Ancient Truth: Background Notes

Posted on November 15, 2012 by ehurst

I’m not sure where I will end up putting this just now, but there is a thread of understanding missing from virtually every commentary and Bible study I’ve ever read.

The Four Gospels don’t directly state the Old Covenant is closed. Matthew comes closest to addressing it and John seems to take it for granted. Mark and Luke are too busy with other major questions. Both Paul and the writer of Hebrews hit it squarely and bluntly, but most of what I’ve read tries to twist it around backwards. It seems to me almost ludicrous non-Christian scholars can point out how Dispensationalism presumes to agree with the Pharisees. That is, even while paying lip service to Jesus’ attack on the Jewish leadership, most Western Christians ignore exactly what it was the Pharisees got wrong. Legalism they seem to understand, but too many Christians never bother to probe how that is merely a symptom of the deeper problem with Judaism as a sharp departure from Old Testament religion. To this day, almost every evangelical and fundamentalist Protestant simply agrees with the fundamental claims of modern Judaism as somehow being a continuation of Moses.

The Pharisees have won the battle among most American Christians. So if reading Moses with Aristotelian eyes is valid, so it is with the whole Bible. Thus, with any attempt to point out why it’s necessary to learn how to think Hebrew, that same old recording plays in their heads, reinterpreting that to mean “learn Judaism.” They never escape Westernized thinking because everything is defined within the matrix of it.

This is precisely what Aristotle was hoping to do. And is precisely what Satan was selling in the Garden.

It’s why so very many Americans demand we expend resources, which we don’t even have, to protect one of the most hateful and belligerent collections of humanity Satan has ever captured. Jesus called them Synagogue of Satan, and nothing He offered as justification for saying that has changed. We have Christians reacting with the same belligerence and hatred as the Pharisees directed at Jesus, for precisely the same reason, and announce to the world they are doing God’s work.

And people wonder why I don’t join any mainstream churches.

Addenda: I forgot to mention the series on John’s Gospel is also finished; find the results here (site gone). I’ll begin prepping the book for publication tonight and maybe have it submitted to Smashwords tomorrow. I need to come up with some cover art, of course.

Posted in religion | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Ancient Truth: Background Notes

Observations Along the Path

Posted on November 15, 2012 by ehurst

Perhaps some of these merit longer comment, but not right now.
Advertisers are too focused on the end product to notice how bad they are doing. All the more so in the coming Network Civilization. Think in terms of time preference: How to people want to spend their time? Facebook is a good clue. It gives people what they want, but it won’t make money because the folks running it don’t understand how to make it pay. The Zynga games are a great way to keep them tied into the time channel, but the monetization is utterly clueless. The advertising which works is that which most entertains. You get people to watch your spiels because they want to, because you offer something worth that time with their attention. Visual spam is not worth their time; entertainment is.
People still go to YouTube and actually look up certain old TV commercials because they are still entertaining. Give them a reason to invest their attention.
Bureaucracies have zero interest in what you think and care about. They have a mandate handed down from some other space entirely, and even when they interview you, it’s all being filtered through that narrow set of things they intend to do. They’ll do those things at the cost of your life, and the bureaucrats can be incredibly spiteful and angry when you dare suggest they don’t understand.
In the current context, about the only good moral thing possible for disaster relief is to do what you can to match demand with availability. Giving people what you know in your greatest understanding of human need is pointless if they have no interest in it. Making people accept and use what you have decided they need is hateful, and qualifies you as a justified target of violence. It’s not your concern whether people are demanding things which will kill them. That’s their decision to make. They’ll understand completely if you simply can’t offer what they really want, but if you demand they corral themselves to your agenda, you deserve their hatred.
Part of what we are seeing with the Petraeus affair is the infighting between the FBI and CIA which has been going on for a very long time. Let’s just say: If it was possible to know Petraeus was having an affair recently, it was well documented before he was ever placed as head of the CIA. You can draw your own conclusions about why the system still chose him for the position, but they knew. Personal immorality is so common at the top levels of our system, you should be frankly surprised when there is no evidence of it. Genuinely moral people are the single greatest threat to the system, and such people are simply not allowed to hold power. They may be put in positions where they can be used, but they will not have any real power.
The current ruling clique have been saving up the firing and shuffling of military brass for over a year. Right now we’re seeing a planned purge. While I do not by any means defend the military system, it’s all too easy to understand the perception among military brass things are ripe for a good military coup. From where they stand, it is hard to justify not taking over a very nasty political system which treats them with the utmost contempt.
Most of what you think you know is a lie.

