January Book List

 Here are the books I read in January, and a brief synopsis and review. 

• Heart of a Dog, Mikhail Bulgakov: The long-banned piece of speculative fiction by the Russian author Bulgakov. Written in 1925, but suppressed by the Soviet state for its clear anti-Soviet sentiment, this book has only come to light relatively recently. It is similar in some ways to HG Wells’ The Invisible Man, or Shelly’s Frankenstein, in that the central action revolves around science that tests the boundaries of humanity. Two doctors find a stray dog in Moscow and replace its testes and pituitary gland with that of a just-deceased human’s. The eventual result is a dog which becomes a man - a scoundrel of a man, a rude, vicious drunkard, and one who just happens to fall into the philosophy and workings of the nascent Soviet society/Party. In this way, the story is not really about the horrors of scientific experiment on a human, at least not in the same way as Wells’ or Shelly’s stories. But it is about the dangers of the “scientific” attempt to recreate humanity, as Bulgakov believed was happening in Russia. He reserves the greatest ire for Sharikov - the dog-man - and Shvonder, the head of the new housing committee in the doctor’s apartment. Both of these reprehensible characters espouse Party philosophy, the former because it will serve his rapacious appetites, the latter because, presumably, he really believes in it. It is a deeply satirical story, racing with action and fury and a wide variety of mixed narrative perspectives, which was immediately (and somewhat understandably) censored by the State it was critiquing so effectively. There is something in the message of the book for us today as well. Our humanity may not be played with - on a personal or societal scale - without drastic consequences. It is a message we should heed with utmost care.

• The Broken Kingdoms, NK Jemisin: Book two in the Inheritance Trilogy, set in Sky/Shadow, the city of the gods. Jemisin is one of my favourite new fantasy writers, and this book, coming after the first one where we learned of the three gods - Bright Itempas (the Sun), Nahadoth (the Nightlord) and Enefa (the Dawn/Dusk, and newly remade), follows the story of Oree, a blind woman who can only see the magic of the gods, the godlings, and the Scriveners (humans who make use of basic magic). The book is essentially Oree’s journal account of her coming to Shadow, making a living, falling in with some godlings, and getting embroiled in certain plots to kill the gods. The writing is entirely engaging and the world-building excellent. I am always looking for what truth there is in fiction that I may hold with clarity before my heart, and in this there are some important words about loneliness, madness, vengeance, and self-control. 

• The Kingdom of Gods, NK Jemisin: Book three in the Inheritance Trilogy, this concluding story is told from the perspective of Sieh, oldest of the godlings, the god of childhood, the Trickster. It is a good book, and a good series, dealing with power, loneliness, love, and many other things besides. The world-building is well done, not obsessively detailed in the same way as Tolkien or Martin, but rather paints in more broad strokes a convincing picture of a gods-haunted world where mortals have had to learn to reckon with powers outside of their control. But the world is changing, for mortals, demons, godlings and the Three themselves. The themes of change, growth and power come very much to the fore in this concluding book, and the finale is pretty epic. I had to skip over the many sex scenes, however, and some of the characters - most notably Kahl - do not get fleshed out as well as I might have hoped. 

• To Life! L’Chaim! Prayers and Blessings for the Jewish Home, Rabbi Michael Shire: Beautiful images and prayers, suitable for many of life’s moments, joys and hardships. I have begun using this book daily to supplement my prayers and to be connected to a living tradition of faith and hope. 

• Maximum City: Bombay Lost and Found, Suketu Mehta: A comprehensive, journalistic, yet also personal meditation on the vast, dense, complicated, violent, dirty, beautiful, rich, poor, corrupt, hopeful, violent, poetic city of Bombay. Mehta explores the destructive nature of the everlasting gangwars; the corruption of the police and politicians; the bizarre existence of the Bombay dancing girls; the insanity of the Rent Laws; the Bombay “no” and the number of ways you have to get around it; the impotence one feels at the plight of street children; the wide array of competing yet also sustaining religious and spiritual beliefs. All within the framework of his own move back to Bombay and his attempt to raise his family in his beloved home city. It is an insider/outsider view of the city, and it is fascinating. 

• The Wim Hof Method: Activate Your Full Human Potential, Wim Hof: Wim Hof, aka the Iceman, seems to have stumbled upon some deep truths about human physiology, and he lays them out in this book even while scientists scramble to understand and test his method. At its heart, Wim Hof says we need to take cold showers and breathe in a certain way. Doesn’t seem like rocket science, and he certainly garlands his ideas in a wide variety of pseudo-spiritual language. But he also gets results. His take is that we have coddled ourselves with comfort to the point where our bodies have stopped functioning as they should. The cold - “merciless, but righteous” - kick starts our vascular system back into gear, and the breathing changes our neurology. All I can say is, after practising these methods for a little less than a month - I think they kind of work?

• Money and Power, Jacques Ellul: Yet another book by Ellul that takes everything you know, or assume you know, throws it in the blender of Scripture and precise, profound discernment of the age, and slams you with the convictions of gospel truth. In this book Ellul uncovers the power of money, money as a spiritual power and principality, with such clarity that you are shocked you didn’t see it quite like that before. Money is not neutral, and riches are not the blessing that we think they are. Christ is Yahweh’s Poor One, and the poor are his reflection on earth. Neither capitalism nor communism (Ellul was writing this in the 1950’s, during the advent of the great world-changing clashes between these two ideologies) have the biblical answer to the dilemma of money and power. 

• A Life of Jesus, Shusaku Endo: A fascinating book, one that I suspect not everyone will appreciate. It is a powerfully rendered retelling of the life of Jesus, based upon the Gospels, but with the backing of source critical scholarship and the weaving of Endo’s skills and interests as a novelist (and one of my favourite all-time novelists). Endo points out aspects of the familiar story which are factually questionable, but which, he avers, may still be utterly “true”. He attempts to explain some of the psychology of Jesus, the crowds, the Sanhedrin, and especially the disciples. He zeroes in on Jesus’s message being about the love of God and the God of love, and then asks the question that, in his mind, never gets properly asked or answered by those who question the truth of Jesus: How is it that the disciples move from cowards to courageous martyrs? What happened? This is the very question that brought me back to faith in University.

• Indians on Vacation, Thomas King: I am a big fan of Thomas King and have enjoyed every book of his that I have read. Until, sadly, this one. I’m not sure exactly what the issue is, but it just didn’t work for me. It is the story of Blackbird and Mimi, an older Indigenous couple from Canada, who are in Prague looking for evidence of a lost family bundle that Mimi’s great-uncle took when he joined a travelling rodeo show in the early 20th century. The story, told from the perspective of Bird, a semi-retired photojournalist, also weaves in events from their life in Canada and their other travels to various locations in Europe, but in an uncharacteristically disjointed way. The problem, I think, is that Blackbird is a miserable grump - his various “demons” of depression, self-loathing, etc..are anthropomorphised into characters he can see and interact with. He is someone you might not want to spend any time with, but the narration forces you to spend the entire book seeing things from his dour perspective. This includes his views on Mimi, who is irrepressibly optimistic and adventurous, traits that are viewed as an intolerable bother and nuisance by Blackbird. There are reflections within on the refugee crisis, the sixties scoop, and the general impotence people of good hearts feel upon encountering the pain and sorrow of the world, but mostly it just feels world-weary. Nothing is resolved, the family bundle isn’t found, nobody changes or even seems to learn or grow. There are so many great Thomas King books out there, I’d suggest giving this one a miss and reading any of the other ones. 

• The Sea and Poison, Shusaku Endo: Set in Japan during the second world war, this is a story about personal responsibility and the effects of conscience. A team of doctors and nurses at a hospital of TB patients is faced with the opportunity to perform vivisections on American prisoners, in the interest of furthering medical science. Endo gives us the backgrounds of several of these characters, each of whom react differently to the horrific procedure. It was, apparently, one of the first times the issue of personal responsibility for actions taken during the war was brought up in Japanese fiction, and the novel won Endo awards and acclaim. It is a stark and stirring work, the clinical nature of the surgery scenes and the interior psychological wrestling of the characters in particular bearing the ring of truth.

• Genesis, Robert Alter translation and notes: I love Alter’s translation work. It takes familiar books and renders them at once unfamiliar, poetic, and earthy. His explanatory notes are always brilliant, occasionally snarky, sometimes even funny. And this story holds its spiritual, narrative and psychological relevance as much as ever.

The Fifth Sign: Ghost on the Water (John 6:16-21)

The main point: Moving water represented chaos to the people of Israel, and certainly the disciples were caught up in both the chaos of the storm, and the chaos of the people who wanted to force Jesus to be King. In the midst of this chaos, Jesus walks across the water, bringing peace and order, and revealing his identity again as the One who has power over Creation.

 

After the feeding of the 5000, Jesus left to be alone in the mountains. This would have caused a fair amount of confusion amongst the people who had just witnessed a miracle, and amongst Jesus’ committed followers. His actions seemed like a sign: he fed people bread from heaven, at the time of the Passover, in the wilderness. The people there took it to mean he should be King, and were ready to force this issue. But this was not what the sign was pointing to, as we will see later on in the chapter. So Jesus takes off, leaving his disciples uncertain as to what to do next.

