Plutarch On Compassion

"To show kindness only to one's friends and benefactors is no proof of having acquired such self-control: the real test is for a man who has been wronged to be able to show compassion and moderation to the evil-doers."

Plutarch, Dion

Our First Christmas Bird

P. and I are making our first turkey together. Thanks to a great bird featured by friends Keke and Jade at Thanksgiving, we have been craving turkey ever since, hence our endeavor today. As an homage to Thanksgiving two years ago, we have decided to add a little something extra--beer--to the roasting process, specifically Beamish Stout. This year's recipe is an adaptation of one of Alton Brown's.

UPDATE

We are about 45 minutes into the roasting. Our aromatic mixture of Beamish Stout, apples, onions, cinnamon, rosemary, and sage are sizzling happily inside. We've rubbed down the outside with olive oil and have sprinkled it with sea salt and italian spices (and extra Beamish). 

Mark's Date

Good discussions on the dating of Mark at NT Gateway (post-70) and Earliest Christian History (pre-70) below.  Critical to the debate is the relative merit of invoking narrative technique in positing a date for the penning of the work. For the posts, check here, here, here, and here.

Teixeira's Destination

UPDATE: Ouch, Mark Teixeira is headed to New York. Those pesky Yankees.

Will Mark Teixeira end up with the Red Sox, despite John Henry's assertion that the team is "not a factor" is negotiations for the star first baseman? I hope so, and Buster Olney thinks so. 

Plutarch on Iraq, er, Syracuse

"After such a long period of tyranny, the Syracusans were in the position of a man who tries at the end of a long illness to stand immediately on his feet, and so in attempting to act the part of a free people before they were ready for it, they stumbled in their efforts. At the same time they resented the attentions of Dion, who, like a good physician, tried to impose a strict and temperate course of treatment."

Plutarch, Dion

Philippians 2:12-13

With “wherefore” Paul returns from his reflection on Jesus to the Philippians and their responsibility in light of the gospel. Like Jesus obeyed the father, the Philippians are to obey Paul, who is Christ’s servant (1:1), whether he is present with them or is communicating with them through his emissaries or a letter. 

The command for the Philippians is “to work out your salvation in a manner of fear and trembling” (1:12). These terms connote serious and consequential activity. It is not Paul, of course, whom the Philippians are most to be concerned of, but God himself. They should pursue Christian living that is fitting to the gospel Paul has delivered, essentially for the sobering reason that “God is the one working in you to will and work on behalf of his good pleasure” (2:13). 

This is a striking reminder of God’s preeminent activity in the life of his people. One’s “partnership in the gospel” (1:5) is not to be taken lightly, for God stands behind such beginnings and his glory is the goal of its continuance and completion (cf. 1:6, 11).  This principle serves as a bridge between 2:1–4 and 2:14–18—by providing the grounds for Paul’s instructions in the former passage concerning like-mindedness and humility and for the latter passage, to which we turn next.

Niebuhr Considered

Joseph Loconte, in Books and Culture, reflects on Reinhold Niebuhr and the relevance of his political theology for our present time. Read the article here.

It's a Wonderful Life?

I love this personal perspective of It's a Wonderful Life given by Wendell Jamieson in the NY Times. He's able to capture many ironies the film holds out to today's viewers as well as the darkness that pervades the story, despite its sentimental trappings. Read the piece here.

Mohammad on Obama

I just stumbled across this post by Mohammad--at Iraq the Model--in the aftermath of the U.S. presidential election. A refreshing perspective.

Obama on Energy and the Environment

Obama looks uncomfortable--maybe he's tired. I've been watching the president-elect roll out his energy team. Concluding the presentation, Obama fielded a few questions, including one or two about the Blago scandal. Two observations:

(1) During the introduction to the Obama energy team and during each member's brief comments there existed this strange "we're going to save the world" feel. Completely understandable during the campaigning season, it seemed a bit strange--dare I say over the top?--here. Don't get me wrong, I think Obama's handled most things very well so far (I'm not sure McCain would have been so organized, for example). In the interest of practicality, though, I would expect the president-elect to start detailing smaller achievable goals, which he can then build on later. Instead I'm hearing Bush-like rhetoric applied to environmental goals. There is one expection.

(2) Obama is, not completely unsurprisingly, back-tracking from his initial insistence against off-shore drilling. At the press conference he notes that he, while campaigning, did allow for the possibility of off-shore drilling as long as it was part of a comprehensive strategy to rid ourselves of dependence upon foreign oil. Well, sort of. He arrived at this particular position only late in the game, after McCain (in my view) outmaneuvered the president-elect on this issue (even if it didn't make much difference in the long run). Initially he completely opposed lifting the ban on off-shore drilling. I am pleased he is showing himself to be practical with this issue, as he seems to be doing with foreign policy as well.

Meet Lucy

Philippians 2:9-11

Ok, back from that Facebook nonsense.

It should be remembered that when Paul turns to Jesus in 2:5–11 he is doing so in order to provide his readers with the ultimate model to imitate. (Of course, Jesus is more than just the model for, he is also the ground of kingdom living.) This point is important to remember for it helps explain why Paul emphasizes what he does. He wants the Church to be “like-minded” (2:2); regard “others as being more important than yourself” (2:3); to look “out for the concerns of others” (2:4). Jesus did all of these things. His obedience (2:8) proved his agreement with the Father; his humility in assuming human form and marching forward to a wretched death demonstrated his self-effacing and compassionate existence. God’s response to Jesus’ actions, then, is one of which Christians who walk in Jesus’ way can also expect to be similar recipients.

[Interestingly, Paul has presented his own sacrificial ministry in much the same terms he uses to describe Jesus’. In 1:23, it will be recalled, he expresses his desire “to depart and be with Christ”; however, he determines to “remain and continue with you all.” Of course Paul wasn’t, like Jesus was, equal to God, but the apostle does give up presence with the exalted Lord in order to minister to the Philippians. This is his act of obedience. And what is the result of it? Like Jesus’ service meant glory to God, Paul’s service causes the Philippians “to glory in Christ Jesus” (1:26). A very fascinating parallel!]

As a result of [“wherefore”] Jesus’ obedience unto death, God exalted him. This is a reminder that God’s ways are so different from the ways that define our ordinary existence in society. Typically, we are only rewarded when we assert ourselves and push our way to the top, whatever the consequences to bystanders, and we long to imitate those who embody this lifestyle. Jesus, though, does not exalt himself but is exalted by the Father; it happens, moreover, only when he submits in humility.

Along with exalting him [progression] God gave him a name that is preeminent. He blessed him with authority—the same authority he had willingly given up in the incarnation. What a turn of events! But the authority vested in his name has the aim [purpose clause, “in order”] that all beings everywhere submit themselves in worship of and acknowledgment that Jesus is Lord. Interestingly, this picture depicts the very like-mindedness among God’s creatures that Paul wishes for his Church at Philippi to possess. Fixation on Christ is the only way to accomplish like-mindedness among God’s people. For, after all, it is God’s will. This we see in the result that flows forth from praise of Jesus.

The end of acknowledgment and reverence of Jesus is that “glory is given to God the Father” (2:11). This is not only the result but it is also the purpose of God’s investing Jesus with such authority. We are not merely expressing praise to Jesus who died for us but we are also worshiping the Father who gave us existence and orchestrated our salvation. Our salvation will also one day culminate in exaltation, but that is for God to accomplish; it remains for us to wait upon him in a humble and sacrificial love of one another as Jesus did.

The Next Model

Check out this moody humanoid. At least he's targeting UK cities first.

The Next Model

Check out this moody humanoid.

Advice to Conservatives Via Powerline

Paul, at Powerline, offers some excellent advice for conservatives wondering how to respond to the new Obama presidency. Check it out here.

Scott adds his own thought.

Paul also forecasts the coming transnational politics likely to prevail under Obama's administration.

Palin and "Troopergate"

Paul at Powerline reflects on the "Troopergate" report here.

Ayers Online

Several MSNBC analysts have made the case that it's a little too late to raise fears in people's minds about Obama's connections to ideological radicals now that people feel comfortable with him. I would probably have to agree with this. The McCain campaign, though, is till going to try. John at Powerline links here to an Internet ad put out by McCain. The ad concludes that Obama's connection to Ayers raises concerns about his judgment, but it fails to say much about the related issue of the Illinois senator's very liberal ideological background.