Posted in prophecy | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Observations Along the Path

Soul Seeds: Not in Shadow

Posted on November 15, 2012 by ehurst

John presented a side of Jesus the other three Gospel writers did not cover well. Their works had long been published when John filled in the gaps by telling things from a different angle. Rather than sketch out the life of Jesus historically, John provides a decidedly non-chronological account which focused on Jesus’ character. In the process, he doesn’t recount so many of Jesus’ parables, though he often included some of the more puzzling illustrations Jesus used.
At the point where Jesus received news of Lazarus’ death, we know it was a period of time when the Jewish leaders in Jerusalem were actively seeking to arrest Jesus, and had recently tried to incite a mob to stone Him. Recall how Jesus had long worked to poke holes in the tightly closed system constructed by the rabbinic traditions. Jesus was about to present them with the ultimate challenge. He knew the timing of Lazarus’ illness was according to the Father’s plan.

Therefore the sisters sent to Him, saying, “Lord, behold, he whom You love is sick.” When Jesus heard that, He said, “This sickness is not unto death, but for the glory of God, that the Son of God may be glorified through it.” (John 11:3-4)

If you had read the previous 10 chapters of John’s Gospel before this, you would recognize the pattern. Jesus would be emphasizing something about the Kingdom of God by using symbolic language, comments which should not be taken literally. Saying Lazarus’s sickness was not unto death, Jesus was referring to the final end of the matter. The point was not to confuse, but to clarify: Bodily death was of no consequence to the Lord of Life. Lazarus’ body would indeed expire, but that’s not where the story ends.
And the reason was to glorify the Son. I can’t imagine anyone else on this earth who could say something like that about himself without arrogance. Yet, we can see from the context Jesus was not in the least arrogant, or pursuing glorification of His humanity. He was proceeding on a course which would verify the power behind the words He spoke. He was about to do something which would forever discredit the Pharisees’ claims against Him. They insisted they were defending the teachings handed down from Moses against any heresy and blasphemy.
Thus, He had to wait to ensure Lazarus was unquestionably dead. Those who have pondered the Gospel accounts will note we know of no one who died in the presence of Jesus. If Jesus had gone to see His close friend, Lazarus would not have died, and this important demonstration would be missing. When that wait was done, Jesus announced it was time to return to Judea. If the previous chapter is connected to these events, that would mean they had been staying on the East Bank of the Jordan, probably in Perea.
At this point, His disciples raised the issue of the very literal threat to His life. Was He going back so quickly after such a close call? Jesus’ answer has perplexed many ordinary believers.

Jesus answered, “Are there not twelve hours in the day? If anyone walks in the day, he does not stumble, because he sees the light of this world. But if one walks in the night, he stumbles, because the light is not in him.” (11:9-10)

Again, He uses a common experience of daily living to express a spiritual truth. We might paraphrase it like this: “By choosing to live in the light of the Father’s revealed truth, I can always expect to get where I am supposed to be, regardless of the circumstances. If I take off on a path He didn’t choose, I am ignoring His revelation, and I am most certainly going to have problems.”
This incident with Lazarus was something God had decreed. It must happen in order for His glory to shine. That glory had to shine through the Son, and through the Son’s actions. To walk in fear of human plotting is to walk in darkness. Had He not already escaped more than one attempt on His life, because it was not His time to die? And when it came His time to die, no human effort would save Him. The murderous Sanhedrin were the Father’s problem. They would fail at anything He hadn’t planned. Jesus was not going to die until He and the Father agreed it was time.
His next comment on the road, about Lazarus being asleep, was not mocking the sorrowful occasion. He was trying to show them the situation was not permanent, because the Father had authority to change things to suit Him. Death was just another circumstance. That authority had been committed into the hands of Jesus. In this particular situation, the dead man would not stay dead, and it was best to simply see it as a temporary condition, like sleep. They were going to wake him up.
Later on, when the Holy Spirit came, they would see all this so very clearly. Not now. They were still operating on that old level, thinking Lazarus was asleep as the primary sign of recovery from sickness. It must have been so frustrating for the Master. He stopped and told them straight out His friend had died, and it was necessary he do so. That’s why Jesus couldn’t go heal him earlier.
But now they were going to him, and the world would never be the same. They still persisted in operating on the old level of understanding, the human level. At this point, we realize calling Thomas “the Doubter” is a complete injustice. Thomas is no doubter, one who can’t accept the truth; he’s a “show me!” kind of guy. Once he’d been shown, he was ready to go all the way to death with that knowledge. His comment was quite serious: If Jesus is going to join Lazarus in the grave, it was their duty to also die. Whatever was included in following Jesus, Thomas was not going to bail out now.
We might say Thomas was a little slower than some to recognize the light of truth when he saw it, but there’s no sin in being cautious. There’s no sense committing to something you can’t grasp. Once Thomas understood what was going on, and understood his part in it, he was content to go forward, come what may.
If Thomas is a Doubter, make me one too.