 

As Jesus does not come back to them, they get in their boat and start making their way back across the sea. So it is that this miracle takes place on the water, still around the time of the Passover, and with only Jesus’ committed disciples as witnesses. The disciples are caught in a storm, and though some of them are experienced fishermen, this still would have been a terrifying event. Jewish people did not typically spend much time in open waters; moving waters, in fact, represented chaos and fear throughout the Old Testament. Their physical environment would have matched their emotional and spiritual environment as well. What did the last miracle truly mean? Is Jesus going to declare himself as the Messiah? Is he going to lead a rebellion? And where has he gone? Jesus’ followers were caught in a chaotic storm in more ways than one.

 

This is when Jesus is seen walking across the water, terrifying them even more. It would be very easy to see a reflection of God parting the waters at the Exodus in this miracle. Certainly people would be thinking along these lines, given that he had just performed a very Passover-like miracle at the time of the Passover. Jesus could be seen as the new Moses, ready to lead his people again as a Prophet and King, bringing bread from heaven and walking through the water towards their deliverance. Maybe the people had it right?

 

But Jesus is not simply a new Moses. He is greater than Moses, as will be made very clear later on in the gospel of John. And this is not just Jesus walking through water that God has moved for him; this is Jesus demonstrating his own mastery over the chaotic waters. This is more like Job’s description of God in Job 9:8 as the One who “trampled over the waves of the sea.” This is more like the Psalmist’s account of God commanding and raising the stormy wind, lifting the waves of the sea, making the storm be still and hushing the waves of the sea from Psalm 107:23-32. This is not a sign pointing to Jesus as a prophet like Moses. This is a sign pointing to Jesus as the Divine bringer of Order and Peace. It is the disciples, strangely enough, who fit into the role of Moses here, as they are witnesses to his divine glory ( a few times after miracles in John it is said that the disciples “beheld his glory”).

 

Jesus’ words speak into this reality as well. His statement: “It is I; do not be afraid”, prepares us for the incredible “I AM” statements to come. The Divine Name (usually translated now as Yahweh) is a declaration of being, of complete and true reality, and it is a name that Jesus takes on for himself. He is the true, the ultimate reality, and he shows this by his power over the chaos of the storm. And, like in most divine appearances, he urges his followers not to be afraid. He has come to bring them peace in the storm. They can trust his presence, though they cannot control it.

 

We too can trust the presence of Jesus, though we cannot control him. Those who believe in him have been given the Holy Spirit, which is the water of life that flows out of us into the world. We do not know what each storm will bring to us, nor even if we will survive them. But we know that the Lord is always with us, and that his reality is the true and final reality. We can only submit our lives into his care, trusting that he is willing and able to bring peace into our chaos.

Concepts versus Truth

Endo, in A Life of Jesus, makes clear how the crowd’s concept of Jesus as Messiah - as a nationalistic figure who would overthrow the established order - is in total conflict with Jesus’ main message, which is to speak of the love of God and the God of love. 

At the two main meals at which Jesus presides, the feeding of the 5000 and the Last Supper, messianic fervour ran high. The crowd wanted to manifest its concept of who Jesus, who the Messiah, needed to be. Jesus denies them on both occasions, speaking instead of his death and of his love. 

The concept of a Messiah who would die was simply not within the realm of imagination. And the crowds, ramped up in excitement at these critical moments, are diffused in disappointment at Jesus’ refusal to make use of this momentum. Judas storming out to betray Jesus is not the only one whose hopes are dashed, who will turn from support to anger and accusation.

So goes all the faith in our concepts of the divine, our need to see our image of God, of Jesus, of victory, of political rightness, of social righteousness brought into fruition on the world. We will kill anyone who gets in the way of our vision of goodness.

Tongues n' Stuff (1 Corinthians 14:1-25)

The main point: Love compels us to use the gifts we have been given to build up the Body of Christ and to declare the gospel to unbelievers in ways that they can understand and receive. The mis-use of the gift of tongues was an issue in the Corinthian Church, and Paul explains that while the gift is from God and is good, it is still better to prophesy in the Church gatherings, as prophecy is intelligible and therefore of greater benefit to the Body than tongues (without interpretation) which cannot be understood.

 

In this chapter Paul carries on his argument from chapter 12. Remember that Paul had been talking about the spiritual gifts in 1 Corinthians 12, specifically how the Church should be understood as one body with many parts, each of those parts being valuable and essential, and all being united by the sharing of the Holy Spirit. In the middle of this argument, Paul stops to deliver his beautiful chapter on love (1 Corinthians 13), the way in which all Christians are to live and use their gifts for one another. With this in mind, Paul returns to his theme of spiritual gifts in 1 Corinthians 14, this time focusing on two specific gifts: tongues and prophecy.

 

Once again we must be reminded that the gifts were given to be used in the context of Christian worship and gathering. They are designed, according to Paul, to build one another up, not for personal glory or prestige. It seems there was a problem with the use of tongues in the Corinthian Church. Some at least of the Corinthian believers apparently thought that speaking in tongues showed that they had achieved the loftiest possible spiritual status. And so, it seems, many were speaking and praying publicly in tongues during their gatherings for worship and instruction, without any interpretation. Paul’s teaching on tongues and prophecy is directed into this situation.

 

But we should maybe first deal with this question: what is the gift of tongues? We first read of the apostles speaking in strange tongues at Pentecost when, after receiving the Holy Spirit, the apostles begin speaking the various languages of the people who were gathered in the streets below, languages which the apostles did not previously know how to speak. This is a case of actual human languages being spoken. Is that what was going on in Corinth? Possibly. In chapter 13 Paul talks about speaking in the “tongues of men.” But he also talks about speaking in the “tongues of angels”, and it seems probable that it was more of a supernatural, inspired, non-human utterance that was happening in Corinth. It certainly seems that most people who pray or speak in tongues today are not speaking any known or possible human language, (though there are some reports of that happening.)

 

At any rate, the tongues that were being spoken, whether human or angelic, were, according to Christensen, “a supernatural manifestation of the Holy Spirit, whereby a believer speaks forth in a language he has never learned, and which he does not understand.” Were they wrong to do this? If tongues were, and are, a supernatural manifestation of the Holy Spirit, then they certainly are not, in and of themselves, wrong. They are a gift from God. They are not gibberish or nonsense, as Paul affirms that it is possible for them to be interpreted. Paul also said that he spoke in tongues more than any of them, and would be happy for them all to speak in tongues. But this does not mean that all Christians have to speak in tongues to be obedient to Scripture. After all, in talking about the diversity of the gifts in chapter 12, Paul asks: “Do all speak with tongues?” The clear implication is, “No, all do not speak with tongues.” So speaking in tongues is good, but not all have to do it, and there are some restrictions on the use of this gift in the context of Christian worship.

 

The benefits of praying (or singing) in tongues are well-attested. Tongues are given as a private prayer language, the gift of praying or singing with your spirit directly to God, bypassing your intellect, using the words God gives you to communicate with him in deep intimacy. Many people have spoken of the spiritual breakthrough that this produces in personal devotion, when words have run dry but the prayer continues from the heart. This prayer language is inspired by the Holy Spirit, but is not ecstatic, and can be controlled and utilized by the person praying. It is the Holy Spirit of God praying with the spirit of the believer, and it is incredibly encouraging to the believer. In a public setting, spoken or sung tongues that are interpreted through the power of the Holy Spirit, either by the person speaking or by someone else in the congregation, essentially take the form of revelations from God, similar to messages of knowledge or prophecy. In that case, tongues would edify the rest of the Body as well.

 

Paul compares and contrasts the gift of tongues to the gift of prophecy. Prophecy, like tongues, is an inspired utterance from the Holy Spirit. But unlike tongues, prophecy is intelligible to the speaker and to others. Prophecy is not just telling the future. It is hearing and speaking out a direct revelation from God into the world around you. It is not the same thing as preaching, though preachers may be speaking prophecy, either being immediately inspired with words from the Lord while they are speaking to the congregation, or being directly inspired as they prepare sermons beforehand. And not just preachers will prophesy. Acts 2:17-18 (quoting a prophecy from Joel), says that when the Holy Spirit is poured out, sons and daughters, young and old, even servants will prophesy. (We will look at some of the restrictions on prophecy next week.)

 

The main point Paul makes about the difference between tongues and prophecy is the fact that prophecy can be understood by all. For that reason, Paul prefers that the believers in Corinth would prophesy, rather than speak in tongues, when they gather together. Prophecy encourages, strengthens, and comforts the congregation (other gifts can do this as well) because it is intelligible, whereas tongues are not. Others cannot even say “Amen” when someone else is praying in tongues, because they don’t know what they are agreeing to. Tongues build up the person speaking; prophecy builds up the whole Church. Paul would rather say five words with his mind at a gathering of the Church than ten thousand in a tongue. So the Corinthians should desire gifts that strengthen the whole Body, rather than ones that primarily benefit themselves.