Last Night's Debate: A Great Cure for Insomnia

Politico makes an accurate assessment of last night's debate: "The Worst Debate Ever." I am so disgusted at the obvious pandering from both sides, not to mention the obfuscation. If my enthusiasm for McCain was tepid before, it is downright cold now. And about the "nonresponsiveness," Harris and Vandehei make a nice point:

"The candidates are stumped.

When Sarah Palin dodged questions with scripted messages and folksy one-liners in her debate against Joe Biden her nonresponsiveness was often glaringly obvious. With McCain and Obama, you have to print out the transcript and read carefully to fully appreciate how they glided past sharp questions. Because both have gone through dozens of such encounters over the past couple of years, and because Obama in particular is an exceptionally fluent speaker, their answers can sound plausible — even when the fog machine is going full blast."

Obama and Ayers, Part 2

Briefly put, there are two main reasons why the Obama-Ayers connection is relevant, and neither one of them has to do with the absurd implication that Obama is a terrorist since Ayers is.

1) It goes to judment. Much has been made of judgment already in this campaign. Obama was mentored by Rev. Wright, a close acquaintance of Farakan. McCain showed poor judgment in continuing the war strategies of George W. Bush. Obama shows poor judgment in wanting to withdraw troops right away. And how about this one, McCain has shown what type of judgment he has (read: bad) in picking Sarah Palin to be his running mate. I argued regarding Obama's Rev. Wright connection, one need not say that the Democratic contender espouses racist ideas or hatred because his pastor does. Similarly, one need not say that Obama is a terrorist because he had multiple interactions with Ayers, a terrorist. However, it does demonstrate his judment. Someone might say that it doesn't reveal much if his interactions were merely accidential of no substance. Perhaps, but that is precisely what needs to be determined. What were the nature of those interactions and what might they reveal about Obama.

2) Maybe even more important, the connection needs to be investigated and explicated because of what it reveals about Obama's chosen narrative for himself. Obama presents himself as a force to bring people together, not as exponent of partisan politics. We have very little to go on in terms of his Illinois Senate voting record (other than "present"); we do, however, have a decidedly liberal voting record in the U.S. Senate. Now, maybe Obama would not deny that he's liberal; perhaps he would just suggest that his liberal politics are exactly what would bring people together. This would be clever semantics and perhaps convincing to some. However, I think Obama wants people to believe he is not a far-left liberal and that he intends more than anything else to bring people together and to usher in a new era of pragmatic politics. his narrative--which Obama has written--is why it's important to dig further (or better explicate further) into his associations with Ayers. I suspect that at the very least they will reveal what his Senate voting record suggests, namely, that he is a thorough-going commited liberal.

One last comment: I've heard some say that Obama only worked with Ayers because Daley introduced the man as his "point man on education." Perhaps this is true. Again, though, this very fact would dispel the myth that Obama is post-party politics. If Obama were part of the renowned Daley Democratic machinery in Chicago, falling in line as necessary, what would this reveal about his potential as a politician to bring people together? It seems to me that we have on the one hand, Obama's voting record and known associates, and on the other, how he portrays himself. For clarification, I have no problem, necessarily, that Obama has plugged in thoroughly with his party's leadership and walks in line with liberal ideology. It's just that he's trying to present a different case. Obama's "Ayer connection" helps make this case.

The Legitimacy of the Obama and Ayers Discussion, Part 1

Just got back from running and wanted to post a few thoughts on political matters before I drop dead. Here goes.

On the question of whether it's appropriate for McCain and Palin to raise questions about Obama's "Ayers" connection. My answer is . . .

Most assuredly yes! Now, before I offer a rationale, let me make an initial observation. I completely understand how, because of the often-times acrimonious nature of politics, those who hear McCain and Palin's attack on Obama as "Palling around with terrorists" get turned off. There are likely several types of people who dislike these attacks:
1) Those who are democrats through and through and at heart just don't want their candidate to be "smeared" in this fashion.
2) Those who pay little attention to politics through disinterest or because of "partisan bickering."
3) Those who used to fall into camp 2 but now are more attracted to the political process because of the hope that Obama seems to hold out for "post-partisan" politics.
4) Neutrals who have investigated the evidence for anything more than a "passing" connection and have come away convinced that Obama's past in this regard is above repute.
5) Those who are Republicans and may think there is a serious connection to be investigated but take issue with the strident terminology in which the subject is broached.

[I, of course, tend more toward 5), but owing to a somewhat realist (cynical?) streak, have come to see politics as a hard-nosed contest. I have to give Obama credit in this respect--though he has had the sore Bush legacy as an ally--because he has managed to establish the national and media narrative for the race in such successful fashion that any serious investigation of his represents smear tactics and a desire for the old partisan bickering that Washington has come to represent and that people want to move past. He's done a great job of this and has taken the arrows out of McCain's quiver.]

Now, I think those who hold to position 1) can be fairly easily dismissed. If Tom Delay was running for president, you can bet that Democrats would be raising as an issue even the remotest of dangerous or rabid ideological acquaintances that he might have had in the past--and rightly so. Someone might say, though, that this is because of Delay's established reputation, he penchant for ideologicaly or power-hungry politics. Well, but that's precisely what is at issue here, one's actual
belief system and tendencies. We don't know much about Barak Obama other than his voting record in the Senate (which speaks against his own narrative). It's important where there is substantial indications of formative relationships and associations to investigate these.

Those who pay little attention to politics because of disinteredness 2a), I have little sympathy for. However, I do have sympathy for those who tend to be turned off because of the strident "dialogue" (2b and 3). Many of my friends fall into this category, as does my wife at times. A preliminary reminder to those new to political interestedness, however, is that there has never been a time in political history, either in this country or I suspect another, where such tones have not existed. In fact, things were much worse at the birth of our country. Duels and beatings occured among members of Congress and the executive branch, and politicians were outright branded traitors and worse on political posters, in newspapers, and on the streets. Politics were run by ruthless bosses who controlled how many on the street would vote (sounds like Ohio, huh?).

This is not to condone this behavior or to say we shouldn't strive for respectable dialogues, but instead to recognize that really important issues are at stake and sometimes the situation calls for serious and, yes, heated debate. Many of those who complain of McCain and Palin's attacks see it as evidence of desperation, to which I say, duh. Of course it is, precisely because they realize that they--and their ideas--are at stack now that polls show Obama solidly winning. It is poor logic, though, that draws the conclusion that such desperation therefore means the point is out of bounds. I will argue, that the Obama-Ayers connections is very much a necessary one to raise insofar as it goes directly to the issue of the narrative that Obama has himself established.

Now, it may be that camp 4) types may exist--those who consider themselves neutral and have thoroughly investigated the details and concluded that Obama has no significant connection to Obama. I think if most of us are honest, though, we would deny that pure neutrals exist at all. I certainly don't consider myself one and I don't ascribe this characterization to The New York Time (or The New York Post, for that matter). In the absence of neutrals, and the indisputable evidence that some relationship existed between the two men, it's only right if dialogue be had. And the dialogue should not stop with, as it might tend to, simply saying that Obama had ties with the terrorist Ayers. This gives rise to the slightly accurate claim of smear politics as well as the aversion by those who might otherwise be interested about knowing more. It must show, as in the court of law, relevance. And I will make a brief case for that in my next post.

Robogirl

Here's a a look at the new robogirl, whose design is based on a real Japenese girl. How would you like to have her serving you coffee in the morning? Scary.

The Constitution and the Vice President

John at Power Line comments here on the constitutional role of the vice president--as touched on in the recent vice presidential debate. (I'm fairly confident that if Obama is elected president, Biden will relish this role.)

Here John links to a NY Post article that details some of Biden's misstatements in the debate. (Pain made her own--e.g., regarding the pre-surge troop levels.) I chuckled at the Burr reference.

For the Love of the Dog

I saw this story a few days ago on TV. A Florida man takes on a shark to save his dog. Check it out here.

Philippians 2.5–8

The ultimate exemplar of the type of like-minded, humble pursuit of gospel unity that Paul wishes to commend to the church in Philippi is Jesus himself. In 2:5 he turns from simple exhortation to a concrete example by urging the Christians to "consider this [mindset/mode of living] among you, which also is in Christ Jesus." In other words, possess or embody Christ's way of life—a high standard to follow, indeed. But rather than point first to Jesus' exalted status, his glory, his majesty, Paul draws upon his lowliness to drive home his argument.