Posted in bible | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Soul Seeds: Not in Shadow

Dancing Corpses

Posted on November 14, 2012 by ehurst

First, the standard disclaimer: I am no activist of any stripe, and thus not a member of the Liberty Movement or anything similar. I am an observer. While I am sympathetic to some of the ideals, I was sure America was dead and irrevocably damned as a nation before the year 2000.
I read eclectically across the political spectrum, but the Liberty Movement, which overlaps with the Patriot Underground and some other things like that, is an ongoing project of study. Were I an activist, I would probably be a part of this thing, somewhere, but I know better.
Here’s what interests me: Consistently over the years, some folks gain status among the readers and activists of this thing. Then, at some point they betray themselves as astro-turf. That is, something they say makes it clear they most certainly do not belong to the movement. Maybe they don’t even pretend they belong to it, but their writings are eagerly reposted in the forums until somewhere they reveal their true colors and suddenly their names disappear. I’ve watched it time and time again. Way back in the late 1990s it was a guy who blew it when he insisted Lincoln’s policies of turning the Constitution on its head were necessary because saving the union was too important. People who were well educated about history realized he was a plant and his stuff disappeared. You rarely see his name any more.
Today we have rabid denunciation of those petitioning for secession by a few guys who were once well regarded in the Liberty Movement. You can be sure their videos and articles will cease appearing on the forums and news aggregation sites. “We see your true colors, shining through.” Anyone who believes keeping the current system is more important than liberty is astro-turf, a fake, someone who is trying to sell something shiny, but it’s just chrome plating on the chains.
Don’t make the mistake of thinking this is some racist hick southerner stripe within the Liberty Movement calling for secession. Lincoln was a far bigger racist than any of them; he seriously tried to raise money to repatriate the Africans. People who actually study the details of history, not just the civic propaganda from the official church of the state, will recognize all of this as true. The people filing these petitions on the White House website include people of all colors, and the only organized Klan type groups in existence today are all fakes run by the FBI and their pals at SPLC, etc. True racists don’t organize like that and wear funny uniforms, etc. They’re too cynical and realistic for that kind of thing, or they are utterly fake and mainstream with the mask of being carefully anti-racist.
On the other hand, I’m quite certain precious few states have anywhere near enough folks living there who would be willing to actually go it alone. All the pronunciations about it being legal or not makes not a dime’s worth of difference, since almost everything every federal employee does these days is technically illegal. Same goes for a lot of state and local employees, often defying their own regulations and laws. The point is, there is so very much astro-turfing it’s just about comical to see who finally tips their hand — it’s almost always someone who has a TV show or lots of money and influence. It’s the same thing which is just about to kill the Republican Party here in the US. The leadership, the folks who get to make all the noise and get their faces in front of the camera, are not even on the same planet as the folks they claim to lead.
I’m laughing the whole time as I watch this stuff. And is anyone the least bit surprised the victims of Sandy are getting the same, if not worse treatment, as those of Katrina? Once FEMA shows up, you might as well kiss help goodbye. With FEMA it’s all about control, and especially keeping their “clients” away from any means to report to the outside world how it’s going in their prison camp. The people in charge of any bureaucracy are so completely out of touch with genuine human need, it’s as if they are pathologically incapable of doing good of any sort. “We aren’t authorized to be nice!”
I’m not laughing at the victims, but there isn’t squat you are permitted to do for them now.

Posted in prophecy | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Dancing Corpses

