Past Articles from 2004 until last year. Many important lessons can be found in each of these articles.
At the beginning of Moses ministry among the wandering Hebrews he climbed up Mt. Sinai and returned with two tablets of stone. On them, written by the finger of God, was a list of short statements - 10 commandments upon which the whole Mosaic Law would be based. We associate one particular phrase with the 10 Commandments – Thou Shalt Not. That isn’t really fair, they don’t all begin that way – only six do. It is true, though, that four of five of those commandments which deal with human relationships are communicated negatively.
Not so the teachings of Jesus. When he began his ministry he climbed a mountain, sat down, and delivered a list of short statements upon which the rest of his Sermon on the Mount would be based. We associate these statements, the Beatitudes with a single word – Blessed. Jesus begins the new day by bringing us blessings, not prohibitions. And yet, these blessings are not the things we might normally associate with sunshine, warm breezes, and rainbows. They include poverty, mourning, hunger, thirst, and giving mercy (you can’t give mercy if you haven’t something to forgive). Jesus calls us to go beyond patience and endurance. He insists that we view such experiences as blessings. This is far more demanding of us than the 10 Commandments ever were.
Perhaps the most demanding Beatitudes are the last two, quoted above. He calls us to see injustice as a blessing. When we suffer unfairly for Him, we should be glad. He gives us two reasons that, together, encompass the past, the present, and the future. We should be glad when we suffer injustice (in the present) because it connects us to our reward (in the future), and to the suffering of the prophets before us (in the past).
This all makes sense, logically. But nothing could be more counter-intuitive. We naturally, virulently react against injustice – especially suffered by ourselves. We establish governments, hire lawyers, memorize the charter of the homeowners’ association, get the best tax advice, keep a detailed record of every slight – all to ensure we are not forced to endure an injustice. Like Sally Brown – “All we want is our fair share. All we want is what is coming to us.” It may be possible to endure, for the sake of Jesus, such treatment – but to rejoice and be glad about it – how is that possible?
And yet it is possible. Indeed, it is the way the early Christians saw things. When Peter and John suffered their first arrest by the Sanhedrin, the congregation at Jerusalem praised God so intensely that the building was shaken (Acts 4.23-31). The second time they were arrested, Peter and John, “left the presence of the council rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer dishonor for the name,” (Acts 5.41). When Paul and Silas, both Roman citizens, were illegally arrested, tortured, and incarcerated at Philippi they spent their time “praying and singing hymns to God”, (Acts 16.25), and again, the building was shaken.
How is this possible? To prepare to endure injustice is understandable, but to take joy in it seems a bit masochistic, even pathological.
Unless we listen to what Jesus really said. We take joy in injustice, not for its own sake, but for the way it connects us to salvation history, and the glory to come. These are the reasons Paul mentions in Philippians 3.4-16. He suffers, he says, because he wants to know Jesus completely – not just through the Word, but through personal experience. He wants to know “the fellowship of his sufferings,” even to “becoming like him in his death,” (v.10). He suffers the loss of all things to attain “the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus.” (v.14).
The bitter Beatitude is bitter in order to be sweet. If we want to know Jesus personally, and not just academically, there is no other way. That we are allowed to know Jesus this fully, this deeply is indeed a blessing. What could be moreso?
- Barry Bryson
“S. is a thirty-five year old male of Middle Eastern origin with a long history of deceitfulness, physical violence, compulsive gambling, and other forms of unacceptable behavior. He is an only child; his mother had to be warned not to during pregnancy. The subject is known to be inordinately fastidious about his hair. His libido is powerful and indiscriminate. He is a non-smoker. His life culminated in a spectacular mass murder/suicide.”
This case study, which appeared in the “Archives of General Psychiatry” diagnosed S. as having “ASPD”, antisocial personality disorder.¹ “S.” is Samson, son of Manoah, whose career as God’s Judge is recounted in the book of Judges, chapters 13-16. It was noted, in that scholarly tome, that Samson clearly meets the criteria of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for being ASPD.
Disturbing.
But then which of the judges, other than Deborah, didn’t have similar problems? What about the prophets? And the Patriarchs? What about Moses and Aaron? What about the kings of Israel? Is there one among them that any of us would cast as Ward Cleaver, Pa Ingals, or Howard Cunningham? Would any of these guys be appropriate subject matter for a Norman Rockwell “Saturday Evening Post” cover?
Noah passed out drunk?
Abraham sending his wife to another man’s harem?
Jacob gluing goat hair to his arms in order to lie to his father?
David looking the other way after his daughter is raped – by her older brother!
Even the afternoon soaps haven’t gotten this bizarre – yet.