After all, "even though" [a concessive formulation] he existed in God's form—something Paul has no wish to deny—Jesus "did not consider 'the being equal to God' status as a thing to be grasped." How different Jesus' manner was, then, from how we tend to conduct our lives, even those of us who would carry around the title "Christian." We grab for every possible shred of dignity and status within our reach; if others fail to exalt us, we exalt ourselves. Our whole lives are a testimony to a struggle to reach the top by whatever means within our power—academically, financially, socially, et cetera. Christ's way was so different, and it was so because he placed his faith in the sovereign lord of the universe.

Rather than grasp for his rightful status as "God," Jesus did something different, something much unexpected. At this point (v. 6b) Paul delivers a strong contrast, "but!" [alla], to emphasize just how extraordinary Jesus' actions were when compared with typical human tendency. The one who existed in God's form nevertheless "emptied himself" of the privileges that "Godness" affords by means of taking/assuming a slave's form. Put another way, he exchanged the form of God for the form of slave, the radical reverse of our expectations and our own habits. Paul reminds us here that Jesus came not merely to testify to his glory but to serve. This service mindset is what Paul himself strives to embody—note already how he has put the cause of the gospel before even his own life—and what he wishes his converts in Philippi to take up as well.

Concurrently with Jesus' emptying himself [I take this verb as parallel with "empty"], he was "born in man's likeness (v. 7c)," which is to say, he became a man. This further phrase illustrates, firstly, that Jesus' appearance as a man (his "likeness") does not tell the full story about who his is. But it also suggests a close linkage between the concepts of "man" or "human" and the idea of "service"—at least insofar as Jesus' humanity became operative for the purpose of service. So far Jesus' humble actions seem laudatory, even counter-cultural, but the full extent of their radical nature has not yet been explored. That's why Paul goes on to say that,

While "being found with respect to outward appearance as a man" [I take this as a temporal clause, explaining when Jesus' following actions take place] Jesus "humbled himself, becoming obedient unto death." Our humility often consists of deferential treatment toward others; of avoiding the limelight; of letting someone else set in front of us while in line. Rarely does our humility take the form of serious self-limiting action. Jesus was humble "by means of" giving himself over in death. His path of obedience led to a destination of expiration; our way of obedience often results in a "temporary setback," because we can't imagine that God wants anything else for our lives other than success. And to top it all off, Paul goes out of his way to emphasize that Jesus' death was the worst then imaginable: it was death produced by a cross.

Why didn't Jesus resist? Was Jesus by his death simply seeking to enact a dramatic—and tragic—parable? What had he to gain from such servitude? What have we? Paul treats the substance of these questions beginning in verse 9.

Kristol's Advice for McCain

Here's some interesting advice for McCain from Bill Kristol. I'm not sure if I agree with Kristol that the liberal tag will hurt Obama at this point. And it seems as if McCain is unwilling to draw attention to the Obama-Ayers connection, noted here in a February post by Ben Smith.

Review of Freddosa's Book on Obama

The Economist has up a review of NRO's (yes, a conservative publication) David Freddosa's work on Obama. Ultimately, Freddosa finds that Obama is, counter to public presentation, a rather conventional politician. Check out the article here.

Campaign 2008: Out with the Old and in with the, er, Old

Here's an article on how this presidential race stacks up against past one's. The author concludes--and I would have to largely agree with him--that Obama and McCain are for the most part running fairly convential campaigns.

Philippians 2.1-5

The material in Chapter 2 flows nicely in a thematic way from Paul's discussion in Chapter 1. We've mentioned before how Paul time and again seems to encourage imitation among his addresses—both of Christ and of himself. We see examples of both here.

Technically, a new section begins in 1:21, insofar as there the apostle explains his intentions to strive further in his ministry as this accrues to the benefit of the Philippians. This attitude, in fact, sets a tone for selfless service and concern for others that Paul wants to impress upon the church. In 1:27–30 he shifts his discussion to the church and begins to treat their responsibility in light of his absence. Even here he associates "living as citizens" (1.27) with a like-minded and harmonious common pursuit of the gospel. It is in the first part of Chapter 2, though, that Paul holds up Christ as an example and unpacks what kind of humility is required of citizens of heaven.

The "therefore" in 2.1 serves to pick up and further explicate Paul's command in 1.27. In this first section (2.1–5) what the apostle wants to do is describe a way-of-life that is characteristic of the follower of Christ. He will then follow up this description with a portrayal of Christ that reinforces his command and further fleshes it out.

While Paul begins Chapter 2 with a series of "if-then" commands, there is little doubt, on the one hand, that these conditions are indeed met and, on the other, that the resultant command must be obeyed. There is encouragement that results from one's residing in Christ [the grounding condition—note the "in" versus "of"—of the following conditions]; there is solace that emanates from [God's] love; true fellowship does indeed spring from the Holy Spirit's presence; and affection and compassion do characterize Christ's followers. Since these conditions are met, the Philippians are obligated to fulfill Paul's command, which oddly enough is to "complete" his joy (2.2).

What follows is Paul's explanation of his joy—that which the Philippians must complete. (This gives us a glimpse, therefore, into the apostle's mindset every bit as much as it describes actions to be undertaken.) Instead of understanding Paul to say "complete my joy by . . .," we should translate the passage "complete my joy, which is you being like-minded [lit., "thinking the same thing"]. When read this way, it's easier to see just how central unity was in Paul's thinking—unity, that is, that is grounded in the Gospel. His joy is a function of the church's unity. The following clauses should not be read as parallel statements with "you being like-minded," as if they are additional actions, but rather as explanations of how (means) to embody the like-mindedness that Paul envisions.

Paul explains how the Philippians are to embody the like-minded life-style by employing three sets of statements, the first strictly positive and the next two comprising alternative, positive-negative commands. (1) Firstly, they are to possess the same love, be harmonious, and focus on the same thing. There is a clear intent to emphasize "sameness" in the apostle's participial phrases; (2) secondly, instead (neg.) of acting according to the standards dictated by strife or vanity, the Philippians are to (pos.) regard others as being more important than themselves; (3) and thirdly, through the instrumentality of humility, which Christ-followers should possess, individuals are not (neg.) to look out for his or her own affairs, but instead (pos.) should look out for the concerns of others.

The above commands are based on and grounded in the model set by Christ, which Paul goes on to delineate in the following verses. . . .

Anti-Americanism in Europe

No wonder why America is so disliked. It's the polygamy!

Bernard Lagat's Coach

Here's an article in the NY Times about James Li, the coach of US runner, Bernard Lagat. I found this interesting about Lagat's training and Li's commentary on it:

Many distance runners train twice a day and run 125 or so miles a week. Lagat has maintained his health and sharpness by training once a day and running about 65 to 70 miles a week. “If I’ve been able to do one thing, it is to liberate myself from what is written in a book,” Li said.

Articles on Philippians, Part 1 (Provenance)

In the course of my study of Philippians I've read some interesting articles lately. They appear in the edited work New Testament Greek and Exegesis: Essays in Honor of Gerald F. Hawthorne.

Frank Thielman, in "Ephesus and the Literary Setting of Philippians," examines arguments for both Rome and Ephesus as the birthplace of Paul's letter to the Macedonian church at Ephesus. Both proposals have their share of advocates, many utilizing poor arguments, in the estimation of hte author. Thielman's argument for Ephesus, rather than relying on external evidence, proceeds on literary grounds.

Thielman determines that an Ephesian provenance, at a time period near to the apostle's penning of Galatians and 1 Corinthians, provides a solution to two "puzzles" that plague one's interpretation of the epistle--1) why the sudden (sharp) change in tone at chapter 3; 2) why does the apostle seem to combat two opposite tendencies, nomism (3:2f) and anti-nomism (3:18f)? Apparently (per Th.) Paul wrote Philippians during his ministry to the Ephesians when "his conflict with Judaizers in Galatia was still fresh in his mind" (219). At the same time, Paul has had to contend recently with the Corithians, many of whom, because of their exalted view of their own spirituality and their cultural climate, allowed themselves wide latitude in indulging their bodily appetites. Thus, the apostle warns the Philippians against a similar move in their habits. In the way it is easy to see how the apostle might find it necessary to combat both practical errors before they take root among the Philippians.