Soul Seeds: Kingdom to Come

Posted on November 14, 2012 by ehurst

One of the most interesting debates among Protestant theologians today is whether the term “Kingdom of God” or “Kingdom of Heaven” applies to something we live with now, something coming later at Christ’s return, or something including both. Sometimes it’s just a matter of emphasis. We know in one sense, Jesus said clearly, what we live today can be called the “Kingdom of God” (Luke 9:27). Yet it’s equally clear that phrase was also used to describe His Second Coming (2 Timothy 4:1). The Parable of the Minas (Luke 19:11-27) can be seen as either one. “Now as they heard these things, He spoke another parable, because He was near Jerusalem, and because they thought the Kingdom of God would appear immediately” (v. 11).
For many Jews, the term “Kingdom of God” meant a literal return of the Davidic Throne, a resurrection of the old Kingdom of Israel in her glory days. Obviously, this meant for them breaking Rome’s power in some way, or at least a radical change in the way things stood during Jesus’ lifetime. In spite of all Jesus said to clarify the prophecies, this notion remained the gut instinct of His disciples. In the final days of Jesus’ life on this earth, as the dramatic conflict approached, and the group was traveling to Jerusalem, Jesus tried yet again to correct this.
A mina is an old Hebrew word for a coin roughly equal to three month’s pay for the average laborer, 100 denarii in Roman money. Those who were in business or property owners, or had special artistic skills would naturally make quite a bit more than a denarius per day. A nobleman would surely have considerable wealth, and could easily afford to loan that much to individuals. Keep in mind this is not the same story told in the Parable of the Talents (Matthew 25:14-30). However, like many lessons Jesus taught, there was nonetheless a similar theme. In this case, it had a similar purpose: to clarify what was going to happen.
The specific problem Jesus had here was an almost frantic expectation: What they believed would be the “Kingdom of God” was about to arise just any day now. As His close followers, they were anticipating a wonderful future serving Jesus the Messiah. Some of what they were expecting can be found in a collection of predictions produced during the Years of Silence, when no Scripture was written, between Malachi in about 400 BC, and the earliest of the New Testament books (Paul’s letters) beginning around AD 50. During that space of time there arose wild predictions (Messianic Expectations) which had some bearing on the Temptations in the Wilderness Jesus endured at the hands of Satan (Luke 4:1-13). In each offer Satan made, Jesus was tempted to be the Messiah everyone was expecting, rather than the Messiah God had actually sent Him to be.
Readers may recall Herod the Great died while Jesus was an infant (Matthew 2:16-23). We also note Herod’s son, Archelaus, inherited the throne, but not all his father’s domain. What we are not told in the biblical accounts is how Archelaus had no easy time getting that crown. First, it was for the Rome to decide who ruled its subject kingdoms. Herod had left the throne in his will to Achelaus, and the imperial government was aware of that. His brother, Antipas, was contesting that will, based on a claim of support from the Jewish community leadership. The issue for Caesar to judge in his court was to verify the will, then to verify if indeed the resistance to Archelaus was significant. It was imperial policy not to set a king over people who simply could not tolerate him, unless there was a compelling reason.
Since the Herodian family was from Edom, circumcised and married into the surviving ruling family of Judah, it took an awful lot of political maneuvering and constantly placating the Jewish nobility to keep Herod on the throne in the first place. Recall, he designed and built a new Temple for his Jewish subjects. The resistance to Archelaus was troubling and he had to appear personally in Rome to settle the issue. Right behind him came a delegation of Jewish nobles who claimed to represent the will of the Jewish nation in opposing him in favor of Antipas. The latter had made some big promises to a faction of Jewish leadership. However, Archelaus won his case, and returned to rule as his father’s heir. That he was no nicer than his father, and had taken the throne in a foul mood, prompted Jesus’ parents to move to Nazareth, in Galilee, outside the particular parcel of jurisdiction Archelaus had inherited from his father’s kingdom, upon returning from Egypt. Keep in mind, Herod tried to have Jesus killed as a possible usurper, actually a legitimate royal descendant of Israel.
But the story of political intrigue between Herod’s sons was fairly well known by the time of Jesus’ ministry. Thus, He took it as the background for this parable. When this would-be king departed, he distributed some of his assets for more than just safekeeping. He was a hard man, and expected some profit from these loans. He specifically told his servants to do business, to invest his money in something which would bring a return.
How the man in this parable settled affairs on his return was a blend of Herodian harshness and Kingdom holiness. Those entrusted with the money were called to account. In this, we see the King of Kings will expect us to branch out in faith. We are required to take what He has given us and use it for His business: changing hearts. The disciples were to remake themselves into His image, by using His power and knowledge. Though they may have had little enough at the time, it was certain if they walked in the light they had, more would come. Some would go far with that mission, because the changes in themselves would be the means to bringing others into the Kingdom. Some would not do quite so well, but that would be no direct cause for God’s displeasure.
He who takes God’s investment into his heart and simply hangs onto it has accomplished nothing. If we see our lives as the marketplace, the merchandise to be bought with His Word and loving power, we can get a sense of what Jesus is saying here. When we first come to Him, we have agreed to His ownership and Lordship. We spend the rest of our earthly lives executing His claims on all our whole selves. The areas of our existence which are not occupied in His business have to be seized on His authority, bit by bit, until it all serves His Kingdom. We take sides with this new conquering ruler, as his agents against our old ways. The process itself is infectious, and draws others to consider a similar deal with God.
To fail in activating His ownership, to fail in giving Him hands-on control over the affairs of our daily living, is to fail miserably His command to accomplish something with His grace in us. What He can trust us with later will be based on how fully we turn things over to Him early on. His property is occupied by a lot of demonic squatters. If we make no effort to evict Satan’s minions, Jesus’ sacrifice is wasted. However, we note in the parable this servant who failed is simply stripped of his future opportunities, and the riches of life that could have been his go to someone more faithful. The failed servant is not turned out, but simply not allowed to advance to a place of responsibility. Such are restricted to lesser responsibilities, kept back from hurting the Kingdom business, and from hurting the faith of others.
Those who actively oppose His Lordship are another story. They will be destroyed. The Herodians had no qualms with dispatching their enemies. There are stories of a bloodbath upon this one’s return from Rome. The final end of those who reject Christ will be far worse.
The point Jesus makes with all this? His active rule would be delayed. Did He mean the 3 days He spent in the grave, plus the 40 days or so after His resurrection, followed by His ascension? And then can we say He began to rule as the Holy Spirit, who descended at Pentecost? Or did He mean the long period of grace from His ascension until the Day of Return, sometime longer than these 2000 years so far? Or is it both, in one sense or another?
That doesn’t really matter here. What Jesus was saying was to forget about those dreams of ruling in the Courts of the Messiah, the Second David, at least in the short term of their dreams. He knew the events subsequent to His crucifixion and resurrection would clarify things, anyway. Once they passed through the dark night of His trial, the agony of His death, the dejection of His burial, and the unspeakable joy of His resurrection, all their silly notions would be forgotten. If they could just make it through that final week of Passover, things would move too quickly for them to react foolishly. It was necessary to restrain them from trying to fight Roman soldiers, expecting miracles to make it possible for them to win.
The battlefield was about to change completely.