 

So what about speaking or singing in tongues in a public gathering? That has certainly become the norm in various Church gatherings, especially in the last 100 years, as it seemingly was the norm in the Church at Corinth. The key seems to be interpretation. Whatever happens in Christian worship should be at least intelligible. This would include a lot of the things we do today in our gatherings that might seem like madness to outsiders. If that is what the Holy Spirit is doing amongst us, then we must obey. But we should also take care to ensure that things are properly interpreted to everyone there.  We will see next week the advice given to Corinth about how to proceed with orderly worship that includes tongues and prophecy. Paul clearly does not think tongues are bad, and assumes that they will be part of Church life. But, for the sake of love of one another, and for the sake of unbelievers who would think Christians were out of their mind if they were all speaking languages that no one understood, Paul restricts their unfettered use in public gatherings. If intelligible prophecy is spoken out in public gatherings, unbelievers who come in may understand it, be convicted, and be saved.

 

*A quick note on verses 20-22, which cause much confusion. The Corinthians thought they were mature because of their gift of tongues. Paul calls them children, because they wanted to use their spiritual freedom without showing loving concern to the rest of the Body. Some suggest though that Paul is talking about using tongues as an evangelistic tool here, saying that tongues are a “sign for unbelievers.” This is clearly in direct contradiction to the verses that come right afterword, saying that tongues will make unbelievers think Christians are crazy. In these verses Paul is actually referring to Isa 28, in which the tongues of foreigners (Assyrian troops) were used by God to speak a word of judgment to “unbelievers”. The unbelievers in this case were Israel, who hadn’t listened or repented to God. So tongues were a negative sign to these unbelievers, a sign given in a language they could not understand. If anything, Christian tongues speaking could be a sign to unbelievers that they did not have the Holy Spirit, but it would not be a sign that they understood, so it would not have evangelistic value on its own.

Mary’s Song of Reversal

Imagine what our society would look like if it were flipped on its head; ie., if all the things we took as normal or inevitable (the rich have power, the poor do not; celebrities are all beautiful; sex sells, etc...) were reversed? What would that look like in the DTES of Vancouver? In other neighbourhoods?

In Luke 1:39-56, this type of reversal is prophesied. A newly pregnant Mary visits with her cousin, Elisabeth, also pregnant with a miracle baby, in the hills of Judea. Even before Elizabeth can respond to her cousin’s greeting, her unborn baby (who the angel announced would be filled by the Spirit of God even from the womb) has realised who it is that Mary is carrying. 

Baby John the Baptist jumping in the womb is the beginning of John’s witness to Jesus. And it is a witness infused with joy, as is Mary’s song (called The Magnificat). The birth of the Messiah is seen as the culmination of God’s action and purpose within Israel. Mary’s song is not just thanking the Lord for his mercy towards her, but towards all of Israel. This act is the promised deliverance and redemption for the people of God, the long-awaited vindication of the poor and needy, and the judgement on the rich, proud oppressors.

In Mary’s song she praises the LORD and declares that He is Saviour. She is in awe that the LORD took notice of her even though she was a lowly servant. But that is what the LORD is like all throughout Scripture - God’s love and attention is searching, it is comprehensive, and it is focused most especially on the poor, the meek, the lowly. Mary sings that the LORD has shown mercy to generations, and has filled the hungry, sent the rich away, exalted the humble and scattered the proud. This song is an announcement of the overturning of humanity’s disordering of creation. The power of God as judge of his enemies, of those who have disobeyed and gained power off the backs of the poor and innocent, is invoked in this song as well. Israel’s salvation was always pictured in terms of release from slavery or return from exile – that is, the overthrow of those powers that were crushing her. The implication is that the same God who brought about the Exodus has also brought about the baby in Mary’s womb. Luke shows a special concern in his gospel for the poor and the oppressed, and is pointing out here that the coming of God’s salvation through Jesus will and should result in a different way of being with one another, in particular giving a new hope to the poor.

Mary’s song declares what the Lord has done for her and for her people. It is an impressive list, and one can imagine being inspired to praise as a result of remembering such a good and merciful God. What has the Lord done for you and your people? What are you still longing for God to do? Write out a list this week, or if you can, a song or poem, that lists out what the Lord has done for you and the reversals that you are praying for. Keep it somewhere you will see it daily to remind yourself of who God is and the mighty acts he has done and will do.

The Third Sign: The Son of the Father (John 5:1-47)

The main point: The first two signs in John showed us Jesus the Messiah as the joy-bringer and as the healer, but also foreshadowed what his task and purpose was. This sign, the healing of the paralyzed man and the controversy that followed it, point towards the unique relationship Jesus had as the Son of his Father in heaven. Jesus claims total unity with the Father in this passage, and points to his authority to give life and to bring judgment. And this is the first sign that is specifically rejected.

 

Chapter 5 of John brings us to Jerusalem, and the action takes place around the pool of Bethesda, locally known for its legendary healing properties. Here Jesus encounters a man who has been paralyzed for 38 years, and who has no friend to help him into the pool for healing. It wouldn’t have mattered if he had made it into the pool though; these waters, just like the water in the jugs at the weeding in Cana, were insufficient to bring about his healing, cleansing and salvation. Only Jesus, the provider of “living water”, could do that.

 

Jesus asks the man if he wants to be made well, and then commands him to get up, take his mat and walk. The man obeys (just like the servant in Cana and the official whose son was ill), and he is healed instantly. At the most basic level, this is a story of Jesus seeing a man in utmost distress, unable to help himself or find healing, upon whom he takes mercy and brings healing. Later he admonishes the man to stop sinning or something worse may happen to him, not suggesting that he will get even more paralyzed, but that the true healing and wholeness he requires is salvation from sin.

 

But this is not just a “basic” healing; it is a sign, an act that is full of symbolism pointing to the identity and purpose of Jesus as the Messiah. The nature of this sign is shown to us by the immediate reaction to it. Pharisees, who were Jewish religious authorities concerned with the proper application of the Law and Traditions, saw this man carrying his mat on the Sabbath. This did not necessarily break any Scriptural laws, but it did run contrary to the Tradition, which forbade carrying something from one place to another on the Sabbath. So we know that this sign has something to do with the keeping of the Sabbath, one of the most important of the Jewish religious regulations.

 

Again, on a basic level one can see the problem with the Pharisees position. Jesus is interested in the welfare and healing and forgiveness of a paralyzed man, while the Pharisees, unable to effect his healing or forgiveness, are interested in whether or not he carries a mat. One concern is compassionate and life-giving, the other seems petty. But there is more going on that that here. Keeping the Sabbath was a commandment from the Lord, and when Jesus is questioned about it he cannot, and does not, say that the Sabbath is unimportant. Rather, he explains why he is permitted to heal and work on the Sabbath. His Father, God, continues to work on the Sabbath. The Father, in fact, never stops working, and his work is effortless. And just as the Father never stops working, Jesus, the Son, does not stop either. The Father has authority over the Sabbath; therefore, so does the Son.

 

Well, this causes a bit of a reaction. The Pharisees want to see Jesus killed, accusing him of claiming equality with God. This did not necessarily mean that they thought he was claiming to be God, just that he was claiming to be independent of God, or was rebelling against God. But this is the complete opposite of what Jesus is doing. Jesus explains that far from being independent of the Father, he cannot do anything without the Father. Jesus’ actions are actually displaying the activity of the Father in the world. The Father’s love for him is perfect, and his obedience towards the Father is perfect, so that their wills and purposes and actions are utterly united. Jesus is not just claiming equality with God, he is claiming unity with God, as the unique Son of the Father. As such, he is glorifying his Father in absolutely everything he does.

 

There are some examples of people using the term Father for God in the Old Testament, but Jesus is clearly claiming a unique relationship here. This is a very troubling claim for the Pharisees, who either interpret it to mean that Jesus thinks himself independent of God, or thinks himself the equal of God. Jesus goes onto to clarify what he is saying, though not in a way that makes his opponents any less angry. There are two things that are absolutely, positively the responsibility of God and God alone: giving life (including resurrecting the dead) and bringing judgment. In this passage, Jesus claims that just as the Father gives life, so does the Son give life to whomever he pleases, and that he has life in himself. He is claiming a task that belongs only to God. And then he does it again, declaring that the Father actually entrusts all judgment to him, because he is the Son of Man.

 

All of this is for the purpose that people would honour the Son (Jesus) just as they honour the Father. The Father and the Son are united, and so honouring the Son is the same as honouring the Father; failing to honour the Son is the same as failing to honour the Father. The implications of Jesus’ statements here are pretty clear. The sign of the healing at the well points to his authority: authority over physical ailment, but also over life and death, and over the Sabbath, and over judgment. He has this authority because he is the one true Son of the Father, and he is in perfect unity with the Father. So true is the unity with the Father that Jesus has the right to be honoured, to be worshipped, just as the Father is worshipped. Those who hear Jesus and believe him will move from life to death, and will not be condemned. And Jesus does all of this out of perfect obedience, in order to please not himself, but his Father.

 

Wow. It is difficult for us, after 2000 years of Jesus being worshipped by Christians, to gather just how scandalous this is. Jaws must have been dropping all over the place. Hands would have been reaching for stones to throw. Jesus claims to be the very self-revelation of God the Father. He is God, wrapped in human flesh. To reject him is to reject God, to accept him is to accept God. And it is too much for the Pharisees to bear. This sign is rejected, Jesus is rejected. But Jesus does not accept the verdict of people, because God himself has testified about who he is. Not only that, but the very Scriptures which the Pharisees studied so diligently are a sign pointing to Jesus as the Messiah, and the Son of God.