Gospel of Judas

Here's an article giving a behind-the-scenes view of the scholarly infighting in the wake of the National Geographic documentary on the Gospel of Judas. Interesting stuff. (HT: Mark Goodacre)

Packing and Obama

I hate packing. It used to be that I didn't mind it so much, but I think I'm getting old.

Read this David Brooks column about Obama and his education policy on break. Check it out.

Tuesday Tidbits

Here's a couple more great columns by David Brooks.

On escaping the mundane.

On a brewing spiritual battle.

And a friend just passed along a Times article on today's Ireland, a must read. Check out the slideshow. For my money (figuratively and literally) experiencing pub life is the best part of visiting Ireland. Check out the article here.

Conservatism across the Pond

Here's an interesting column by David Brooks comparing the stature--and message--of today's British conservatives with America's. I'm intrigued by the British conservative projection, at least, of a positive concern for society (i.e., rather than just being against negative forces) that seems to be coupled with traditional conservative economic themes. Who knows how this will be manifested in practice. Surely America's conservatives should be watching the situation closely and rethinking what shape today's conservative movement should take.

Doc's Pep Talk

Here's some funny stuff from the Sports Guy. I don't have a lot of confidence in the Celtics at this point.

Philippians 1:27-30, Part 3

The relative clause "which" in verse 28 does not, I take it, refer to all of vv. 27–28 but only to this late statement concerning how the Philippian Christians are to respond to their opponents. Paul here unpacks the significance of fearlessness in the face of all kinds of adverse circumstances arranged by those who (literally) stand against the Christ-believers.

A fearless response to attacks on the gospels signals ["a sign of," g. of apposition] two things: for those who opposes, it essentially as a visible proclamation of destruction; the gospel itself, after all, was birthed in/through opposition! By contrast, fearlessness for the believer who proclaim the gospel, for reasons that Paul will go to elaborate, becomes evidence of salvation. Being "partakers of grace" (1:8) carries with it a hope that can not be extinguished by human opposition, that of being resurrected from the dead and transformed in the body (3:10, 21), being "with Christ" (1:26), and seeing "every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord" (2:11). Ultimately, Paul takes care to note, the "salvation" that he Philippian believers enjoy comes "from God." This simple addition hints again at the inference that the opponents sponsored an approach to religion that relied heavily on personal achievement.

With an explanatory "since," Paul advances his argument for fearless suffering by undermining any element of surprise that such opposition may occasion for his church in Philippi. They are to understand that such opposition is their lot as followers of Christ. The passive "it has been granted to you" alerts the readers to the reality that God stands behind all circumstances that they encounter. And just as much as they have been chosen—not for their sake, but "for the sake of Christ" (1:29a)—to direct their belief to Christ, so too they have been selected to suffer "on his behalf" (1:29b). Suffering is part and parcel of the life of a Christ-believer. No big surprise given Christ's own bloody path to exaltation.

As the apostle does elsewhere, so too here he holds up himself as an example for the Philippians. While [temporal] they are engaged in suffering, they can realize they are walking the same path ("conflict") that their spiritual father, Paul, himself has gone down and continues to follow. They are to engage in imitation as a way of bolstering their confidence in Christ as they encounter opposition.

To summarize 1:27–30. Being citizens (1:27; cf. 3:20) of a heavenly kingdom requires a (i) unified approach, (ii) common striving for/in the interest of the gospel's message and purpose, and (iii) a fearless attitude toward opposition—which is a sign of (a) destruction for opponents and (b) salvation from God for believers, which is (c) founded on the call of God to suffer on behalf of Christ, and which process is (d) supported by the similar conflict endured by those who go before his in the faith [here, Paul].

Iran

Here's an interesting article in the Times from yesterday about Iran's nuclear program. The country recently released photos of a nuclear development facility in Nantanz, giving analysts plenty to debate about: why, for example, is the Ahmidinejad regime showing its cards? what do such cards reveal? is uranium being enriched for peaceful purposes (note the "bottom bearing" mentioned in the article).

What America's approach toward Iran will, I hope, be an important issue in this year's presidential campaign. While I certainly don't find myself agreeing with President Bush on all foreign policy matters (e.g., Iraq), particularly when it comes to a devaluation of diplomacy, I also can't help thinking that the an "Obaman" approach might be equally dangerous. Ultimately, a president's foreign policy approach to different countries and different conflicts should be, well, different, even when there's an operative well thought-out policy.

From experience, we know that taking a country at its word, as the US did with North Korea during the Clinton years, can pose certain hazards when the avowed enemy is adept at using deception and diplomacy to achieve its nefarious purposes. Iran, I think, resembles North Korea in this respect, declaring, against all past evidence, that its aims are peaceful. It might not be the wisest thing merely to take the leadership at its word or to engage in toothless diplomacy that might allow them, as it did North Korea, to gain more time in developing nuclear weapons (which, by the way, are likely to be completed by 2010-2015 according to current projections).

All's Not Wright with Obama

Though I'm not an Obama supporter, I do admire him and, consequently, feel sorry for him as the Rev. Wright stuff has dominated the news of the last few days. Of course I do find it hard to understand how some of Wright's positions and statements could have come as a surprise to Obama--could this really be a completely different side of Wright than Obama has encountered over the last twenty years? Yet still, I can understand how Wright and Obama may share a common understanding of some of the problems occupying American (esp. black) while dividing over how to frame those issues and what solutions to offer.

Clearly Wright is taking a more divisive approach while Obama, whether because of temperment or ideology, wants to provide unification in moving forward toward solutions. It's possible that what came across in their past dealings was a mutual agreement that these problems do exist, but, either because Wright didn't listen or because Obama didn't offer (Wright, after all, was the superior in the context of their relationship), Obama's more measured policy solutions were not understood by Wright. This does not seem improbable to me. And I do not hold Obama responsible for Wright's rhetoric.

Philippians 1:27–30, Part 2

The remainder of this section (1:27b–30) expresses what it means to live in such a way as the apostle envisions. Paul employs a purpose clause ("in order that") merely as a means to spell out how the Christians in Philippi should be behaving: the important thing is not, of course, whether he "is able to come and see" or "hear" the following things about them, but that they are in fact conducting themselves as he proceeds to spell out.

What comprises conduct worthy of the gospel is, in part, unity. Later Paul discusses unity in contrast to conceited, self-interested behavior, whose opposite is seen in Christ's self-denying obedience (2.1-8); here, he describes it ("stand in one Spirit," [manner]) as a stance Christ-believers should assume as they [temporal] "strive together [again, manner] for [i.e., 'in the interest of'] the faith." (By "the faith," Paul means the gospel.)

Just because different people may be declaring and fighting for the same gospel does not mean that they are doing so in a way that truly embodies that gospel and models unity. We recall how earlier in the same chapter Paul speaks of those who preached Christ "from envy and rivalry" (1:15). While he concluded there, however, that ultimately what was important was that "Christ is proclaimed" (1:18), here (1:28) he emphasizes that it does in fact matter how those proclaiming Christ stand in relation to the rest of the family of believers.

Next Paul moves to what must have been a central concern to his recipients: opponents of the gospel. Even as [temporal, parallel with the preceding clause] the Philippians are to stand together as a united body in their defense of the gospel, they are, outwardly, to protect themselves against fear of those who oppose them and/or their message.

It's not clear to whom Paul is referring here, but one might suppose, based on 3:1-2, that such opponents urge a more strict adherence to certain behavioral precepts (the law? circumcision?). Regardless of their identity, Paul is clear that the Philippians should not be frightened "in anything [means, i.e., 'by'] by those standing against you." Interestingly, the apostle does not care to elaborate why the Philippians ought not to fear, but instead chooses to dwell on the significance/repercussions of such an attitude.

For the Love of the Plant

This week I was listening to the Herd, IMHO the best sports radio show out there, and heard about the book, It's Just a Plant. Colin talks about a lot of stuff other than just sports, so I wasn't too surprised he brought this up. Hearing about this, though, I didn't know whether to laugh or shake my head (I did both). This, from an editorial review on Amazon:

"Jackie wakes up late at night and finds her parents smoking pot. They give a simple explanation and promise to talk to her about it the next day, which happens to be Halloween."

The goal of this book, apparently, is to acclimate one's children to the proper use of marijuana. It is, after all, just a plant.

