here is not on the correct answer to the question of grace, heaven, and hell and the nature of God that Campolo presented (though in general that is a central, perhaps the central question), but rather on the issue of who in this debate is more Biblical, and how we can know such a thing.

    Accusations, and in Campolo’s case confessions, of picking and choosing, interpreting away, or just plain ignoring various scriptures or scriptural teachings are a dime a dozen, and they are rarely examined, especially by those who agree doctrinally with whoever is making the claim. In this case Campolo says outright that he will interpret away any text that disagrees with his basic conception of God. Quoting him as quoted by Amanda:

    (more…)

  • Christian Carnival CL

    Christian Carnival CL has been posted at Brain Cramps for God. It’s well organized and there is some good stuff there as always.

    I’ve already commented on one good post over at Threads from Henry’s Web.

    Go, read, enjoy!

  • Measuring the Speed of a Meme

    Acephalous wants to measure the speed of a meme so he can report it at the MLA meeting. Now Well, I’m supposed to explain what’s going on here, and persuade all my readers to also link to the post, even going so far as to invent sob stories. Acephalous will be measuring links to his post every 10 minutes.

    Now personally I think the best sob story is that this is an excellent way to get links, but even if that were so (and his site does look like a serious, interesting site), he’d certainly deserve to succeed with such a creative plan.

    So whether it’s for science, or to reward a very creative link gathering plan, how about linking to him. Besides, you too will get to be a tiny part of a statistic used to advance science!

    Just link to this post, and ping Technorati, which you very likely do anyhow.

  • Isaiah 26: Praise and Lament in Trouble

    Update: I forgot to tag the places the New Testament quotes (none in this case) or alludes to this passage.

    In my series on Biblical criticism I discussed the division of Isaiah 24-27 into various segments and discussing their form. In that article I suggested taking Isaiah 26 as a unity even though it would be the longest single segment in Isaiah 24-27.

    Other commentators suggest dividing the chapter after verse 6 into a song of praise while verses 7-21 are a community lament. I see the two parts of the chapter as inextricably tangled together. Isaiah 24-27 appears to be a confused portrayal of the end times, but it is intentionally confused–what appears confused to us is intentional.

    Our desire as Christians is to get a roadmap, to find out how to avoid trouble, and how to come out fine in the end without too much fuss and bother. But “fuss and bother” is a characteristic of final events. You have a time of conflict in which there will be moments of triumph and joy, and moments when one needs to hide.

    18Woe to those who are anxious for the day of YHWH,
    Why do you want the day of YHWH?
    It’s a day of darkness and not light!
    19It’s as though someone flees from a lion,
    but a bear meets him,
    so he goes into his house,
    leans his hand on the wall,
    and a snake bites him!
    20Is the day of YHWH not darkness rather than light?
    Is it not gloom without any gleam of light?

    –Amos 5:18-20

    This rather negative view contrasts with the joy that is expected on the day of the Lord, the day when God comes to redeem, but also to avenge. There are two reasons for this mixed description. First, the day of the Lord is joy for those who are ready and waiting, but not so joyful for those who are not. Second, the end does not come in any scriptural description without some conflict and trouble. This is not the place to go into any detail on pre-trib vs. post-trib arguments, but I think this passage hints at a situation in which the good spent some tense times along with the bad. It is certainly not a “proof passage” on this point; it simply hints on a less precisely laid out final time of conflict.

    Translation and Notes

    1In that day this song will be sung in the land of Judah.
    We have a strong city,
    Salvation set in walls and outworks!
    2Open the gates!
    So a righteous nation may enter,
    One that keeps justice.
    3The mind that depends,
    You will keep totally peaceful,
    Because he trusts in you.[Philippians 4:7]
    4Trust in YHWH forever,
    For in YH YHWH is an eternal rock.
    5For he has humbled the inhabitants of a lofty place,
    An inaccessible city.
    He will overthrow it,
    He will cast it down to the ground.
    He will make it reach the dust.
    6Feet will trample it,
    The feet of the humble,
    The steps of the poor.

    This is the song of praise, but in leads into the destruction of evil, which in turn leads into the lament of the following verses. The lament in turn ends on what, from God’s people’s point of view at least, is another high point.

    Some commentators have been concerned that the great city has already been destroyed in chapter 25, but that is part of the lack of clear chronological sense of Isaiah 24-27. The intent is to portray the time of conflict, and the feelings of God’s people, both positive and negative during that time.

    7The way of the righteous is level.
    You prepare for them a straight path.
    8Indeed in the path of your justice
    We wait for you YHWH,
    Your name and for your reputation,
    is our deepest desire.
    9My soul longs for you in the night,
    My spirit within me keeps watch for you,
    Because just as your judgments hold sway in the land,
    So do the inhabitants of the earth learn righteousness.

    Here again is the key to the day of the Lord. God asserts his rule and his justice. For some people that’s a good thing, for others, it is not so good. God’s true people wait anxiously for God’s justice, even though there may be great trouble along the way.