 

This is where Jesus turns the accusation of the Pharisees back on themselves. They accused him of rebelling against God, of being independent. Their motivation was not the love of God, but the approval of others. They longed for the praise of people, but missed the very revelation of God that their Scriptures were all about. Jesus is explaining here that not only his miracles, but also all of Scripture, were signs pointing to his identity and purpose. The Laws and the Ordinances, such as the animal sacrifices, were not ends in themselves, but signs pointing to the greater reality to come. The Laws of Moses could only point out sinfulness, they could not remove it. Only Jesus, the unique Son of God, the Messiah, could do that. So Moses, upon whom the Pharisees trusted, actually became their accuser, because he prophesied about Jesus in his writings. But the Pharisees did not believe what Moses had written when that prophecy took flesh before their very eyes.

Betty the RV

Betty the RV

Here follows the shortened account of our 31 day cross North America Family Road Trip in Betty the RV. We survived tornados, snakes, sewage, Texas, and four children.

Day One: Betty (the 1976 RV) wobbling in the wind; border trouble; side flap flapping in the wind; top hatch clapping like a popcorn maker; surprising desert and canyons in Eastern Washington; headlights on and off; slept in rest stop in Idaho.

Day Two: Climbing into Montana; strange skies; snow in Butte; exhaust manifold pops while crossing the continental divide; Betty sounds like a loud Harley; struggling up hills; limp into Big Sky Montana; sleep in gas station parking lot, snow all around.

Day Three: Engine sounds horrible; mechanics closed; Yellowstone mechanic does not know up from down; downhill into Yellowstone, Wyoming; Bison, wolf, elk, geysers, Old Faithful; Grizzly RV Park, RV hook-ups, freezing cold.

Day Four: Showers and coffee; engine won’t start, sewage won’t empty – too cold; prayer makes both work; over Continental Divide again; downhill back into Idaho; engine still protesting, cruise into Utah, through Salt Lake; Mormon Tabs everywhere; discover Flying J in Nephi, Utah, sleep there; “Where we are is exactly where we want to be.”

Day Five: Dom’s ripped PJ’s; Tanya discovers blown manifold; Mays automotive fixes exhaust, way better; Southern Utah is beautiful – Big Rock Candy Mountain; eat in Mormon town, Joshua exposes doctrinal error; into Arizona, another huge climb, beautiful canyons lit by sunset, scary to drive in; stop in Cameron, Arizona gas station; store clerks mean; Caitlyn leaves phone.

Day Six: Grand Canyon; “Oh no, the border!”; Watchtower; no donkey rides; jumping cacti; beautiful views; camping overnight, smores, campfire;

Day Seven: Heading  through Arizona to New Mexico; swirling red dust clouds; Route 66; Betty stalls; Suddenly hot temps; headlights stop working in Albuquerque; Enchanted Trails RV Park.

Day Eight: Through NM towards Texas; “What is that bull doing?” Rest stop has “Beware of Rattlesnakes” signs and a Tornado shelter (foreshadowing); strong winds keep us awake and nervous.

Day Nine: Arrive in Houston, after harrowing drive through Dallas; stop at hospital, continue on to Walmart; Karen and Joseph and family; huge sleepover.

Day Ten: Soccer games; Joseph’s parent’s place, Noah and Doms peeing in backyard; UFC with Joseph.

Day Eleven: Church – tour of the facility; Betty housing Mexicans?; Splashtown – “I survived the Tornado!” (foreshadowing); “Crocodile Isle was AWESOME!”.

Day Twelve: Raymond checks out Betty; Cherie has 4 hour coffee date, cheesecake in the evening.

Day Thirteen: Getting Joseph’s car; NASA; fixing Betty; Dom goes low, goes to hospital – CAT scan scare; Children’s Hospital – Dom is fine, insurance weirdness; final night in Houston.

Day Fourteen: Drive to Tulsa, OK; Thunder storms and lightning show as we roll in; park in Believer’s Church parking lot; 5am fierce winds and tornado siren goes off; Betty rocking back and forth, green light outside; each adult grabs a child and goes under table; Dominic sleeps through, Aaron calls Tim “I think there’s a Tornado outside, and we’re in an RV.” “I think you’d better get out.” “Uh...”; Tim lets us into prayer room for safety.

Day Fifteen: Coffee at Fusion, hanging out with Tim; Linsey and Aaron and Mathieu come in, bowling and pizza and mall and park; Evidence of tornado destruction on streets outside; Tanya and Caitlyn hanging with BR crew; Thursday in the park, Ray singing songs; meeting with Aaron and Leah about Van; Tribe drumming night, drumsticks and prophecy; leery night in Betty, lightning and heavy rain.

Day Sixteen: Hang out in Fusion with Adam and family; visit Harvest grocery co-op; Doms poops in urinal; driving towards KC, Miss; more evidence of tornado damage on back roads through Kansas; Coffeeville, Kansas – Tanya’s heritage; miss Wendy’s street, drive into ghetto; finally find Wendy’s mansion; Noah finds dead mouse; over to Thad May’s, Boo greets kids at the door; (non)smelly firewood; Boo sneezes, kids lose it.

Day Seventeen: Big breakfast at Wendy’s, Adam Cox, Lindsay Ellison, Maggie, others; visit Boiler Room, art space, Campus America, Linnea et al and their incredible book shelf; kids and Boo and Thad go to the park; curry at Thad May’s house, sharing with Thad and Mary.

Day Eighteen: Adam and Juli’s baby trump morning coffee; Venison sausage; prayer and prophecy time at Thad’s; Boiler Room (hip) gathering; begin drive to Chicago; stay in Iowa rest stop.

Day Nineteen: Find great Rest Stop with dump!; Interstate closed, detour to Walmart; police investigate children on their own in Betty (not on their own); bumpy rainy ride into Chicago; arrive at Blue Island Church, see Ro-ro; Caitlyn freak-out when Meghan Labreque arrives; exercise room; drive to Polanco’s, enter a party (Neisy, Caleb – Nap Dyn, Prezza, children, Maggie the dog, Ambur); fantastic dinner, homemade ice cream; Guiseppe.

Day Twenty: Cherie migraine; laundry, exercise, lunch and climbing wall at Church; dinner at Beggar’s Pizza; still no Eric Himes.

Day Twenty One: Six Flags in Corps Van; first really sunny day, no line-ups, mixed feelings towards Dark Knight, loved Buccaneer Battle, log ride; Caitlyn and Tanya crazy bus and train ride into Chicago, hair extensions; White Castle; prayed for Ro-Ro and Prezza.

Day Twenty Two: Lincoln Park zoo, crazy drive into Chicago; Tanya explores Clark St.; Jo-Jo the Gorilla, lions, tigers, bears, rhinos, giraffes, warthog, monkeys, hissing cockroaches, naked mole rats, blue-tongued skink, etc...; drive to CFOT, see Wrigley Field!; visit Ian; go to little cafe; back to Church, extended talk and prayer re Boiler Room, War College etc...

Day Twenty Three: Leave Chicago, drive to Madison, with many tolls; see Joseph Steinke, staying in Winnebago House; eat at Mexican Taco place, cooking brownies; visiting with BR people, including Wes, Neel, Kaya (who has her own language) and others for dinner; Dom bit through a glass; Ciara took care of Kaya; Wes and family may be coming to Vancouver for a spell; Dominic did NOT like the brownie.

Road Trip Journal Continued...

Day Twenty Four: Awake early to head out to Madison Farmer’s Market; Pumpkin Oatmeal bar for breakfast; kids watch break dancers, including 2 Mormon missionaries who could really throw down; cheese curds – but no poutine; “If you don’t stay still, Dominic, I’m going to draw you as an alien!”; dinner at the Winnebago house; another migraine for Cherie; unexpected 2nd night stay in Madison.

Day Twenty Five: Off in the morning towards Minneapolis; Betty smells exactly like a toilet that has not been emptied for 5 days and has been sitting in the hot sun, “It’s either Betty or a field fill of 400 cows that have been crapping for 60 years”, “We are reaching bio-chemical weapon status”; desperate to find an RV dump station, finally do; kids are very squirrely in the RV today, they may be reaching the end of their patience, as are we all; hugest dead deer on the side of the road yet; reach Minneapolis, eat dinner with BR community and the Wohlers; everyone prays for Cherie’s migraines; do yard work; kids pair off with Wohler children to play.

Day Twenty Six: Bike riding; everyone piles in Betty, we visit Fallout Boiler Room space for some prayer; visit Fallout Art Co-op to see studio spaces; Dominic has conflict in the park, announces to other children that he is Superboy, they remain unimpressed; tacos and District 9 at night; giant argument about the value of Speed Racer the movie between Caitlyn and Bobby goes 10 full rounds.

Day Twenty Seven: Begin the day with Peter Pan; got Minnesota Twins tickets and bubble tea in downtown Minneapolis; Bella Wohler likes to eat Lego; prayer and talking with new interns at Source; t-shirt exchange; Twins vs. Yankees game suspended due to thunderstorm , which ended the moment we got out of the stadium; final prayer with Peter.

Day Twenty Eight: On the road by 5:30am; Betty coming apart at the seams a little; making great time, aiming for Regina; ate lunch in North Dakota, attacked by ants; dumped our sewage in Drake, where they allowed us to get rid of our wasted near a children’s playground; ate dinner near Danish windmill; running out of gas near Can border, discover puncture in tire – two rednecks fix tire in Lignite, N Dakota; spectacular sunset; cross border with no issues; fear of more tornados, big lightning storm in southern Sask; make it all the way to Regina, 1200 kms today.