Posted in bible | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Soul Seeds: Kingdom to Come

Soul Seeds: Never Satisfied

Posted on November 13, 2012 by ehurst

The story of the Rich Man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31) may not be a parable, but an actual piece of history. Jesus tells it in a style quite different from parables, and its meaning is so very bluntly clear: Rich people can go to Hell, even while obeying all the Pharisaical requirements.
Dimas (the nickname scholars like to give the Rich Man) bore all the earmarks of God’s favor, by the Pharisees’ doctrine. He dressed in the best and wiped his hands on pita bread at mealtime. The servants would dump this used pita near the gate, where Lazarus could fight the dogs for a bite. He was so weak, he couldn’t keep those dogs from licking his open sores, which was more close contact from a dog than any Jew could normally tolerate. That the situation was reversed in Eternity would have rattled the Pharisees. Jesus’ final comment, in the mouth of Father Abraham, was, “If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rise from the dead” (v. 31).
God works through His Word. If that’s not good enough to clarify His demands to people, then they aren’t interested to begin with. Miracles aren’t going to help. It’s quite possible Jesus is here rubbing salt into the wounded reputation of the Pharisees by using the name Lazarus, the name of a man whom He had very publicly raised from the dead. That miracle had not changed their tune one bit — they still rejected the message of Jesus. Further, they were trying hard to prevent anyone else from hearing it.
Thus, Jesus turned to His disciples and warned them about hindering the fragile faith of fresh converts (17:1-2). Nothing could prevent random events shaking such faith dangerously, but one who did it purposely deserved a fierce condemnation from Jesus. He didn’t suggest a household millstone, with which a strong man might be able to swim briefly, but the large ones pulled by donkeys. So great was the sin in Jesus’ eyes that He ordered them to put up with the most exasperating behavior from one who was still struggling to learn (verses 3-4).
For this, the Twelve knew they needed a lot more faith than they felt they could call on right then. In the context, their word “faith” implies a sort of surrender and commitment which empowered one to act with absolute constancy. To respond good-naturedly to such weakness in others would be very costly, requiring a great store of self-denial which seemed more than even the best could possess. Notice, though, Jesus added the condition that the offender must actually repent. The trial for the disciple was honoring the righteous desire in the hearts of those unable to carry out their own wishes to do right.
Jesus replied they probably already had sufficient faith for the exercise, if they would just use it. “If you have faith as a mustard seed, you can say to this mulberry tree, ‘Be planted in the sea,’ and it would obey you” (v. 6). Surely they had enough to outweigh a mustard seed! Of course, far too many have taken this aphorism too literally; they have tried yelling at trees unfortunately placed. Context is everything in the Hebrew culture.
Then Jesus addresses the real issue: Don’t expect to approach perfection in this life. God willingly uses us as we are, even with just a small dab of faith. It is neither the amount of faith, nor necessarily the quality of it. It’s just a matter of using what’s there. We don’t need great strength or power; we need humility. Putting up with the failures of others isn’t so challenging when you consider what God puts up with from you.

“And which of you, having a servant plowing or tending sheep, will say to him when he has come in from the field, ‘Come at once and sit down to eat’? But will he not rather say to him, ‘Prepare something for my supper, and gird yourself and serve me till I have eaten and drunk, and afterward you will eat and drink’?” (vs. 7-8)

What is normal for the life of a servant amounts to an awful lot of work. Plowing with oxen was arduous, because they cannot be driven with any great finesse. Tending sheep was not quite a peaceful job, either; it was constantly chasing after strays, to say the least. So after a good 10-12 hours of this, the same servant might be expected to serve at the table. That’s what servants were for, and what they expected. While their personal needs did get attention, their comfort didn’t count for much.
Jesus was saying we are servants of God. That’s the best life anyone could hope to see, to be accepted as one of God’s slaves. Consider what our sins have done, and what we deserve. So we have upon us a monumental burden of responsibility to God. He owns us; we are not our own. How fortunate we are to be so!

“Does he thank that servant because he did the things that were commanded him? I think not. So likewise, when you have done all those things which you are commanded say, ‘We are unprofitable servants. We have done only what was our duty to do'” (vs. 9-10).