    10When the wicked receive grace,
    The don’t learn righteousness.
    In a land of upright people he acts unjustly,
    And has no fear of YHWH’s majesty.
    11YHWH, though your had is lifted up,
    They don’t see it.
    Let them see your zeal for your people,
    And be ashamed.
    Let the fire of your anger consume them. [Hebrews 10:27]

    There is a certain emotional conflict about the end times in that while many are being saved, God’s people know that others will be destroyed. God’s people have cried out for justice throughout history. There is the essential tension between God not wanting anyone to perish, and God’s unwillingness to allow sin to persist.

    The apparent absence of God’s judgment gives sinners permission to carry on whatever they’re doing.

    12YHWH will accomplish deliverance for us,
    Indeed all our accomplishments are things you have done!

    This is a tremendous statement of the gospel message. We really have done nothing. Even what we appear to have done is God’s activity in us.

    13YHWH our God,
    Other lords besides you have ruled us,
    Still we praise your name.

    I like this little note of repentance. “We’ve run away Lord, but we’re back. You’re the only one who matters.”

    14Being dead, they cannot live;
    Being shades, they cannot rise;
    Therefore you punished them,
         destroyed them,
         eliminated all memory of them.

    My translation is a bit different from what you will find in most versions based on Waltke-O’Connor’s grammar. It seemed strange to be talking about the dead in this verse and how they cannot rise when we have an affirmation of resurrection at the end of the chapter. What this verse actually refers to is those “other lords” who have ruled Israel. They are actually dead, unable to do anything. God has wiped them out.

    15You have added to the nation, YHWH.
    You have added to the nation.
    You have been glorified.
    You have expanded the borders of the land.

    Note the turn to a description of God’s blessing.

    16In trouble they called to you, YHWH.
    They poured out their prayer as you corrected them.
    17Like a pregnant woman who comes near to giving birth,
    She writhes, she cries out in her pains, [John 16:21]
    Thus were we from before you, YHWH.
    18We were pregnant, we writhed,
    But we gave birth to wind.
    We have not brought forth salvation on earth,
    Nor have the inhabitants of the world fallen.

    And here is another statement of God’s grace. Every human effort has failed, has accomplished nothing. They are like giving birth to wind. Yet when God steps in there is salvation.

    19Your dead will live,
    My corpses will rise.
    Wake up and sing!
    Those who dwell in the dust.
    Like drops of light is your dew,
    And the earth will bring forth the shades. [Ephesians 5:14]
    20Come my people! Enter your chambers!
    Close your doors after you.
    Hide for just a moment,
    until wrath passes over.
    21For look! YHWH is going out from his place,
    To repay the iniquity of the land’s inhabitants on it.
    The land will reveal its blood,
    And will no longer conceal its slain.

    We end with two affirmations: 1) God will bring new life, an early affirmation of the resurrection, and 2) The land is going to reveal the iniquity that has been done in it, allowing final justice.

    On the first point there has been some debate about whether this resurrection refers merely to the restoration of the nation or whether there is a resurrection of the dead involved. I believe the latter, largely because of the contrast to the dead gods/lords who will never rise again.

    On the second, note that the sacrificial system had many cases in which a sacrifice was to be offered when someone realized their guilt. The things that are concealed must be revealed so that justice can be done, whether for atonement or for punishment.

  • Gail Riplinger and Isaiah 26:3

    This is in the “I just couldn’t resist” category. Stating that Gail Riplinger’s “New Age Bible Versions” is poorly researched is to cast aspersions on shoddy research everywhere. Today as I was preparing a post on Isaiah 26 for this blog (which will be in the next entry), I recalled her use of Isaiah 26:3, so I took a quick look on the internet to see if there was anything more recent.

    (There’s no particular reason to actually track Riplinger’s work in any detail. The errors are too widespread and pervasive to merit serious discussion.)

    For those who may not be aware, in a chart (she loves charts) on page 455 of my edition (identified as 5th printing) Riplinger quotes the first part of Isaiah 26:3 in the KJV and the NASB. She then supplies a period where there is actually a comma in both versions. This prevents one from noticing either that the verse is only half quoted, or that the point of her chart is completely destroyed if the entire verse is quoted.

    Her claim is that the NASB is saying that it doesn’t matter who one trusts in, that it is the steadfastness of mind that results in peace. She goes so far as to claim that people would not seek psychologists so much if the translators of the NASB had not translated as they do.

    Now look at the two translations of the full verse, side by side:

    NASB KJV
    “The steadfast of mind You will keep in perfect peace,
    Because he trusts in You.    		 Thou wilt keep him in perfect peace, whose mind is stayed on thee: because he trusteth in thee.

    Now notice that the claim that the “steadfastness of mind” is somehow presented as adequate for perfect peace is completely false. The fact of dependence on God is made clear by two factors: 1) God is the one who keeps the person in perfect peace, and 2) the reason for the peace is that the person trusts in God. Of course these very plain statements are removed in Riplinger’s deceptive chart.