Day Twenty Nine: Cold night in Betty; sleeting in Regina; meet Erika in Robbins donuts; pray outside of proposed prayer house; leave Regina, heading for Calgary; more ominous looking skies and big storms; snowing in Calgary, leaking in Betty; reach 24-7 community (The Wilsons) in Calgary, crazy suburb with ridiculously similar names for every street; Caitlyn wants to know War College summer assignments.

Day Thirty: Snow on the ground in Calgary; off to Jesus Loves You Society to help unload a truck, pray, eat lunch, play hockey, and look at prayer art; stopped in at Peter’s Drive in for wicked awesome milkshakes; dropped off crib and bike for a young family; kids go swimming; Caitlyn finds someone to talk about musicals with; dinner and prayer with Andy, Debbie, Nolan and Sherry.

Day Thirty One: Wake up to even MORE snow on the ground in Calgary; concern over Betty’s ability to ascend (and descend) the Rockies; horrible conditions driving out of Calgary, someone left the gas cap at the gas station; beautiful drive over the Rockies; dinner at Denny's; find a Flying J in Kamloops to sleep.

Day Thirty Two: LAST DAY; leave at 5am, climb over Coquihalla, Betty does fine; growing excitement as we near Vancouver; drop Tanya off in Langley, sad farwell; Betty stalls on Hastings St, typical; finallyb reach home, our community painted and redecorated our home!

Knowing the Father who disciplines his children (Deut 8:1-5; Prov 3:11-12)

The book of Deuteronomy is Moses’ last chance to instruct and inform the Hebrew people before they enter the Promised Land. Moses will not be going there with them. So he explains to them as best he can who God is and what he has done for them, and what the relationship between God and his people ought to look like.

The Hebrew people have just spent forty years wandering around in the desert so that an unfaithful generation would pass away before they entered Canaan. The new generation that now waits on the side of the Jordan River has known nothing but this wilderness wandering, and they are about to enter a land of wealth, stability and comparative comfort. Everything, in other words, was about to change. Would they still remember God in this new land? Or would they be so enamoured with the Promised Land that they would forget the one who had promised it in the first place? Comfort and ease have a way of distracting us.

Moses, aware of this danger, places before their minds a picture of God who is not to be taken lightly, nor easily forgotten. God is the provider, God is the carrier, yes. But God is also the discipliner. The reason for the wilderness experience, lest we all forget, was to test the people of God, to deny them comfort, to allow them to endure hardship and privation so as to humble them. They needed to grow up and understand the reality of their situation, that they themselves were no great thing. It was God who had delivered them from slavery in Egypt, and it was God who would deal with any enemies. If they thought they could accomplish any of this in their own strength, they were very much mistaken.

And so, like a good Father who sets boundaries for his children, who tells them no, who allows them to fall down and to fail and experience the limits of their own abilities, God disciplined his children in the wilderness. The testing was to see if Israel really would follow the commandments of God even in the midst of hardship. He wanted to know their hearts, and he wanted them to know their own hearts. He also wanted to show his people that he was trustworthy, that even in the wilderness he would not fail to provide for his children. Food would come. Clothes would not wear out. Feet would not swell. The discipline was hard, but it was not impossible, and it was for a purpose. And though they grumbled and resisted, ultimately

This shows the degree to which the Father loves his children. Why else would he bother with them? He wants them to learn, to grow, to understand that which is best for them. And for that he needs to use limitations, strictness, rigour. No learning comes without these disciplines, these challenges. To use the new lingo, God created an “atmosphere of learning” for his children, and one that was not covered in bubble wrap.

If we want to learn and grow and experience more of the Father’s love for us, we also must submit to this discipline. We must come to know God as the Father who disciplines us, because he loves us. We must be open to his correction, to his limitation, to humility, to his saying “no” to us. How can we claim to be his children if we do not truly accept him as Father? There is a struggle inherent in the Christian life, a denial of self which is learned over and over again throughout a lifetime. There is a type of living that is counter-intuitive to the world, a rejection of certain comforts and privileges that would lead us away from obedience towards God. The life of faith is a dangerously risky thing, because it is meant to be lived in utter abandonment to God.

But we can trust him. God is not like a human parent, even the best of whom will fail, will be selfish, will sometimes act rashly or foolishly. God is in control of himself, and has proven that he loves his children so much that his discipline, though unpleasant at the time, will certainly produce the fruit of righteousness. What the Father has is good for us. It is never abusive, always life-affirming and life-giving. It will always lead us into greater knowledge of him, and greater dependence on him. And we can know that if God is disciplining us, we are his true children whom he loves.

So how do you suspect God wants to discipline you? How do you suspect God wants to discipline his people in this day and age?

(Much of the information used in this is taken from Knowing God the Father Through the Old Testament by Christopher Wright and From Paradise to the Promised Land by T Desmond Alexander).

2022 Albums

Essential Albums List, 2022

Highway 61 Revisited, Bob Dylan

Listened to the album, or part of the album, every day in January. I was most familiar with Like a Rolling Stone, of course, but really fell in love especially with Tombstone Blues, Ballad of a Thin Man, and Desolation Row. Dylan was an absolute genius lyrically, and I appreciate his unconventional voice as well as the sometimes circus-like instrumentation. He created an environment with his albums, and this one seems to point to the chaos, confusion and possibility of the 1960’s, both in terms of politics and social movements. 

Thelonius Monk

I started the month aiming to focus on just one of Monk’s albums, but in the end decided to listen to as many as possible, including a number of his live recordings. These are some of the albums I took in this month: Straight No Chaser, Brilliant Corners, Round Midnight, Monk’s Dream, Live in Paris, Underground, Live in Zurich.

What a brilliant musician and performer, surrounded of course with many other incredible jazz performers. I haven’t appreciated jazz before in quite the way I should. Listening to whole albums at a time, and especially the discography of such a supremely talented artist as Monk, really helps. You start to hear the themes he and the others develop, the way they play with and around the melody, the syncopated way the instruments come together (especially with a pianist like Monk, who had such a unique, percussive approach to the piano) and the beauty of the lengthy solos. The melodies are there, but sometimes they are more implied than played. This is music that asks you to do some work, and I like that. Jazz doesn’t spoon-feed you like pop does. You have to be attentive, to train your ears and heart to catch the movement, the switches, and as Monk liked to say, the notes that aren’t played. He was sometimes criticized for playing wrong notes (though he was incredibly skilled in multiple genres on the piano), but he never thought a note was “wrong”. Or if he did, he wanted to make sure he played the right wrong notes. 

Essential Hip Hop Albums: 

Illmatic, Nas (1994) - Quintessential East Coast NYC rap. Incredible lyricism, and really clear delivery and flow (unlike today’s mumble rap). Feels like a bridge album from 80’s hip hop to the more hard core rap of the 90’s. Really love Ruhrpott State of Mind and It Ain’t Hard to Tell.

3 Feet High and Rising, De La Soul (1989) - feels like a concept album, mostly chill rapping with lots of flowering instrumentals and relaxed beats in the background. There are a number of “skits” interwoven throughout the album and lots of humour and experiments throughout, but it also includes socially conscious and uplifting material. You can feel it veering towards the more awake sounds and ideas of the 90’s. Can hear the connection with the Canadian hip hop group, The Dream Warriors. 

Aquemini, Outkast (1998) - Atlanta-based rap that came in and changed the game when everything was focused on West Coast/East Coast. Speed-rapping from Big Boi and experimental instrumentation and flow from Andre 3000.

Supa Dupa Fly, Missy Elliott (1997) - Wow. Produced by Timbaland, featuring Lil Kim, Da Brat, Busta Rhymes, Aaliyah and more, this intro album by Missy is just ridiculous. The Rain is such an absurdly good song, so far ahead of its time in every respect, and it was her debut single. The combination of Timbaland’s epic beats and Missy’s rapping and singing is really unmatched, in my opinion, by most artists working today. 

The Score, The Fugees (1996) - This was one of my jams in the mid-90’s. Laid-back, groovy, funky, melodic, and with some killer rhymes and social conscience. Lots of powerful refugee and Haitian references, but also a couple of “skits” that didn’t really age well. MCs also love talking about how they are destroying all the other sucka MCs, which I believe comes from the culture of rap battles and diss circles. Feels like a pretty competitive world.

Midnight Marauders, A Tribe Called Quest (1993) - This album totally escaped my notice in the 90’s, not terribly surprising. Hip-hop heads - and I am not numbered amongst them, though I am growing in my appreciation - justly number this album in the top 5 all time. And it is truly remarkable. It feels very fresh, not dated (some of the references, such as the one to Mr. Belvedere, are bound in time, but the sound is still extremely current). The beats are complex and fascinating, as is the background instrumentation. Smooth rapping flow, and again very socially conscious lyrics: not every MC is about the negativity.” There are “skits” throughout, but they aren’t disruptive - they are brief and tend to carry the theme of the album forward, which is refreshing (one of them gives info about the growing rates of HIV infection in black and hispanic communities).