What would the DSM conclude about the whole lot of the men and women mentioned in Hebrews 11? How many would be prescribed Prozac or Haldol? How many would be evaluated as needing inpatient intervention? How many would become permanently institutionalized?
And yet, what does the Bible say about Abraham, David, Moses and the rest?
“…men of whom the world was not worthy…having gained approval by their faith…” Hebrews 11.38-39
How can this be? Don’t we have to be perfect and together for God to love us – for God to save us – for God to use us?
“But God demonstrates his love toward us in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.” Romans 5.8
“Therefore, I am well-content with weaknesses, with insults, with distresses, with persecutions, with difficulties for Christ’s sake; for when I am weak then I am strong.” II Corinthians 12.10
Evidently not.
Sixty years ago, last Monday, Britain’s King George VI died. He was 56 years old. He retired to bed at 11.30 pm on the evening of February 5. Sometime in the night a fatal blood clot prevented him from waking up ever again. He was found at 7.50 am the next morning by servants. After Winston Churchill and other members of the government had been informed, an 8 word message was permitted to go out on the news wires: “The King is dead; long live the Queen.” Princess Elizabeth, then 25, was on vacation with her new husband Phillip in Kenya when her father passed. It wasn’t until later that morning that news reached the Treetop resort where they were staying. Phillip was informed, and then he took his wife for a walk in the garden to tell her about her father’s sudden death. It was a devastating day for her – one that she usually observes each year in private.
But as it is her Diamond Jubilee year, she was expected to observe it publically – which she did. She spent the morning with school-children who performed songs for her. On the news yesterday I watched as a very gracious, lovely elderly lady in a cornflower-colored coat, and a royal-blue hat smiled and nodded as the children sang and danced the song “Time-Warp” from the Rocky Horror Picture Show. I must say that although there is nothing unusual about seeing cute, rosy-cheeked, British children waving the flag of St. George at their Queen. It was a jarring juxtaposition to hear them encourage her to “do the time warp again!” It was jarring to hear this song sung for the Queen – jarring to hear it sung for Accession Day – jarring to hear it sung and danced by small children. I was glad they weren’t in costume.
Of course, if we think about it a moment, expecting the Queen to celebrate her accession day is jarring in itself. It is, by definition, a day of death, as well of accession. It is the day her father died. The press wire could not have said “Long live the Queen,” without also reporting “The King is dead.” Who throws a party to celebrate the death of a beloved parent? It is a bizarre overlap of situations, a jarring juxtaposition of events.
But it is one with which we are not unfamiliar. Every Lord’s day we celebrate a meal that commemorates a death. It is a moment which focuses on a bleeding and broken body – not on a victorious empty tomb. The empty tomb is in our consciousness – without its emptiness there would be little power in the blood and the broken body – but we think not of the folded linen set aside, or the voice of the Angel saying “Why do you seek the living with the dead?” We think instead about the lash, the lance, the nails, the rough lumber, the reviling crowds, the gasping for breath, His words of love and forgiveness.
A few weeks ago Scott Chambers began his table-talk with the invitation, “Welcome to this time of fellowship.” It was jarring to hear this time so described – and altogether perfect. The word for “sharing/fellowship”, and the word for “communion” are the same word in the original text. Communion is family time, sharing time. We commemorate the death of our beloved Brother and celebrate the sacrifice of our eternal Savior. The King is dead; long Live the King!
If we are no longer jarred by holding in our minds, simultaneously, our sin, His suffering, and our salvation, we are no longer observing the moment correctly. If we lose that jolt of incongruity – the unfairness of it all – how will we properly “discern the body” (I Corinthians 11.29)? If we are no longer jarred by placing ourselves alongside Jesus, how will we ever remember grace?
- Barry Bryson
“Read your Bibles!”- Mel Hurley
The other day I ran across the title of an intriguing book, Harnessing Your Earthworm. Harnessing Your Earthworm, by Thomas J. Barrett, was published by Faber&Faber in 1949. “What a wonderful title!” I thought, “…and what an intriguing subject!” What could it be about? Why would anyone need to harness an earthworm? Are there that many people in possession of an earthworm to warrant the publication of such a book? Even if a sufficient number of people are in possession of an earthworm to warrant publication of books about earthworms – how many earthworm owners have a need to harness their earthworm? What would a harnessed earthworm be harnessed to do? Maybe it would pull a plow in an ant farm. Maybe it would pull a wagon in a flea circus. I just didn’t know.
If one had a need to harness one’s earthworm, one would surely need a book on the subject. It can’t be easy. An earthworm has no neck, no shoulders, no ribcage, no skeletal system at all. And – they are slimy. In addition, they are wriggly. I suspect that if you were able to develop a harness tight enough to keep the earthworm from slipping out, it would be so tight that you would sever the earthworm into two parts. There is an advantage to this in that you double your number of earthworms – but still, these earthworms remain unharnessed, which seems to defeat the purpose. How would I ever get answers?