From Syria to Pike Place

Here's an interesting article in the Times about the survival (barely) of Aramaic in several Syrian villages. The article notes how The Passion of the Christ stirred some interest in Malula's (a Syrian village) Aramaic heritage. Like the citizens of the village and the prof. at UCLA mentioned in the story, I also had a hard time following the Aramaic dialogue in the movie, because of the "different dialects of Aramaic, and the actors’ pronunciation made it hard to understand anything." But only for those reasons. Heh.

Meanwhile, Brian at Climb Jacob's Ladder has an interesting post up about "Libertarian strains in US Christianity and its boundaries." He examines the intersection of Christianity with government and manages to touch on the philosophical roots of the US constitution.

Tim Ricchuiti has provided some final thoughts (along with session-by-session summaries) of the 2008 Grear-Heard Forum at New Orleans Baptist Seminary. This would have been an awesome event to attend.

Oh, and for the record, I hate Starbucks' Pike Place Roast! It's weak. Sorry, Jason.

Philippians 1.27-30, Part 1

Paul is sure that he is going to "remain" yet longer because of the benefit that the Philippians stand to gain from his coming to them. Not surprisingly, for Paul this gain is ultimately the whole-hearted fixation—in thought (1:9), proclamation (1:18), and identification (3:8)—on Jesus Christ. The apostle exemplifies this reality in his own life, and he hopes that by his visiting the Philippian church, they too will approach this ideal. Most importantly ("only"), though, the believers are to behave (or "conduct yourselves as citizens") in a manner that is "worthy of the gospel of Christ" (1.27), that is, the good news that is characterized by Christ.

The verb in this sentence, politeuomai, is related to "city" (polis) and "citizen" (politeis) but in common usage at this time probably carried the general idea of "live," "conduct one's ways," etc., though one can easily see how the concepts are related, since being a citizen carried with it certain obligations. And because of this connection, it's not outside of the realm of possibility that Paul does intend the idea "conduct yourselves as citizens" to be understood by his readers as they are, as Christians, ones who live with a certain expectation of "the day of Jesus Christ" (1:6) that will "bring to completion" the work wrought within them. In fact, this work confirms that they already enjoy—together with all Christ-believers—"citizenship . . . in heaven" (3:19). Thus, even now they are bound by an obligation to live in a manner that corresponds to the person who has guaranteed their citizenship.

The remainder of this section (1:27b–30) expresses what it means to live in such a way. Paul employs a purpose clause ("in order that") merely as a means to spell out how the Christians in Philippi should be behaving: the important thing is not, of course, whether he "is able to come and see" or "hear" the following things about them, but that they are in fact conducting themselves as he proceeds to spell out.

Patriots Day and Boston Sports

Boy, I wish I were in Boston for Patriots Day (or the day it is celebrated). Aside from the historical significance of this holiday, there is much to appreciate it from a sports perspective, especially this year. Of course the Boston Marathon is a huge draw. (Too bad I'm an old man with a gimpy knee, or else I would join the field.) It looks like there was a pretty close finish today.

The Sox, of course, come in a close second in terms of importance. Today in downing the Rangers they completed a sweep at home. Way to go, Buchholz! Up next, Beckett faces the Angels and SP Weaver.

The Celtics last night proved their regular season dominance was no fluke as they crushed the Atlanta Hawks. Who would have thought a year ago that the Celtics would be co-favorites--along with the Pistons--to make it to the finals?! Even more surreal is the fact that they stand a good chance of meeting the LA Lakers if they do. What is this, the 80s all over again? Should both of these storied franchises indeed meet again in the momentous finals, I will be hard-pressed, as a traditional Lakers fan with new Celtic sensibilities, to decide who I want to win. A nice problem to have, nonetheless.

Well, I guess that's it. Oh wait, could it be true, could the Bruins really be jealous enough for some of the limelight so as to do something about it? Perhaps. At least they've already done the improbable as an eight seed in the playoffs--coming from behind 3-1 to tie the series 3-3 and force the one-seeded Montreal Canadiens to the brink of elimination. While it's not likely they will in fact upend the dominant team north of the border, there's still hope. After all, it is Patriots Day (kinda).

The Fence Fell

Here's a very interesting poem by Erich Fried that we read in our German class:

Versuchung

In Nachbars Garten

wiegt sich der apfel am Stiel

"Still, Stiel!"

"Still stiehl!"

Ich hielt mich an

an dem Zaun

und der Zaun fil.

Viel fiel.

Ich hielt mich nicht mehr im Zaum.

Im Garten

baumt sich die Schlange

unter dem Baum.

A rough translation, rendered, of course, with the aid of our prof., reads like this:

Trial (or Testing)

In the neighbor's garden

the apple swayed on the stem.

"Silent, Stem!"

"Silently steal!"

I held myself

on the fence [i.e., in check]

and the fence fell.

Much fell.

I held myself in check no more.

In the garden

the serpent "treed himself"

under the tree.

The play on words in this poem is a central feature. There's the similarity at the beginning b/w Stiel ("stem") and stiehl ("steal," imperative); the comma in the 3rd line indicates an address to the stem, whereas the absence of one in the 4th line suggests, instead, a command given to a separate entity to "steal silently (adverb)."

Further on the poet playfully employs a common expression (apparently) in German "on the fence," which figurately means "hold oneself in check," in close proximity to "the fence fell," presumably to illustrate the inexorable consquences resulting from a breakdown in self-restraint. As the fence down, "much [else] did (Viel fiel)."

In the end, the snake "treed himself (baumt sich) [presumably an invented verb by Fried]" "under the tree (unter dem Baum)." Thus, what was the neighbor's garden at the beginning, seems now to be the serpent's. Perhaps?

Anyway, I find this poem at the same time fun and haunting and very worth pondering.

Man Who Grew Roots

I just saw this video of an Indonesian man "who grew roots." I can't imagine how difficult his life must have been. Happily, it seems that he may have a chance of recovery after doctors recently performed a series of operations on him. Here's a fuller story on the man and his disease. Apparently,

"Dede's problem was that he has an extremely rare immune system deficiency, leaving his body unable to contain the warts. The virus was therefore able to "hijack the cellular machinery of his skin cells", ordering them to produce massive amounts of the substance causing tree-like growths known as "cutaneous horns"."

Boston and Seafood

Our trip to Boston didn't exactly turn out the way we had planned. P. made two trips to the ER, was virtually confined to a room for the trip, and was forced to cancel her interviews. However, I am so thankful that we made it through a very trying time and am very grateful to our hosts R. and A., who were so kind to us in feeding us, giving us rides, and attending to all our needs. Their cute son provided much additional entertainment. He's quite an accomplished guitarist, as seen in the picture below. When he plays he taps his foot on the ground. It's hilarious.

Though our trip to Boston was nearly a wash, we did have a fun time the first few days. On Monday night we spent time with our awesome friends Keke and Jade in the North End. They introduced us to The Daily Catch, an unassuming restaurant with scrumptious seafood; they also have branch in Brookline.

Here Keke and Jade demonstrate the proper way to eat calamari.

P. had a cool dish: ground squid served over noodles died with squid ink. I like how it's served in the pan in which it's cooked.

My mussels weren't half bad either.

Bad and Good

Still bummed about this. But baseball season is in full swing and this cheers me up.

Boston--Friends and Food

It's already been a great couple days since landing in Boston. We are staying with our wonderful friends who are housemaster's at MIT; I'm hoping just by being here that some of the brain power will rub off on me. Seeing them and other friends at church and for lunch has been nice.

Also, we've had two great--all-time favorite--dishes since being here, Pho and Jombong. I've greatly missed these so I'm still savoring them in my belly. Sigh.

Stuck on a Toilet

It's been a while since I last posted. Been busy proofreading a commentary on 2 Peter and Jude, writing curriculum for the 8th graders, and studying German. Fun stuff.

Anyhow, I couldn't pass up the opportunity to link to this story appearing in the local Columbia Tribune. It's about a woman in Kansas--next door to Missouri, for you Northeasterners--who was found stuck to a toilet. Enjoy.

More Buechner

"Almighty and everlasting God,

Only speak to us that we may hear thee. Then speak to us and yet again so that when in our hearts we answer thee by saying No, we may at least know well to whom we say it, and what it costs us to say it, and what it costs our brothers, and what it costs thee.