The Chronic, Dr. Dre (1992) - Obviously a classic, and a real achievement in composition, lyric, beat and instrumentation (the latter of which was influenced by A Tribe Called Quest). I am not really a fan of gangsta rap though. I fully accept that I don’t like it because it does not speak to my reality, and that the reality it does speak to is real. “The Day The N***** Took Over” about the LA riots is important. And this album also introduced Snoop Dogg to the world in a serious way.

The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill, Lauryn Hill (1998) - One of my favourite albums of all time, with such gems as Zion, Doo Wop (That Thing), Forgive Them Father, Lost Ones, and more. Incredible rapping and singing, so smooth, so funky and groovy. 

Black on Both Sides, Mos Def (1999) - "Yo Mos, what's gettin ready to happen with Hip-Hop?" (Where do you think Hip-Hop is goin?) I tell em, "You know what's gonna happen with Hip-Hop? Whatever's happening with us…We are Hip-Hop, Me, you, everybody, we are Hip-Hop, So Hip-Hop is going where we going, So the next time you ask yourself where Hip-Hop is going, Ask yourself: where am I going? How am I doing?" This is from the opening song, Fear Not of Man. Apparently we all collectively decided to go to mumble-ville? Anyways, such an incredible song and album. 

It Takes a Nation of Millions to Hold Us Back, Public Enemy (1988) - Another of the most important, socially-conscious rap albums of all time. Public Enemy really were scary to people, but in a different way than NWA. They didn’t glorify gang life, drugs (Night of the Living Baseheads) or sex, used very little profanity, but still rapped lyrics that challenged the mainstream and the black community both. This album calls for Black America to step up in its dignity and potential, and calls for the tearing down of anything that stands in the way - especially the Media. Also, Flava Flav yells “Yeah Boi” a lot.

Ready to Die, The Notorious B.I.G (1994) - Biggie Smalls’ debut album. Biggie is considered by many to be one of, if not the, greatest rappers of all time. He has incredible flow, but it is difficult to listen to his violent and misogynistic lyrics after spending time with the public uplift and challenge of Public Enemy, Mos Def, Lauryn Hill, et al. Things Done Changed is a really powerful song, and One More Chance is so smooth, a massive banger from the summer of 94. 

Enter the Wu-Tang (36 Chambers), Wu-Tang Clan (1993) - Well, they definitely bring the mother-lovin’ ruckus. I tried to listen more to the beats, the sampling, and the wide variety of rapping styles amongst the many members of the Wu-Tang Clan, and less on the lyrics. They definitely lean into the “Wu-Tang fighting style” motif. 

Run D.M.C., Run D.M.C. (1984) - This is really one of the essential, foundational albums from some of the pioneers of modern hip-hop. Run D.M.C. and Jam Master Jay provided the soundtrack for any and every roller skating rink I ever attended. This was the crossover hip hop album, which really started mixing in not just beats but also rock riffs behind the rap. It’s Like That, Hollis Crew, Rock Box, Wake Up and more are absolute classics. 

good Kid m.A.A.d city, Kendrick Lamar (2012) - This is a later album obviously, a masterpiece that somehow lost the Grammy to Macklemore. Oh well. Kendrick is the real deal, telling true and powerful stories. I dig To Pimp a Butterfly maybe even more, but the lyrics and ideas and musicality is beyond compare. Kendrick’s flow when he gets going is entrancing. B**** Don’t Kill My Vibe is probably my favourite song on the album.

All Eyez On Me, Tupac, 1996 - Tupac’s fourth studio album, and the last to be released during his life (or is it?) All the misogyny and violence typical of the albums at the time, but lots of truth-telling throughout as well. And very chill beats and background music. Tupac’s rapping was very smooth and restrained, with a very unique sound. California Love, I Ain’t Mad At Cha, Only God Can Judge Me, and Ambitionz az a Ridah are amazing songs.

Silence? 1 Corinthians 14:26-40

The main point: The Spirit gifts every Christian to bless the Church in its gatherings. But this does not mean that chaos should rule in the Church. God is a God of peace, not confusion. Christians therefore should be self-controlled, out of love for one another and reverence for God. Under certain circumstances this will mean that some have to hold their tongues and remain silent during worship meetings, so as not to cause confusion or disorder. (On the issue of women being silent in the Church, see below.)

 

As with all the instructions given in 1 Corinthians 11-14, Paul is speaking into the particular situation of the Church in Corinth, specifically about how they behave as they worship together. And it seems as if they had some pretty unruly worship services! Paul has already instructed the Corinthians on being one Body with many parts, all gifted by the Holy Spirit; on how the one true marker of the Christian life was not one of the spiritual gifts, but rather a love that endures forever and puts others ahead of oneself; and on how in the context of worship it is important that believers and non-believers alike be able to understand what is being said. And now he deals with disorder in worship

 

But who doesn’t like a little disorder? After all, the complaint of many people inside and outside the Church is that the meetings are too predictable, too boring, too orderly. But Paul is not advocating for quiet, boring services. He assumes, in fact, the occurrence of tongues, interpretations, prophecy, revelations, hymns, and more. He teaches that everyone who comes to the assembly has something to give, something that the Spirit has blessed them with so that they can bless and build up the rest of the Church. His instructions about orderly and peaceful worship, then, are not given in order to quench the Spirit, but in order to create an environment in which the Spirit can be heard through everyone.  Far from silencing anyone (which this passage is often used for), order in the Church ensures that everyone can use their gifts to bless the Church in an appropriate, edifying and God-honouring way. Without any order or restrictions, chaos will reign, and only the loudest voices or most influential people will be heard. The regulations given by Paul here allow for a truer freedom in worship. And it is left to the whole body, under the direction of the Word and the Holy Spirit, to ensure this order and freedom.

 

Because the issue of tongues was a big one in Corinth, Paul gives some specific regulations for their use. For the public assembly, they must be accompanied by interpretation. And even then the worship gathering must not be dominated by them. It seems that in Corinth many people were speaking in tongues all at once, making interpretation impossible. So only two or three people should speak in tongues, and one at a time, allowing for interpretation. Paul then applied the same kind of regulations to the gift of prophecy, adding that the prophecies should be judged and weighed by the rest of the assembly. Prophecy does not have its own independent authority. It must be judged by the Church, weighed against Scripture.

 

Paul asserts that it is the Holy Spirit who gives the gifts, but he also teaches that the speaker and prophet have control. They are not in an ecstatic trance, as was common in pagan worship. They can stop speaking, hold their tongues, wait their turn, and defer to one another. And they should exercise this self-control and peace, because that is what God is like. Pagan cultic worship was full of frenzy and disorder. But God is not like that, and Christian worship should reflect the character of God. The Corinthian worship, in its disorder and confusion, was not loving to one another and not reflective of God. Some people had to restrain themselves in order to stop contributing to the confusion. So there are times when it is God-honouring and appropriate for people to remain silent in the Church, if it builds up the Body and brings peace. This is a message for “all the Churches of the saints” (verse 33b). Many translations have linked that verse to the instructions about the silence of women. It makes more sense, though, to connect it to the ordering of tongues and prophecy which reflects the order and peace of God (verses 26-33a).

 

Now let’s look at verses 34-35, about women not speaking in the Church. Few Churches act out the simplest reading of these verses, which is that women should remain absolutely silent in Church. That doesn’t just mean preaching or teaching; that means praying, singing, doing children’s time, reading announcements, saying hello, etc…Even those who believe that women shouldn’t preach or teach have given up this most basic reading. So already we have some interpretation happening.

 

And we need interpretation, because it seems impossible that Paul is actually saying that women must remain totally silent in the Church. In 1 Corinthians 11:4-5 Paul assumes that women will be praying and prophesying in the Church. In other letters Paul commends various women as prophets, deacons, even apostles (eg. Rom 16:1-12; Phil. 4:2-3). And in Acts 2:17-18 it is announced that sons and daughters, male and female servants will prophecy.  All believers who are filled with the Holy Spirit can prophesy, and the context for this prophecy is the building up of the Church. In fact, if women are not allowed to speak at all in the Church assembly, then it must mean that the rest of 1 Corinthians 12-14 – which instructs believers on how to build up the Church with their Spirit-given gifts - must apply only to the male members of the Body of Christ!  So it seems the verses in front of us cannot mean that all women should never talk in Church. What do we do with these verses, then?

 

One very respected theologian, Gordon Fee, believes that these two verses are not actually part of the canon of Scripture. This is because he finds them out of place in the passage, which is all about the regulation of the use of spiritual gifts and which flows more naturally if the two verses are omitted; because they contradict the rest of Paul’s message, which states that all are meant to prophesy or bring hymns or tongues etc…; and because some textual evidence supports the possibility that they were added by a later editor (see Fee, Gordon, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, pp.699-708.) This is a strong argument which should not be quickly dismissed, and which Fee is not alone in holding.

 

So there is a question about the authenticity of these verses. However, given that they are not actually missing from any known manuscript of Scripture, and that the Church has traditionally accepted them as part of sacred Scripture, the question still must be asked: what happens if we accept these verses as written by Paul? None of the “solutions” offered are free from difficulty. We simply don’t know, aside from educated guesses, what was going on in Corinth at this time that caused Paul to give the corrections he did.

