June 2008 Archives

From Aidan, the compline prayer for Monday in the Celtic Book of Prayer:

May the virtue of our daily work
hallow our nightly prayers.
May our sleep be deep and soft
so our work be fresh and hard.

OK, someone wrote and said the RSS feed is not working. Well, I don't even know what this is, but this blog community is big enough both to figure it out and fix it. Please advise.

Our discussion of the Dobson and Obama dust-up raised one point, that of misrepresentation of Obama by Dobson, but there was something else in Dobson's discussion that day that deserves a conversation. Dobson, who speaks for many in the religious right, are wary of McCain and some think Bush wasn't a true conservative, and, yes, some seem to long for the good ol' days of Reagan. Which led Dobson to say the conservatives in Washington DC haven't done the job. That's what I'd like to generate a conversation about.

Before I say that, though, let me register my disgust with the ploy the House Democrats are now using by employing a Bush impersonator in radio ads.

Before I go further, I commend the efforts of the young radical Christians to call us back to following Christ.

I'm glad McCain met with Billy Graham.

Back to Dobson and DC results ... and I'd like to have a good, honest, clear, and non-accusatory conversation today about this topic.

In essence, it can be put like this: apart from appointments of some conservative justices in the Supreme Court, and we dare not minimize these appointments as those who have the power to carry on the conservative agenda, what has been done in the last 30 years or so to further the agenda of those in the religious right?

Dobson and many complain that they simply can't stand with McCain because he isn't conservative enough, even though he probably would appoint conservative justices. I'm sure they think they are consistent in their stands in this judgment of McCain. But here's something that I'd like to see the religious right leaders address and address with open eyes and and open mind. I'd like to hear your views on this question:

Has the religious right been had? Have the politicians running for office used their power and their numbers and their support? Does the fact that they ran on some of these conservative agendas and not doing much (or anything) about those agendas in DC suggest that they were disingenuous? That they, in general sided with that conservative viewpoint, but did not have the passion to carry it out in DC? Is their social conservatism in morals a mask for economic conservatism? Or is the political system/machine so complex that our elected representatives are unable to carry out their promises (whether Republication or Democrat)? Or is it the checks and balances that we have in government? Or ....?

Tell me what you think. Explaining the failure of conservatives in DC since the Reagan years to pull off the major promises in such terms as "they've been had" is a little too skeptical for me, but I must also confess: some days I think it might be the best explanation. What do you think?

Kris read Carolyn Custis James' new book, The Gospel of Ruth , recently, gave it to our daughter, Laura, and both loved it. It is an imaginative Bible study of the book of Ruth and it can serve well for personal devotional time as well as for Bible studies. During the time that Kris was reading the book, she would share with me that she enjoyed studying Ruth (along with James' book) and felt that she learned much from Ruth.

I haven't had a chance to read the book because Kris and Laura snarfed it up before I had a chance.

Many of you know that I have a book coming out this Fall from Zondervan, called The Blue Parakeet. That book is about rethinking how we read the Bible. What I haven't said much about is that the last 3d of the book is about women in ministry, and one thing I think we need to do a lot more of is to teach and preach about women in the Bible. It was not possible for me to delve into each woman in the Bible, and there are far more women in the Bible than most of us know (!), and I didn't cover Ruth at all. So, I am very happy to hear about this book.

I'm wondering who has read it and what you think of it?

There are two good reasons to do a focused Bible study on heaven. First, because the history of how Christians have understood heaven has been written by several and this history reveals that Christians have both invented plenty and have failed to interact adequately with the Bible. For, this I recommend McDannell and Lang, Heaven: A HIstory. The second reason is because Tom Wright, in Surprised by Hope, has suggested that heaven is not a place we go to eternally after we die. Instead, at the resurrection we will enter into the new heavens and the new earth. So, here goes ...

Before I say another word, this: Matthew has tons of references to the "kingdom of heaven" and that Jewish expression means "kingdom of God, who dwells in the heavens." What this helps us with is simple: heaven is where God dwells. Out of reverence, Jews frequently substituted expressions for God and in this case "heaven" means "God's dwelling place." So, this expression doesn't tell us that kingdom is heaven. That's not the point. And what I have chosen to do is focus on Mark's Gospel; there are so many NT references I can't dwell on each one. So, I'll get this going by looking at the first four references to heaven in Mark. Here they are: they can be combined to make one general point.

Mark 1:9 At that time Jesus came from Nazareth in Galilee and was baptized by John in the Jordan. 10 As Jesus was coming up out of the water, he saw heaven being torn open and the Spirit descending on him like a dove. 11 And a voice came from heaven: “You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased.”

Mark 4:30 Again he said, “What shall we say the kingdom of God is like, or what parable shall we use to describe it? 31 It is like a mustard seed, which is the smallest seed you plant in the ground. 32 Yet when planted, it grows and becomes the largest of all garden plants, with such big branches that the birds of the air [heaven] can perch in its shade.”

Mark 6:39 Then Jesus directed them to have all the people sit down in groups on the green grass. 40 So they sat down in groups of hundreds and fifties. 41 Taking the five loaves and the two fish and looking up to heaven, he gave thanks and broke the loaves. Then he gave them to his disciples to set before the people. He also divided the two fish among them all. 42 They all ate and were satisfied, 43 and the disciples picked up twelve basketfuls of broken pieces of bread and fish. 44 The number of the men who had eaten was five thousand.

Mark 8:11 The Pharisees came and began to question Jesus. To test him, they asked him for a sign from heaven. 12 He sighed deeply and said, “Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign? I tell you the truth, no sign will be given to it.”

First, heaven is up.
Second, heaven is the skies.
Third, heaven is where God is and where God dwells, which is not to say God isn't omnipresent and present on earth, but heaven is where God dwells. Thus, a sign from heaven is a sign from God, who dwells in the heavens.
Fourth, it is the place from which God speaks and from which God makes his move when God becomes manifest on earth.