And when at those moments that we can never foretell we say Yes to thee, forgive our healfheartedness, accept us as we are, work thy miracle within us, and of thy grace give us strength to follow wherever love may lead.

We bless thee for him who shows us the way and is the way and who will be, we pray, at the end of all our ways. Grant that even on stumbling feet we may follow him into the terrible needs of the human heart. Remember us. Remember us. For thy mercy's sake.

Amen."

Life's Presents

Here are some penetrating words from Frederick Buechner's "The Sign by the Highway":

"The old saying is that where there is life, there is hope, and I think that the hope that there is, the hope that if not tomorrow or the next day, then some fine day, somehow, life will finally give us the present which, when we open it, will turn out to be the one that we have waited for so long, which is the one that will fill the empty place, which is the peace that passeth all understanding, which is the truth, salvation, whatever we want to call it.

But one by one, as we open the presents, no matter how rich and wondrous they are, we discover that no one of them by itself, nor even all of them taken together, is the one of our deepest desiring--that ultimately, although her face is beautiful and draws us to her, life by herself does not have that final present to give. And to know that is the pain of it as again and again we reach out our hands to life for what we need most deeply, only to have it seized in the terrible grasp."

Philippians 1:12-18, Part 4

So the situation that faces Paul is proclamation of Christ for very different reasons. The implied question, then, is what does he think of the fact that some people may be engaging in preaching activities for such base reasons (“What then?” v. 18a). His response reveals his single concern: As long as “Christ is proclaimed . . . I rejoice” (v. 18b). What is especially interesting about this section (vv. 12-18) as compared with the former one (vv. 3-11) is that here Paul seems to take a pragmatic approach in focusing on the end result—the announcement of the news about Christ—whereas there Paul was very much interested in the internal lives of the Christians.

We could draw the wrong conclusion from this observation and say that Paul is simply a pragmatist, intent on Christianizing. However, what this observation really points up is the fact of God’s sovereignty evident in his working through less-than ideal circumstances. Above it had been Paul's imprisonment and the hostility of the palace guards; here it is the twisted motives of some of the insiders, fellow Christians. And Paul’s response is key here as well, for he determines, first, to recognize God’s working, and, second, to rejoice in it, even when as now it means a level of discomfort for himself.

Earlier I mentioned that Paul holds himself out as a model and that is part of the reason why he shifts from concern for the Philippians to excursus on his own circumstances, and then back to matters involving his recipients in 1.27. In this context it is notable that Paul resolves to rejoice in every circumstance here (1.18) and later states his desire to remain in the flesh for the “progress and joy in the faith” (1.25b) of the Philippians.

Essentially, Paul wants this group of Christians to reach the same state of being able to find their wholeness of meaning and fulfillment in glorify of Christ that he himself enjoys. He is not merely stroking his ego and singing his own praises, but is showing his young converts how to orient themselves in the midst of adverse circumstances. The repetition of “I will rejoice” in verse 18b is a bridge that allows Paul to draw a theological conclusion to his experiences above as well as to begin a brief new section (vv. 19-26/30?) that links the apostle and his experiences to his church at Philippi.

Notes of Interest

William F. Buckley died today. Read about him here.

And aren't you glad you're not Roger Clemens right now? Word is that the Justice Deptartment is going to investigate him. This is in addition to, now, the FBI and IRS. Ouch.

Academy Awards

Today's bible class went halfway okay. I just cannot understand these kids. Somedays they're rowdy, others indifferent, and still others attentive (to a point). It doesn't seem to matter how much I prepare; the result is always unpredictable. All I can do is thank God when class goes as smoothly as it did today.

We caught only a little of the Oscars last night--and that's not a bad thing. I will say, though, that I'm pleased with a couple results. Granted, I didn't actually watch There Will Be Blood, but I'm glad nevertheless that Daniel Day-Lewis won an award. I think he's a terrific actor and he has starred in two of my all-time favorite films: Last of the Mohicans (which I will argue--unpopularly--is better than Braveheart) and In the Name of the Father. I could watch these movies over and over again. They are both so emotionally compelling.

Also, Glen Hansard and Marketa Irglova won for their song "Falling Slowly" in the terrific movie, Once, which I posted about a while back. Poor Marketa--she got cut off by the music just as she was beginning to follow up Hansard's remarks with a "thank you" or two of her own. P. and I were so happy with this win that we went on iTunes and bought the whole soundtrack to the movie. See the film if you haven't.

Philippians 1:12-18, Part 3

The passage gets especially interesting in the next few verses as Paul elaborates on the proclamation of most of the “brothers” (14a) by laying bare two different types of motives. What’s important to remember—and what’s especially instructive for what it teaches about God—is that Paul is still describing the advance of the gospel. This is not a detour.

Possibly as some of the Philippians had heard (a conjecture on my part, but see “indeed,” v. 15a) Paul had rivals within the community of Christians. These brothers do speak the word about Christ’s lordship but do so for very wrong reasons—out of a spirit of envy (v. 15a). Two verses down, Paul delineates their hopes even further: Such envy and rivalry motivates them to “proclaim Christ” and they do so “not sincerely but hoping to afflict me in my imprisonment” (17b).

Was their aim to bring additional physical punishment upon Paul because somehow he, as leader of this band of Christians, was held accountable for their activities? Or in his imprisonment were they seeking to stage a coup and usurp his authority and thus cause him mental anguish? It’s difficult to say. What can be said, though, is that unless they enjoyed some exemption, the evilness of their motives must have been pretty outstanding so as to cause them to risk their own torture, imprisonment, and death just to harm Paul. This makes Paul’s response to the situation below all the more remarkable.

[Does this group correspond in any way to those who, in chapter 3, Paul condemns for their confidence in the flesh? (There Paul explains the absurdity of such ill-placed hope.) If so, his rhetoric has sharpened its bite by shifting from a reference to “brothers” here to “dogs” (3.2) in that chapter.]

The other group of brothers are those who, for Paul, serve as the proper corrective to those preaching out of rivalry. This group preaches out of love (v. 16a, for God? for Christ? for Paul?). Before their own egos they put their love of God and trust for his plans: They understood that Paul had been chosen to “defend the gospel” (v. 16b). Unfortunately, even when it comes to announcing Christ’s salvation and lordship and serving the purposes of his kingdom, we can let ego get in the way.

In thinking of my own life it’s sobering how often screwed up motives lie behind what outwardly seem like good activities. Sometimes I act out of guilt, sometimes out of a sense of mere responsibility, sometimes, like those mentioned above, because of envy. Paul notes here that not all the "brothers" have good intentions at heart. But in defiance of those who would seek to afflict him, Paul observes that God's will is still being done, since Christ is being made known. God is sovereign.

NY Times Strategery

Ha ha. I couldn't help but laugh at Drudge's astute (ok, obvious) observation about the NY Time's 2008 presidental strategy: "Now That He's Secured Nomination: NYT Downloads on McCain." That's it, endorse McCain and then slam it. Here's the article by the Times. Enjoy.

If I was running for president, I think I would want the editors of the "Paper of Record in this Country" (as Chris "Hardball" Matthews likes to call it) running my campaign. Joe Scarborough thinks the Times piece may in the long run end up helping McCain by galvanizing the base. Already Hannity and others are rallying behind the "maverick." In the long run? I'm not so sure.

On a happier note, no teaching today due to "hazardous driving conditions." So hazardous that I will drive much farther to get to my German class this afternoon. Who's complaining, though? Certainly not I or my apathetic students!

Philippians 1:12-18, Part 2

A second proof that the gospel is truly advancing is also somewhat puzzling and involves the activities of Paul’s fellow Christians. It occurs to me that Paul may be referring to other Christians imprisoned like him, but I’m not sure. At any rate, seeing Paul’s boldness, others are spurred on to preach about Christ (14). Fear no longer inhibits their activities. It is easy to see how this could be the case when we think of times in our lives that we’ve been scared to do something we still in some way thought valuable.

All alone, we may lack the courage to move forward even though our minds may be convinced of its ultimate value, yet give us a few like-minded individuals, and together we may gain the boldness required. Such boldness does not simply seize the other believers because of “[Paul’s] imprisonment (14)]” but on account of the way the apostle continues to pursue Christ’s glory in the midst of it. A good question is what does it take for a Christian to reach this point where all else pales in comparison with winning honor for Christ? Paul speaks more of this later in our passage.