No matter how thoroughly we give of ourselves in service, we cannot possibly repay what we owe Him. If we should manage to fully obey in every respect, as Jesus had done, we are nothing special. Holiness remains forever a standard, not a destination. While it is just possible for earthly servants to push themselves so hard as to impress their earthly masters as exceptional among other slaves, that comparison doesn’t exist for servants of God because human achievement bears no relation to the divine calling, except as a mere reflection.
There was a time when holiness as a concept was a harsh rod in the hands of Church leaders. We have seen plenty of emotional thrashing and other forms of abuse in fringe groups today. The mainline churches have long forgotten this message, though. In our attempt to be modern, we have pressed all too hard for making folks comfortable with their God, to the point they remain spiritual children, if spiritually alive at all.
Jesus did say in verse 3, “If your brother sins against you, rebuke him.” Let him know what sin is. Then, if he seems to grasp it, and declares a readiness to leave his sin, we place our offended sensibilities under the Blood. If your brother fails in his efforts to lay hold of the truth of holiness in his life, but hasn’t forgotten what it means to be holy, you are to rebuke and forgive, again and again. All he takes from you in the process, including the emotional cost, is already bought and paid for — it belongs to God. We are in His debt, so we charge such sins to His account.
This is not the counsel of despair saying, “You can’t please God.” It is the counsel of prodding; you can’t overdo it. You owe Him your whole self. And when you are weak, and can’t go on, one of His other servants will be there to forgive and show you His love.

Posted in bible | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Soul Seeds: Never Satisfied

Ancient Truth: Status Update

Posted on November 12, 2012 by ehurst

Mark has been updated; you can see the results starting here (site gone). I’m about half-way through Luke today. It’s beginning to look like I’ll have more than 150 pages as a Word file for the manuscript.

TMOC has been downloaded 49 times and SSJP 41. If you want your free copy, just follow the link at the bottom of the right-hand column on this blog. The fiction pieces aren’t moving, but I didn’t expect much on them.

Update: Commentary on Luke is now finished, too. Starts here.

Posted in meta | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Ancient Truth: Status Update