 

Some have suggested that women were allowed to prophesy and pray, but not to teach, preach, or weigh the prophecies of others. But this passage is not about preaching and teaching at all, and Paul does not limit the gift of discernment (nor any other gift) to men alone. And prophecy was designed at least in part to teach everyone (1 Cor 14:31), so women who were prophesying were teaching. Others have suggested that Paul was quoting here from the letter the Corinthians had sent to him, so that it was the Corinthians, not Paul, who really wanted women to be silent. But there is no indication here that Paul is quoting anyone (whereas in other places it is clear), and there is no evidence elsewhere that the Corinthians held this kind of view.

 

One popular notion is that the men and women were split up into different rooms or sections for their Church meetings, and that the women were idly chatting too much and interfering with the worship of the men. But this probably wasn’t the way the home churches were set up, and verse 35 shows us that the women in the Church in Corinth weren’t idly chatting; they wanted to learn. This, Paul agrees, is a good thing, just as speaking in tongues is a good thing. But asking questions in the middle of the meeting, as it appears the women in Corinth were doing, was not a good thing. It caused disruption and confusion just as speaking in tongues in a disorderly and unintelligible way caused disorder and confusion.

 

But why were women told to not ask questions in this context, and not men? If the women in Corinth were asking questions during the time that Scripture was being taught, as seems likely, then they were probably causing offence by doing so. As Craig Keener points out, questions were normal in public lectures, but they were asked in an orderly way, and it was considered rude to ask irrelevant questions, or questions that could be answered on your own time through your own study. And women were far more likely to be uneducated or unfamiliar with public lectures at that time, so they were far more likely to be asking irrelevant or inappropriate questions while the Scripture was being taught. This was shameful and scandalous in the culture that the Corinthian Church wanted to reach with the gospel. Thus, the Corinthian women’s silence, in this particular case, would be loving and God-honouring to the rest of the Body. The women here were being asked to submit, as the Law required, to the needs of Church peace.

 

But Paul was still in favour of their learning more by asking questions. So he points out that there was another venue in which they could ask questions and learn what they wanted to know: asking their husbands at home, who were probably more educated than they were. This is the most progressive program for the education of women at the time! Far from belittling the women, it assumes that they can and should learn the things they are wanting to know, and addresses the inequality of Scriptural education between men and women. It asks husbands to take responsibility for ensuring that their wives receive the education they are looking for.  (A modern application of this principle could be ensuring that those who have not had the same educational opportunities as others, regardless of gender, have access to classes in which they can be taught Scriptural basics.)

 

The careful conclusion we come to is that, if these verses are authentic, they are a correction given to the Church in Corinth. There is a message here for us, but the letter is not written to us. We therefore believe that this passage does not prohibit women from speaking in the Church today. The passage does not address preaching or teaching, and the cultural situation that made it necessary for the women in Corinth to save their questions for their husbands at home no longer exists in much of the world. This interpretation does leave open the possibility that there may be cultures in the world today that are similar to that of Corinth, and in which women might still cause scandal by asking questions in the Church. But it insists, as Paul did, that Christian men in those cultures work towards resolving any inequalities in education the women face, so that they can participate more fully in Church gatherings. The Church must work to change those cultures from the inside out, and it must not simply be content to adopt the prevailing culture.

 

We also believe this passage does not prevent women from exercising any role or gift in the body, as we see women in these roles and using these gifts in other parts of Scripture, and as we receive Paul’s instruction from this passage that “all may prophesy…so that all may learn and all be encouraged.”  The case-specific instruction given here fleshes out the same principle that underlies all regulation of Christian worship: act in love towards one another, and do not cause confusion or disruption in worship, so that all within the Church can understand and be built up, and all outside the Church can hear the message of the Gospel. The Scriptural principle to which we are called here is order and peace in worship, not the silence of women.

 

This discussion on the issue of women in the Church is limited by time and space. Here are some of the resources that were used in researching this passage, if anyone wants to do more study. 

 

Blomberg, Craig, 1 Corinthians, The NIV Application Commentary

Rediscovering Scripture’s Vision for Women, Lucy Peppiatt

Women and Worship at Corinth, Lucy Peppiatt

Unveiling Paul’s Women: Making Sense of 1 Corinthians 11:2-16, Lucy Peppiatt

Carson, D.A., Showing the Spirit

Cunningham, Loren and Hamilton, David, Why Not Women?

Fee, Gordon, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, NICNT

Grenz, Stanley and Kjesbo, Denise, Women in the Church

Keener, Craig, Paul, Women and Wives

Martin, Francis, The Feminist Question

Pierce, Ronald, and Groothuis, Rebecca, Discovering Biblical Equality

Webb, William, Slaves, Women and Homosexuals

I Want to be a Magician

I Want to be a Magician

I want to be a magician. Now, let's be clear about this: I do not mean that I want to be a necromancer, to commune with the dead or to play Dungeons and Dragons. I want to be a sleight of hand magician, like David Copperfield only a whole lot cooler.

Why, you may justifiably ask?

Because magicians have, in my estimation, the greatest job in the world. No, not because they get to cut people in half. Murderers get to cut people in half, and I am not suggesting that being a murderer is the best job in the world (it's not even in the top twenty!)

No, magicians have the greatest job in the world because their entire profession revolves around making you look and feel like and idiot, and you pay them for the privilege.

Consider the average magician's trick. They hold out a ball and show it to you. You look at it. They explain that it is a perfectly normal ball. You agree, because what do you know? They even hand it over to you and ask you to check and make sure that it is a normal ball, as if you have any special qualifications to make that assessment. So you take it, look at it, maybe bounce it, and discren that, yes, it is, according to your limited understanding of such arcane things, a perfectly normal ball. The magician takes the ball back, shows it to everyone again -  "Here's the ball, see the ball, can you see it? watch it carefully, watch the ball" - and you're all watching it with severe intensity like complete buffoons when bang! it's gone.

And the magician's like "Where's the ball? Where did it go? It was right here, but you don't know where it is now. I know where it is but you don't. I'm a magician, you're an idiot. Give me money."

And you DO. You give him money. Why do you give him money? Because you are desperate to know where that freakin ball is, that's why. And the magician won't telll you, because he wants to SHOW you, to reinforce the fact that it's nothing less than a sheer miracle that you actually managed to dress yourself on your own this morning.

"Hmmmm, where could that ball be?" the magician asks pompously as he strokes his ridiculous little beard. And you know, you just KNOW, that the stupid ball is going to be hidden somewhere about your person. Sure enough, this arrogant little magus points to you and says, "Hey, this is really just a wild guess, but perhaps you'd like to check and see if that ball is in your underwear." And so, relinquishing all dignity, modesty and any semblance of decorum you put your hand down your pants to discover that, yes, the magician has somehow managed to violate your personal space to such a degree that this blessed ball is impossibly located INSIDE YOUR OWN UNDERGARMENTS. You bring it out sheepishly, the magician instructs you to keep the now-soiled ball, everyone laughs at you, and you give the magician even more money for this final degradation.

This is why I want to be a magician. 

The Second Sign: Long-Distance Healing (John 4:46-54)

The main point: In his first sign, changing water into wine, Jesus was announcing the joy of the Kingdom that was coming through him. In this sign, he is announcing the new life of the Kingdom that was coming through him. 

In John 4:46 the connection between the wedding at Cana, where Jesus turned water into wine, and this sign of healing is made clear. Cana in Galilee is where Jesus performed the first sign, and it is also where he will perform the second sign. This then is the continuation of his Messianic work, and we should be on the lookout for what this sign tells us about the identity of Jesus and the nature of what he has come to do.

In Cana, Jesus encounters a nobleman or official whose son was sick. We don’t know who this man was, though he was probably not the centurion from the healing stories in Luke and Matthew. There is some speculation that he was one of Herod’s officials. The man had heard that Jesus could perform miracles, and he had an urgent request: his son was dying, and he needed the help of this proven wonder-worker. It may have been an act of desperation, but it was nevertheless an act of faith.

But Jesus does not answer this request with a miracle right away. Instead, he seems to give a rebuke, either to the man, or more generally to people who were asking miracles from him. If this official was a member of Herod’s court, it is possible that Jesus was referring to Herod and all his officials, who were after him to perform signs and wonders simply for the sake of signs and wonders, or to test him in some way. Jesus also may simply have been speaking about Israel in general, who wanted signs and wonders done just as Moses performed at the Exodus. Jesus had just encountered such a request for a sign in Jerusalem (John 2:18), and he responded by saying the sign would be the destruction of the Temple, and its being rebuilt in three days, (referring to his own death and resurrection). The one other time the phrase “signs and wonders” is used in the gospels is in Matthew 24:24, when Jesus is warning about false Christs and prophets who will deceive even the elect with their signs and wonders. Jesus’ signs are not being done to impress a sceptical crowd; they are identifying who he really is, and pointing towards the fulfillment of his Messianic task, his death on the cross.

The response of the official showed that he was not just testing Jesus, however. He was simply begging Jesus to help, or his child would die.  At this Jesus responds with his healing miracle. This miracle brings instant healing to the sick child, and relief to the desperate father. It also serves as a sign. At the wedding in Cana, Jesus’ sign of changing water into wine pointed to the fact that he had come to bring the overwhelming joy of the Kingdom, even though that joy would cost him his life. In this sign, Jesus shows that he is the one who has power to give life to those who are dying. This is in line with the expectations for the Messiah, who was meant to lift his people up from their grief, bring healing from all kinds of diseases, and translate mourning into rejoicing. These two signs have now identified Jesus as joy-bringer and life-giver.