Philippians 1:12-18, Part 1

I love this passage for what it shows about God’s amazing creativity and providence in the way he accomplishes his purposes. And let’s not forget, as well, what it reveals about Paul’s whole-hearted fixation on the glory of Jesus Christ.

There is a definite shift in focus from 1:11 to 1:12. In the previous section Paul had concentrated on the faith of the Philippians and concluded with a prayer on their behalf. Here, Paul shifts to his own experiences and does so in a way that, one, casts in sharp relief the sovereignty of God and, two, holds himself up as a model of behavior for his young disciples.

We see first that God’s ways are subversive and thrilling. Whereas one would have expected that the opposition of the Roman authorities and the local leaders would have brought a halt to the proclamation of this rebellious following of Christ as king, instead, the apostle argues, his own imprisonment has advanced the message and its fruits (12). So right off the bat we see a contrast between what is expected and what really happens.

That God should perform his most marvelous work in the midst of—or rather, through—adversity should come as no surprise, however, since Jesus’ own crucifixion evidenced the victory of God over sin and death. When we season our hearts with this truth we come to a new appreciation of the trials in our lives and of the fact that God orchestrates such events to accomplish his aims.

The results of this advance—or perhaps the clarification of it—are two-fold. Only someone as committed as Paul is to proclaiming Christ could be enthusiastic about the first one, for it likely means further suffering for himself. As a consequence of his imprisonment, the “imperial guard” come to know that the reason why he is in prison is because he is pronouncing someone other than Caesar as Lord, namely, Jesus who is the Christ (13). It would have been hard for someone asserting what Paul was to hide from the authorities.

Now, it’s possible that Paul means to suggest that some of the imperial guard respond to his message with acceptance of his claims. More likely, I think, is that Paul is simply indicating that his message became crystal clear to a group of people who had other allegiances. This hits me hard as I tend to regard acceptance as success in God’s economy; acceptance often drives the way I even discourse about Christ’s claims to allegiance. Here we see at the very least, though, that in one sense the announcement itself is evidence of success. For God is pleased when the message about Christ rings forth. And sometimes, as it does with Paul here, this occurs in situations of great conflict.

Lent

UPDATE:

Three days in and still no coffee. I'm amazed. It feels weird, I must say. I go through the day with more of the even temperment, although I do get a bit moody toward the end of the day as the tiredness becomes most acute. Who knew that life without coffee would be so, well, boring?



This is what I've given up for Lent this year:

It's only 10:30 and my head is already throbbing. I'm in trouble.

Voting

Dang it, I thought every vote was supposed to make a difference. Instead McCain, er Huckabee, wins Missouri. At least I got a nice sticker that says "I voted." Sigh.

Football and Politics

I'm in mourning after last night's Pat's defeat. It's hard for me to contemplate, actually, why it was so stunning, given that I was not a big Patriot's fan until last year. The empty feeling in my stomach does not compare to the Sox defeat to the Yankees in the 2003 ALCS. Now that was bad.

Oh, yeah. And I have yet to decide who to punch the ballot for in tomorrow's primary. I'm halfway leaning toward Romney simply because I'm getting pissed off at the media for annointing John McCain the Republican nominee prematurely. I did just get a telephone call from an Obama supporter. Usually the animus felt in our home toward telephone solicitations would cause me to react in a negative manner, but I have to say, the lady was very nice and not that pushy. Of course, I still won't vote for him, but my admiration for the man increases if it is legitimate to infer something about him from his supporter.

Music to Deaf Ears

I heard this incredible piece on NPR yesterday morning. Parts of the story are omitted but can be heard on the link provided.

Paul's Prayer (Phil. 1.9-11), Part 2

The immediate goal of Paul’s prayer for the Philippians is that an increase in love will lead to the ability to “approve that which is excellent” (10a). As the word here has the original sense of “that which is different,” Paul seems to be referring to a separate quality altogether, not merely gradations of “good.” The gospel of God as a belief and life commitment is starkly different than any other cause the world has to offer. Paul wants his young believers to embrace those things that belong to this message of grace in a way that their lives are swallowed up by it.

What this looks like, I think, is difficult to quantify. I give mental ascent to the teachings of the gospel but hardly excel at a life determined in every way by its dynamic and true character. As I read this chapter, the section following (vv.12–26) allows Paul the opportunity to hold up himself as a model for the Philippians; in his whole-hearted dedication to the cause of the gospel, one sees what it means to “approve what is excellent” and not be sidetracked by comfortable distractions characteristic of ordinary life.

The ultimate goal is that they be “pure and blameless for the day of Christ” (10b). This is when Christ as Lord comes to execute judgment and vindication, whatever the case may be. As salvation has become synonymous with heaven and thus rescue from this world in many Christian formulations, it is easy to overlook the emphasis on God’s glorification in us, and to focus simply on ourselves . Paul points out, however, that blamelessness begins and ends with God: (A) The attitudes and actions that typify it come about only as a result of Jesus’ prior and continued work (11a), and (B) the objective of such a transformed life is glory and praise quite appropriately being given to God (11b); after all, God is the one who initiated the “good work” in their lives (6).

Paul’s prayer in Philippians 1.9–11 provides a good snapshot of the life transformed by God’s work in the gospel. I’m not sure it completely describes me, as I cannot honestly say my affections are whole-heartedly directed toward God-honoring pursuits; nor can I say a driving force in my life is seeking to be found blameless when Christ appears again. And while I can acknowledge that whatever good springs forth from my life is solely attributable to Jesus’ work, I am more likely to want to leverage that as credit in my favor than to perceive it as fruits produced for the glory of God. I fall far short. I can only hope that one day I’m able to mimic Paul’s attitude expressed in his hope that “now as always Christ will be honored in my body” (1:20).

Textual Criticism of the Qu'ran?

Here's an interesting article in the Asia Times Online regarding textual criticism of the Qu'ran. Some may have already heard of this, but allegedly ancient manuscripts of Islam's holy book were hidden away, and are only now resurfacing and available for scholarly scrutiny. Spengler notes:

It has long been known that variant copies of the Koran exist, including some found in 1972 in a paper grave at Sa'na in Yemen, the subject of a cover story in the January 1999 Atlantic Monthly. Before the Yemeni authorities shut the door to Western scholars, two German academics, Gerhard R Puin and H C Graf von Bothmer, made 35,000 microfilm copies, which remain at the University of the Saarland. Many scholars believe that the German archive, which includes photocopies of manuscripts as old as 700 AD, will provide more evidence of variation in the Koran.

Why is the presence of variants in the Qu'ran significant? After all, in biblical manuscripts countless variants are known to exist. Again, Spengler:

No one is going to produce proof that Jesus Christ did not rise from the grave three days after the Crucifixion, of course. Humankind will choose to believe or not that God revealed Himself in this fashion. But Islam stands at risk of a Da Vinci Code effect, for in Islam, God's self-revelation took the form not of the Exodus, nor the revelation at Mount Sinai, nor the Resurrection, but rather a book, namely the Koran. The Encyclopaedia of Islam (1982) observes, "The closest analogue in Christian belief to the role of the Koran in Muslim belief is not the Bible, but Christ." The Koran alone is the revelatory event in Islam.

This article is especially interesting for what it proposes as an explanation as to why Germans circa World War II contrived to keep such manuscripts shrouded in secrecy. (HT: Dan Reid via Evangelical Textual Criticism)

Noonan on the Civil War(s)

Here's another good election analysis by Peggy Noonan. Great stuff. Here's a highlight from the article:

There are many serious and thoughtful liberals and Democrats who support Mr. Obama and John Edwards, and who are seeing Mr. Clinton in a new way and saying so. Here is William Greider in The Nation, the venerable left-liberal magazine. The Clintons are "high minded" on the surface but "smarmily duplicitous underneath, meanwhile jabbing hard at the groin area. They are a slippery pair and come as a package. The nation is at fair risk of getting them back in the White House for four years."

That, again, is from one of the premier liberal journals in the United States. It is exactly what conservatives have been saying for a decade. This may mark a certain coming together of the thoughtful on both sides. The Clintons, uniters at last.