    Now on the internet today I find her response to White. This isn’t terribly recent, but it just caught my attention. The response is just as deceitful as the original:

    White hopes his readers are as weak in grammar, syntax and theology as he is. He tells easily noted outright lies, which only the “simple” (Rom. 16:18) will swallow. He begins his lambast, storming:

    “[T]he rest of the verse actually contains the ‘key words’ she alleges are missing!…This kind of actual miscitation of the modern versions is rampant throughout the text of her work.”

    If White can find the missing words “on thee” in that verse in his NASB, I’ll give him $1 million dollars. He is lying, the rest of the verse does NOT “actually contain the key words she alleges are missing!” His accusations fall under the category of “false allegations” (not “fair comment”) in the courts.

    Actually, as I’ve pointed out, those words are there. But Riplinger apparently believes that by blustering and using strong terminology she can intimidate people into missing them. Of course they are not in her chart. But they are in the NASB.

    After ranting about psychology in the church (you can read the whole thing here), Riplinger continues:

    One cannot pretend, as White does, that because the words “in Thee” are a part of the next subject (he), verb (trusteth), and prepositional modifier (in Thee), that they have any grammatical connection to the earlier sentence and its syntax. The KJV has BOTH “on thee” in part one AND “in thee” in part two. The NASB omits one, thereby changing the meaning. White misses, not only the grammatical differences and hence the factual differences here, but he misses the basic biblical distinction between the heart, which trusts in God, and the mind which thinks on God. The “because” phrase tells WHY it works; it does not tell WHAT works.

    Considering how much she rants about White’s English comprehension, Riplinger should perhaps study a bit of literature herself. In poetry, words can pull double duty, but even that is not the point here. The NASB correctly translates the Hebrew phrase “in you” precisely the number of times it occurs. It carries additional freight in this verse because of the Hebrew parallelism, but that is very clear in any of the major versions.

    This is a case of misrepresentation, and that misrepresentation is stubbornly maintained down to the present by Riplinger. James White is correct in his analysis of the passage.

    Note: Updated 3/30/08 to place blockquotes around this section. I respond to the issue of italics elsewhere. These words are quoted.

    The KJV uses italics when the theological sense of a verse demands the insertion of English words to accurately complete a Hebrew thought. It is the only translation that is honest in this way. Both the NIV and NASB insert 1000’s of words, but give the reader no clue as to which words are inserted. One NIV editor’s article “When Literal Is Not Accurate” gives expression to the frequent use (6000 in the NIV) of such insertions.

    The veracity of the italics in the KJV have been proven true to such a degree that this author feels no need to pick them out and set them apart as uninspired. The ten words in italics in 1John 2:23 have since been vindicated by ancient manuscript discoveries. Note the following ‘miraculous’ coincidences:

    * The italics of Ps. 16:8 are quoted by Paul in the Greek text of Acts 2:25.
    * The italics of Is. 65:1 are quoted by Paul in the Greek text of Rom. 10:20.
    * The italics of Ps. 94:11 are quoted by Paul in the Greek text of 1 Cor. 3:20.
    * The italics of Deut. 25:4 are quoted by Paul in the Greek text of 1 Cor. 9:9.
    * The italics of Deut. 8:3 are quoted by Jesus in the Greek text of Matt. 4:4.

    I miscited nothing; my allegations regarding the NASB’s omission are true. White’s wrong again.

    Update 3/30/08: Note that even though I did not respond here at the time I wrote this post, this issue of the use of italics, and the very suggestion that the italics are quoted in Greek is ludicrous.

  • We Killed Less People than They Did

    I am often annoyed by the things that the Traditional Values Coalition does. When they call for a boycott of Walmart I don’t expect much damage to be done except to the general reputation of Christians.

    But today I got an alert e-mail from them that strikes me as celebrating Christmas by stirring up hatred. This alert, available online and titled Atheism Has Fueled Greatest Mass Murders In World History is apparently a reaction to some recent comments from various people who object to religion in general and Christianity in particular.

    The response, however, is less than constructive. It appears to be largely an attempt to smeer atheists by linking them with militant Muslims and blaming them for various historical slaughters. After quoting some of the attacks on Christianity, Sheldon says:

    The Christian-haters should turn their attentions to militant Islam and Atheism as the most serious dangers to the world.

    One of my many questions is simply which group of atheists right now is behaving in a manner at all similar to militant Muslims? This strikes me as simply striking out at people one would like to hate without any consideration for the facts or the consequences. (Note that at the same time as I am opposed to demonizing atheists, I would suggest watching out for demonizing Muslims.)

    The attacks to which this alert supposedly responds are a collection of the rather standard attacks on Christianity–responsibility for the crusades, the inquisition, and the Salem witch trials, for example. And what is the response to this? Apparently it is that not nearly as many people were killed as some people claim were killed.

    (more…)

  • New Methodist Blogs Weekly Roundup

    Allan Bevere has posted the first edition of his new Methodist Blogs Weekly Roundup, numbered #93 in succession from Locusts and Honey.

    Check it out!