But both of these signs were also accompanied by obedience. In the first sign, Mary instructs the servants to do whatever Jesus says, and they do. Perhaps not so big a deal, considering that it was their job to serve. More impressively, when Jesus here directs the man to return home because his child has already been healed, the official does so immediately, without questioning. Jesus is the only true source for the joy of the Kingdom of God, the only true source for the healing and life of the Kingdom of God. No human effort, no religious system, can bring about the joy and life that Jesus has brought. Obedience to the commands of Jesus allowed the people in these two stories to experience the miracles he brought about. And in both cases the miracles resulted in people putting their faith in Jesus.

Finally, these signs were performed in Cana, and not Judea, at least in part because Jesus had not been received in Judea. When he went to Jerusalem signs were demanded, and some had believed in his name when they saw his miracles, but Jesus did not commit himself to them, knowing that they had not understood or accepted what his signs were pointing to (John 2:23-25). Jerusalem, the very place where the Messiah should have felt at home, had not received him. Cana in Galilee, considered unimportant in the grand scheme of things, was prepared to welcome Jesus at this point.

Knowing the Father who carries his children (Deut 1:30-33, Isa 46:3-7)

The book of Deuteronomy is the account of Moses’ last instructions to the Hebrew people in the Moab Plains, just before they were to enter Canaan, the Promised Land. They had, of course, been in this position before. Forty years earlier the Twelve Tribes had waited at the banks of the Jordan River to hear the reports of the twelve spies they had sent into Canaan. What was the land like? Would they be able to take it, as God had told them to?

 

Now they stood again on the brink of promise, steeled by years of wilderness wandering, ready to enter the land. And Moses began by reminding them of what had happened forty years earlier. The people had listened to the reports of the spies, and had decided that what the Lord was asking them to do was too dangerous. They chose to believe that the Lord had brought them out of Egypt only to see them destroyed by the Amorites and those living in Canaan. In the end they got scared and would not trust and obey the Lord who had carried them up out of Egypt.

 

But this was madness. The Lord, Moses said, would have fought for them, just as he had in Egypt. The Lord had already proven himself as a trustworthy provider and caretaker. According to Exodus 19:4 the Lord had carried his people on eagles’ wings to himself. He had gone before them as a cloud by day and fire by night, securing good places for them to pitch their tents. The Lord their God, in fact, had carried them, as a man carries his son, all the way they went until they had come to this place. God, like a Father, had carried his people out of Egypt and through the wilderness until they came to the place he had promised for them. But they rebelled, and as a result they had to wander forty years in the wilderness until the unfaithful generation had passed away. None of them would see the Promised Land.

 

Moses brings this painful memory up as if to say, “Do not again forget who the Lord God is to you.” The Lord God is not a god who would bring his children out of slavery in Egypt only to see them killed by the Amorites. He is a Father who carries his tired, grumpy, disobedient children. He carries them away from danger, away from slavery, and into promise and rest. The God who carries his children like Father is a God who, above all, is one to be trusted. They are not to trust in their own military or financial or cultural might, nor to despair over the lack of it. They are to trust their Father.

 

But his people initially did not trust. And later on they came to put their trust in other things, things that were not remotely trustworthy. Isaiah 46 is a passage comparing the Lord to the silver and golden idols of Babylon. What were they? Constructed things, useless things, deaf things, immobile things. These “gods” needed to be carried around by their worshippers. They couldn’t even save themselves, let alone save those who cried out to them for help.

 

God is telling his people here not to set their hope and trust in the things of the world, the systems of power and wealth and religion that promise salvation and care but simply cannot provide these things. The temptation was not just the golden statue, but participation in the system of Babylon, the ruling power, the Empire with the mighty army and the cultural and financial influence.

 

God does not want his people to trust in this Empire, in this system of control wherein the priests place their gods wherever they want them to stay. This is a system that is a burden to the weary. This power relies upon the backs of the people to carry it around, and is oppressive. But the Lord God may not be controlled like that. The relationship he has with his people is the exact opposite. God will not be a burden to the weary. He will not force people to carry him on their backs. It is God who has carried his people since their conception and birth, and it is God who will carry them even into their old age. God the Father is the great sustainer, the rescuer, the maker, the saviour, the carrier. And he will still carry us today.

 

(Much of the information used in this and the other blog submissions about Knowing God was derived from studying Knowing God the Father Through the Old Testament by Christopher Wright and From Paradise to the Promised Land by T Desmond Alexander).

Who do you think you are? - Luke 3:21-22, 4:1-13

The stories of Jesus’ baptism and of his temptation in the desert are separated in the book of Luke by a lengthy genealogy of Jesus, but they definitely should be read and understood together. This is made clear by 4:1, which says that Jesus, full of the Spirit following his baptism, returns from the Jordan where he was baptized and is led out by the Spirit into the wilderness.

 

The baptism of Jesus should be understood in the light of his self-understanding at the age of twelve in the Temple as God’s Son, and of the prophecy from Isaiah 42:1 which speaks of the chosen servant of God, in whom God delights, having the Spirit poured out on him so that he will bring forth justice to the nations. This is what is going on in the baptism of Jesus, which was a truly remarkable event. Here we see Jesus, already aware of his own relationship with the Father, having this relationship confirmed in him as the Spirit is poured out on him in fulfillment of prophecy. Here we see the Trinity in action: Father speaking love, Spirit descending, and Jesus receiving and being empowered for his mission. Jesus is not adopted as a Son here; he already is the Son of God. But his identity and vocation is affirmed, as is the constant presence of the Holy Spirit with him.

 

This Spirit then leads Jesus into the wilderness. The purpose was to fast and pray and to commune with his Father. But he is also tested and tempted by Satan who is trying to destroy this relationship between Son and Father. Jesus’ wilderness testing is reminiscent of Israel being lead into the wilderness following the Exodus and the giving of the Law, to be tested before they entered into the Promised Land. Israel was in the desert for 40 years; Jesus was in the wilderness for 40 days. Israel failed its testing in the desert and consistently gave into temptation; Jesus overcame Satan and prevailed against the temptations, answering them by quoting the Word of God. The Scripture he quotes is from Deut 8:3, 6:13,16, which is significant because these were passages dealing with Israel’s time in the wilderness. Jesus is tempted here so as to stand in the place first of Israel and then of all humanity, facing sin and temptation and overcoming. It also foreshadows the trials and tests that are to come in Jesus’ life, as his life is a constant struggle against the kingdom of the devil. At the end of this passage it states that the devil goes away to wait for another opportune time to test Jesus. We later see him on the scene in Luke 22:3, starting the proceedings for Jesus’ arrest, trial and crucifixion. In both the temptation and the crucifixion we see the devil intending to defeat Jesus through temptations and trials, but God uses both events to defeat the devil and bring glory to His name. And in both cases the devil seems to be initiating things, but in reality it is part of God’s plan; we see this in the wilderness as it is the Holy Spirit who leads Jesus there, not the devil.

 

One other Old Testament story that should be mentioned here is that of David from Samuel 17. Just after David is anointed (dedicated as the new King of Israel, though he was still young and Saul was still on the throne) we see him facing up against Goliath on the field of battle, representing all of Israel. David is victorious, and returns to a hugely popular welcome in Israel. Jesus also is victorious, and returns to Galilee, being glorified by all (Luke 4:14-15). Once again Jesus can be seen as standing in line with the story of King David.

 

The point of Jesus’ answers to Satan were not simply that he knew Scripture really well. Of course he knew Scripture really well; most Jews at that time would know Scripture incredibly well, and Jesus had the added advantage of being the Son of God! The test was not of Jesus’ knowledge of Scripture, but of whether or not Jesus would obey the words of Scripture and submit to the will of his Father. The main emphasis of the devil’s temptations is to drive a wedge between Jesus and his Father. The devil questions Jesus’ identity, and tries to get him to follow his own path, rather than following the path set out for him by the Father. The first temptation tests Jesus to make bread from stones, a temptation to use his power and authority for his own ends, and thus turn aside from his Messianic task and his relationship with his Father. Jesus responds from Scripture that obedience to his Father is more important and life-giving than even food. The devil then offers him all the kingdoms of the world and all the glory from them. This is not truly the devil’s to give, and the cost required is to give to the devil the worship that belongs solely to God. Again, the devil is trying to break the Father-Son relationship, and again Jesus answers with Scripture, saying that God alone is to be worshipped. Finally the devil takes Jesus to the top of the Temple in Jerusalem, and asks him to prove who he is through a miraculous sign. Jesus answers a final time from Scripture, saying that he will not put his Father to the test. He is secure in his knowledge of who God is and of who he is, and does not need to test it or prove it.

 

We may easily and often be tempted with material things, with striving for independence from God, with glory and power, with fame and being considered significant. But these are all distractions from the main thing, which is living out our relationship with God the Father, and being obedient to his will. This passage is not primarily a guide on how-to deal with temptation, but it almost certainly was used as an early model for Christian believers on how to overcome the tests that came with faith, and Jesus’ responses and model are still instructive to us now.