Australian Open

I've really enjoyed watching the Australian Open this year. Really, it's all because of the names. In the women's semis it was Sharapova vs. Jankovic on one end and Ivanovich vs. Hantuchova on the other. This was somewhat disappointing because I was hoping for ova vs. ova and ovich vs. ovich. Oh well, can't always get what you want. Hantuchova nearly beat out my favorite Ivanovich; the silver lining would have been an all ova final. However, reportedly Ivanovich's squeaky shoes distracted her opponent and gave her the comeback win. Now since Maria Sharapova topped Jankovic we'll have a squeaking vs. grunting final and be able to determine once and for all which ending is better, ovich or ova.

Paul's Prayer (Phil. 1.9-11), Part 1

Paul’s prayer in Philippians 1.9–11 builds theologically upon his pronouncements of solidarity with the church. The “and” (v. 9) can almost be seen as a “therefore” since Paul seems to be saying that his confidence concerning God’s work in the Philippians’ lives is really what causes him to pray as he does. Though I tend to be a poor pray-er, usually what does motivate me to pray for fellow Christians is a remembrance of how Christ is active in their lives. For Paul this connection is profound.

Paul’s prayer is very specific and is thereby an antidote to my often vague expressions of well-wishes. Interestingly, we see here a coupling of two concepts—love and knowledge—that we are likely to view as separate concepts: the whole heart versus head mentality. Paul holds them together when he requests that God cause the Philippian church to increase in their love “with knowledge and discernment” (9).

“Discernment” perhaps makes clear that knowledge here is not the exclusive dominion of the head but involves the will and decision-making. While my habit is to crave knowledge for the purpose of self-aggrandizement, or at least self-assurance, Paul desires that these saints increase in their affection for God, through the means of a moral understanding that mere information cannot provide.

Peru--I hear it's lovely this time of year

It's probably pretty lame to post pictures of someone else's vacation, but that's what you've got to do when you love to travel but have no money to do it, so here goes. My brother and sister-in-law are on a business/pleasure trip to Peru and they sent some photos.

Below are a couple of images from Machu Picchu. Evidently it wasn't the clearest day, yet the pictures are neat nonetheless.




And here's a picture of what my brother ate for lunch while down there. Unfortunately, it's not much different than the rats he normally consumes, (except a little bigger). I especially like the sides.

Pats Win!

Congratulations to the Patriots, who win yet another AFC title. Now that the Cowboys are out of the playoffs I can wholeheartedly support the Pats in their run to cement their dynasty with a superbowl win to cap off an already perfect season. Sure, Belichick is a jerk, but I can look past that. I'm sure Vince Lombardi wasn't a sweet guy all the time. Cheers!

Stakes in Michigan

Here's an interesting article by Steve Kornacki on the stakes involved in the Michigan republican primary (HT: Real Clear Politics). I think he's likely spot on with his analysis of the result of a McCain win:

McCain, meanwhile, would be ideally positioned to gobble up broad support from the G.O.P.’s rank-and-file masses in the next wave of primary and caucus states. They may have lukewarm feelings for McCain, but they feel no more affection for the rest of the G.O.P. field. And many of them are anxious to stop Huckabee, whom they see as a certain November loser. By getting rid of Romney, McCain would be able to lay claim to these Republicans, which in turn would make him the runaway favorite in Florida and most of the big states that will vote on February 5. He also has a fighting chance in South Carolina, which will vote this Saturday, where he and Huckabee now run even.

Overall, Kornacki and others are seeming to embrace the idea that a McCain win would simply the Republican nomination process, while a Romney--or Huckabee for that matter--win would spawn chaos. Here's his ultimate scenario should McCain lose, one I heard from a McCain supporter on TV earlier today (no coincidence, I am sure):

But even then, it’s doubtful the Republican race would be settled on February 5, raising the legitimate possibility of a brokered convention—a stunning prospect for a party famous for settling its nomination fights with speed and order.

Electoral politics is about strategy just as much as substance, so it's certainly not out of hand to raise such a hypothetical, but I'm not so sure that a Romney win would inexorably lead to a brockered convention. Should McCain lose--and perhaps worse than expected--momentum that had been going McCain's way could shift again toward Romney and this, on top of a strong showing in South Carolina, could bode well for the former Massachusetts governor and remind Republican faithful of their ambivalence toward McCain.

Our New Nephew

We went to my brother-in-law's to meet their newest addition to the family and our newest nephew. Here's a video of him with my father-in-law, S. He was told that if he removed his shirt his grandson would be more responsive to him. I know, it sounds weird. It seemed to work, though, as our nephew didn't really open his eyes much until he was laid against the bare chest.




And here's P. with her new nephew.



Oh, and he's only two days old.

Scot McKnight on Infant Baptism in Calvin's Institutes

Scot Mcknight has been posting his reflections on Calvin's treatment of infant baptism. Such thoughts are helpful to me as my old church is Presbyterian, my wife grew up Presbyterian, and I have many Presbyterian friends. I, on the other hand, grew up in a baptist church and attended Baptist seminaries. (To be clear, McKnight is referring to Calvin's views, not necessarily infant baptism as a legitmate practice.)

Here are his posts (not yet completed): Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4.

Huckabee and Evangelicals

The NY Times has an article on how Mike Huckabee's candidacy is splitting evangelicals. Check it out here.

The Mysterious Butt Abscess

This will make for hilarious congressional hearings. How embarrasing. Poor Roger.

New Hampshire

Interesting result coming out of New Hampshire's primaries. The Republican outcome, if you consider the polls in the few days preceding the casting of ballots, wasn't a huge surprise. Unfortunately for Romney, it was significant reversal considering he had put so much energy into campaigning there.

What will be fascinating to see is how the Iowa and New Hampshire results carry over to the rest of the primaries. One commentator reckons Romney for dead, given that the candidates overall strategy seemed tied to his doing well, that is, winning, in the two early states. However, someone else remarked that we might see a lot of "one hit wonders," Huckabee in Iowa, McCain in New Hampshire, etc., before it becomes really clear who will be the frontrunner. This assessment is attributed to the supposed lack of any die hard conservative candidate who can command wide acceptance as the nominee to go up against the Democratic nominee, who will certainly be on the far liberal side of the party.

As for the Dems, it's the conventional wisdom is that older women and Republicans are celebrating today after Hillary's victory. The question is, though, how did she win after momentum seemed to be going Obama's way after Iowa and polls seem to corroborate this feeling. Daniel Finkelstein lays out 6 possible explanations to Hillary's "comeback" win over at the Times Online (HT: Pajamas Media). Which do you think is most likely?

Reflections on Philippians 1.3-8

1. Paul prays for others a lot. I don't think the opening sections of his letters are a mere formality. Here he begins by claiming to give thanks "to my God in every remembrance of you" (3). The following phrase, I think, either explains when he gives such thanks or the means he uses. He says "always in every prayer of mine on your all behalf, I make my prayer with joy" (4). It's one thing to be thankful of another person or persons in the course of our daily lives, as many of us are; it's quite another matter altogether to invest considerable effort in expressing thanks to God as Paul seems to do. Why is this so tough?

2. For Paul, one's consistent identification with the gospel is evidence of God's hand at work in a person's life. Paul gives thanks for the Philippians "because of" their partnership "toward the [goals of the] gospel from the first day until now." Even when things got tough, the steered toward a course charted by the gospel message. I think Paul is not just talking about affirming the truth of the gospel, but committing to a way of life that is determined by the gospel.

Because the Philippians have exhibited such consistency in their dedication to gospel living, Paul is able to say with confidence that he is persuaded that "the one who began a good work" in the Philippians "will bring it to completion until the day of Christ Jesus" (6), which is simultaneously a day of deliverance and judgment. Consistency in life commitment to the gospel evidences the reality of God's work in a believer's life.

3. Paul's confidence in and affection for the church is not built around some superficial connection but rather in their identification with him in advancing the gospel. Paul explains (7) that it is right for him to feel this confidence ("this way"--could point back to Pauls' thankfulness (3), but I'm taking it here with v. 6) because he holds them in his heart because they are "partakers with me of grace, both in my imprisonment and in the defence and confirmation of the gospel" (7). He expounds on this by calling upon God to witness to his true yearning for them, yearning with affection which "proceeds (or has its origin) in Christ Jesus" (8).

Does my life bear witness to a consistent commitment to the goals of the gospel?

How can I more consciously and proactively live out the truths of the gospel and identify (and parnter) with causes and activities and people that seek to further the gospel's redemptive work in our world?