Perhaps the best thing to do is look at the book.
I did. This is what I found out. First, I found that the title isn’t Harnessing Your Earthworm, it is Harnessing the Earthworm. That changes things – clearly. The book is about earthworms, in general, and not individual earthworms owned by fanciers. Then, as I read on I found out that the book is about using earthworms to naturally enrich the soil for farming. The “harnessing” of the title isn’t literal, but metaphorical. The book is about the metaphorical harnessing of earthworms generally.
Well, that makes sense then. Mystery solved.
Lesson learned.
Look at the book.
The writing of many books is endless….Ecclesiastes 12.12
Amen. It is a great testimony to the wide-spread devotion our Savior engenders (and primary evidence of global deforestation) that so many books are published each month about Jesus, about the Bible, about morality, about spirituality. Many of them have even better titles than Harnessing the Earthworm. Many of them are well thought out, well researched, and well worth our time. My concern is that we forget The Book itself has the great claim on our time – not the latest tome describing 12 steps to a better relationship.
There is a great, qualitative difference between reading books about the Bible, and reading the Bible. Reading a book (even a great book) on a Bible-topic is not the same as reading what the Bible itself says on that same topic. It is God’s word that is God-breathed, alive and sufficient (II Timothy 3.16-17), not the best seller that makes a Jell-O salad out of proof-texts, pop-psychology, earnestness, and good intentions.
If we want to know about the Bible we need to pick it up and read it.
Every day.
Richard Berk, Professor of Statistics at the University of Pennsylvania, has developed an algorithm which will help Philadelphia’s Adult Parole and Probation Department make decisions on which candidates for parole will be the most likely to repeat offend.* The department supervises nearly 50,000 individuals. Since their prison population vastly exceeds capacity it is urgent they release as many as can be safely returned to the community. It is that “safely” part that Berk’s algorithm is intended to help identify. Using the records of 100,000 inmates, and going back as far as 1962, Berk’s algorithm forecasts the likelihood of repeat offense with a great degree of accuracy. He has found that the age at which a first offense is committed has much greater significance that the severity of the offense – a man who was convicted of armed assault at 13 is likely a greater threat to the community than a man who committed murder at 22, but had no prior incidence of violence.
The Philadelphia Algorithm has been accused of being seriously flawed. Some see Berk’s refusal to use race as a factor in his calculations as a grave mistake. Others see his use of ZIP codes as a factor another way of profiling certain neighborhoods, and sneaking race in through the mathematical back door. It, and other similar mathematical predictors are widely used now, and will be more so in the future. This is the old CBS crime-drama “NUMB3RS” come to a police station near you (or the new CBS crime-drama “Person of Interest”). Can all human behavior be reduced to an algorithm? If so, would it be acceptable for government to base a decision about who to parole based solely (or even largely) on mathematics? If we are all so predictable, where is there any room to hold a person responsible for choice? Are we not all slaves to the external factors accounted for in the algorithm?
The Philadelphia Algorithm may be exponentially more accurate than its predecessors at predicting criminal behavior – but it is not perfectly accurate. It is only pretty accurate. It could only be perfect if it factored in every possible variable. That would take omniscience. Omniscience would render such an algorithm obsolete. If one is omniscient, one would know what is about to happen, and who is about to make it happen.
One does. That one is God. He is omniscient (Psalm 139, Matthew 10.29-31). His omniscience does not take away our own responsibility for deciding and acting. We are still responsible because, although God knows ahead of time what we are going to think and do, He does not force us to think or do anything. We are responsible because God’s law is not based upon variable factors, but upon the changelessness of God Himself. A lie is a lie because God is truth. It becomes no less a lie because of environmental factors.
It seems sensible to use precise data to guide the administration of law and order in a society. It seems sensible to remember that humans, in all their unpredictable prejudices and presumptions, will be gathering, sorting, and applying that data. Thus, it is also sensible to remember that our human ability to achieve justice will never be better than nearly accurate.
God’s administration of justice can be calculated perfectly. Isn’t it grand that although God in his omniscience could bring harsh mathematical justice to bear upon us, He has offered us another equation.
If anyone is in Christ he is a new creature. Old things are passed away. Look – all things have become new. (II Corinthians 5.17).
Grace wipes away past offenses, taking no thought of recidivism – other than to provide payment for further offenses (I John 1.5-7). Although God’s omniscience is not used to prevent human sin – His omnificence is used to address it. This is something no algorithm, regardless of how perfectly calculated, will ever enable us to do.
*Nadya Labi, “Misfortune Teller” in The Atlantic, February 2012, pp18-19.