Soul Seeds: Confidence Games

Posted on November 12, 2012 by ehurst

Scholars tell us the Hebrew language has some 800 root words, and all the rest are combinations of those few. They also tell us the Hebrew language was very visual, and was used to evoke emotions with that imagery. We have a hard time regarding such an emotive language as normal. It is broadly considered a mark of intellectual shallowness if one converses or writes in heavily loaded language in English. At the same time, we note most modern news media do that, as well as politicians. The difference is, in Hebrew it wouldn’t be considered manipulation because no one pretends language is supposed to be used any other way.
It was then perfectly appropriate to communicate in dramatic terms in Hebrew and its cousins, the Semitic languages, just as it is today. In our parable for this lesson, The Unjust Steward (Luke 16:1-13), Luke records a word in Greek which came directly from Aramaic: mammon. It’s almost certain Jesus used that very word as He taught this in His native tongue.
According to James Strong (Strong’s Concordance), it came from the idea of wealth. The word took on the connotation of a person; thus, it meant wealth personified as “great confidence.” This is perhaps a sort of joke on the old Hebrew word shalom. The original meaning of shalom was more than the commonly understood “peace,” but included the idea of prosperity, social order, security, a readiness for bad times. It’s almost a synonym for being blessed. To the Jewish mind in Jesus’ time, the most concrete proof of God’s favor was prosperity, security, and health. However, there was an awful lot of unspoken emphasis on the wealth part.
As time went on, the Jewish elite made much of accumulating wealth, and fought hard to keep from sharing it, contrary to the fundamental purpose God stated for blessing people with possessions. Given the natural tendency of humans to simplify things like that, there was the connotation of mammon meaning the god of greed. To “serve mammon” was to worship at the shrine of acquisition, of getting more stuff, particularly stuff others didn’t have. True servants of mammon would step on anyone to get more.
Since the average Jew was rather poor, with no hope of ever rising above his poverty, you can be sure a little class envy got involved in the mix. However, most of the comfortable middle-class got where they were by ignoring the poor, and the upper-class did so by frankly abusing the poor. A little animosity was generally justified. In fact, anyone well off who was also generous and decent was a remarkable departure from the norm, and became quite famous.
Most of Jesus’ listeners were on the poor side of the economy. They would have relished His use of the term mammon as a picture of wealth gotten by means not entirely righteous. In this parable, Jesus used that term exclusively to emphasize how wealth could not possibly be the primary proof of God’s favor. Wealth in that society was more likely a sign one was a sinner. It wasn’t so much a blessing as it was plunder.
In this context, Jesus spins a tale of a household manager. The truly wealthy and their lifestyle were well-known, because they often put on a show to ensure everyone knew, “I am blessed of God, and you are not.” The master of the house had too many other important things to do, and delegated the management of business affairs to a steward. This particular steward was ordered to stand for an audit, in preparation for losing his position. In the normal process of getting the accounts up to date, he made sure to cook the books. The beneficiaries of this embezzling were obviously going to be thankful. So long as he remained in his position, all the steward’s decisions were legally binding, and the master could not revoke them later.
Nothing in the man’s story is commendable. However, he earned the admiration of his master for being so clever. About to be tossed out with little more than the clothes on his back, he would surely have friends who could afford to host him and support him, perhaps give him a cushy job. The whole way through this story, Jesus is mocking the property-conscious Jewish elite. Notice He did not say the Kingdom of God was like this. The point was this steward knew what mammon was for: making friends. He owned precious little of it; his job was simply to handle it.
The wealthy and powerful Jews were fools for thinking wealth was really theirs. God owned everything, and was about to call them all to account for how they handled everything He had provided. If they had realized the nature of things, they would have known property is just a tool, a means, and not an end in itself. They would then be using property wisely, to build relationships with people, leading them to an understanding of God, to redemption. The human heart is the real arena, the place where God does His real work. They should have been seeking ways to make life better for people, carefully investing in Eternity. Then, when the party’s over, they would be welcomed into Paradise by all those they had blessed.
Rabbis often mentioned the afterlife, and had many terms for it, but treated the concept as a myth. The orthodoxy was not in actually believing in it enough to change your life, but in paying lip service to it. For them, it was a matter of pushing God’s buttons by doing all the correct things — sharply considered from every angle — so God would be compelled by His Covenant Law to reward them with shalom. Theirs was not a prosperity and security of the soul. Their version of Eternity was merely an endless time, instead of outside the limits of time.
If a thieving scoundrel, a man admittedly dishonest and sinful, knew best what to do when given control of mammon, then in that sense he serves as a better example than the Jewish elite, who were so sure they were the cream of God’s crop. Thus, Jesus sets him forth as a model of proper attitude toward wealth.
The Lord ends by stating several epigrams: “He who is faithful in what is least” — meaning mere material wealth — “is faithful also in much” — the things of the Spirit. “Therefore, if you have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will commit to your trust the true riches?”
And to ensure there was no misunderstanding about whether the steward did right or wrong, “And if you have not been faithful in what is another man’s, who will give you what is your own?” It was common to reward honest and productive stewards with a bonus from the wealth saved or created in larger households, but only when the master was sure there would be no conflict of interest, in which the steward would spend too much time building his own personal wealth on the master’s time.
And finally, this brings us to the context for the comment “No servant can serve two masters.” If God is our Master, then we owe it to Him to invest full time and attention in building His Kingdom. The wealth of His Kingdom is in the hearts which have been changed. If you are too busy trying to gather up all the trappings of service, and putting all your effort into the means, you will neglect the reason for those things. It would be like serving another god, like a steward secretly taking bribes from his master’s competitor.
Only, our Master knows all.

Posted in bible | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Soul Seeds: Confidence Games

Intuitions of Wars

Posted on November 11, 2012 by ehurst

What follows is not prophecy; it’s simply intuition.
We’ve known for a few weeks the US is now totally unhappy with the rebels in Syria. It appears they’ve been losing pretty badly, so we had some Stinger missiles sort of disappear from one place and somehow wind up in the hands of the Syrian rebels. But it won’t do them much good because the rebels are hopelessly incompetent. So a lot of folks were half expecting some time ago the US and some allies would start enforcing some kind of no-fly zone over Syria. This would be prelude to an invasion, and I can’t guess the specifics, and I have no idea when it might start.
My intuition says Assad’s government will fall. I sense that will make Syria rather like Iraq and Lebanon. My intuition also suggests this will somehow be the final straw, that something about this will break the bank for us, so to speak. Whether or not it prevents any further idiocy is doubtful, so I suggest it will set us up for a disaster when we start something somewhere else.
I’m hoping I’m wrong, of course. These are not nice thoughts. Still, I’m praying for the hapless citizens of Syria. I’ve already been praying for Americans, but I have already declared us all too deserving of bad news. By the way, I don’t think the US will simply blow up. Might break up into smaller entities, but I rather doubt that any time soon. My intuition suggests we’ll go into a long decline worse than what happened for the UK at her worst. I doubt there will be any major military attack here, not even by outside terrorists. We will, of course, suffer false flag attacks from government sponsored terrorists, but that’s hardly news. Meanwhile, the political spectacles will continue in the media here, and it will all mean just about nothing.
Enjoy your week.

Posted in sanity | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Intuitions of Wars

Soul Seeds: Tough Enough

Posted on November 11, 2012 by ehurst

Recall for a moment all those nifty little evangelism aids you’ve seen: the little tracts, bumper stickers, videos, comic books, etc. Consider how it seemed to make committing oneself to following Jesus so very simple — how could the non-Christians say no?

“If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple. And whoever does not bear his cross and come after Me cannot be My disciple.” (Luke 14:26-27)

Most folks have no trouble seeing how the use of the word “hate” is meant in a relative sense. People who actually hate themselves are mentally ill and/or demonized. Hating others is simply not what Jesus taught us to do. So, in the context of His other teachings, we know He was calling on us to count all the things in this life which matter most to us as having no great worth compared to following Him. In order ensure His listeners understood, He mentioned the most horrific form of punishment known at that time: crucifixion. If one cannot willingly face that horrible end, they cannot be His follower.
Bear in mind this was before He Himself experienced crucifixion. He knew where it was going to end in a few days. He prophesied that it would be crucifixion, and that anyone who couldn’t or wouldn’t go there with Him can’t be called His disciple. This is hardly the meaning of our popular phrase, “That is my cross to bear” in referring to something annoying us over the long term. No, Jesus was referring to self death, a death to self will which may very well include literal crucifixion, or something as bad.

“For which of you, intending to build a tower, does not sit down first and count the cost, whether he has enough to finish it — lest, after he has laid the foundation, and is not able to finish, all who see it begin to mock him, saying, ‘This man began to build and was not able to finish.’
“Or what king, going to make war against another king, does not sit down first and consider whether he is able with ten thousand to meet him who comes against him with twenty thousand? Or else, while the other is still a great way off, he sends a delegation and asks conditions of peace. So likewise, whoever of you does not forsake all that he has cannot be My disciple.” (Luke 14:28-33)

Jesus expanded on the comments about self-death by warning that it’s no picnic being His disciple. I’ve seen at least a dozen attempts to make these images cover far more territory than Jesus meant. Some have made much of the mocking, others of the armies, the suing for peace, and so it goes. None of those details matter so much as this: We had better pay full attention to the demands Christ makes on all those who consider following Him.
How many evangelism messages have you heard calling on people to die? I’ve not heard too many. Nonetheless, that was the call Jesus made here: “Come die with Me!” I suppose we could say the phrase “give your life to Jesus” includes that idea, but it doesn’t quite strike one’s ears in the same way.
There is indeed a sense in which following Jesus is building something. It is to clear away all the old stuff which naturally occurs and lay down something solid, something with depth. Then, we begin to pile up one stone at a time. Most ancient towers were seldom more than what we would regard as a couple of stories. Still, to build it of stacked stones and mortar was quite a job. Never mind why we would want one, just assume we know we need it.
There is also a sense in which discipleship is war. And it’s not being negative-minded to note it appears we are outnumbered. We ought to expect this war to be exceedingly difficult. Our Enemy is not one to negotiate, not in good faith at least. He wants only one thing — your surrender. And so does Jesus. But clearly, whatever enemy Jesus meant here, it was not supposed to be seen as the good guys.
But in each of these two illustrations, it must be noted that I expanded upon them in a devotional fashion, not building a doctrine. What I added can be found easily enough in other places, in much more precise terms (try Ephesians 6:10ff). Here, the point is simply drawing a picture in the mind, as the Hebrew language was designed to do: You have a lot to consider when you decide to follow Jesus. You cannot afford to let anything on earth, even what you take as God’s blessings themselves, get in the way of that radical servitude.
You cannot hold back a part of yourself, a part of your life, reserved for your own independent decision-making. All of it is His. It’s all or nothing. Have we been failing in evangelism if we don’t tell the whole truth of this? I have a phrase I’ve used for some years: “spiritual stillborns.” How often do we step into a church for the first time, and encounter a majority who has made no progress beyond a token commitment? They may well be genuinely born-again; we aren’t permitted to see what’s written in the Lamb’s Book of Life for now. But they clearly have no fruit, no repentance.
Fruit is defined in Galatians 5:22-24. It is not a matter of what one has accomplished with others, but within oneself. Your fruit in the Spirit is the collection of changes you have allowed God to make inside your soul. Those internal changes inevitably result in the power to change some things around you. Those who haven’t moved since their public announcement of their intent to follow Jesus are, for all practical purposes, still dead, unconverted, and unrepentant.
And why do we have so much of that in churches today? Could it be we failed to give them sufficient truth to count the cost? Did they really know what they were letting themselves in for, that they had to accept their own death, for all intents and purposes? If we did not tell them that, we have done both them and the Savior a disservice. In the best of cases, we know God does sometimes accept a partial commitment based on partial knowledge (look in the mirror of your own soul). Then He drags us kicking and screaming farther into His will. At worst, though, we have allowed lost and dying souls to believe they are saved, and have perhaps sealed their doom.
The Great Commission ends like this: “teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you.” He has commanded us to take up our crosses. If we don’t include that in our message to the unbelievers, we have deceived them. By all this sweet talk of being born again, we have forgotten Jesus mentioned that phrase only once, as far as we know. He spoke of repentance and full obedience to the Law of Love a lot more.

Posted in bible | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Soul Seeds: Tough Enough