Unsettled Christianity

One blog to rule them all, One blog to find them, One blog to bring them all and in the darkness bind them.
May 5th, 2011

Scratchpad: James, Wisdom, Doing

Classwork, kept it brief. Did my job:

___________

This passage, 1.1-8 is speaking to those who are undergoing trials (v2) in their dispersion (v1). The author is commending to them a joy which comes from enduring the trials, and their full reliance upon God in all matters. Further, wisdom is something which is sought, and asked for, from God (v5). Perhaps it is what is missing from the ‘perfect effect’ (v4 – NET). James 1.6 is the key verse in this passage. The Greek word, διακρινόμενος, is often translated as ‘doubting’ which for many, seems to be the opposite of ‘faith’ and yet, if we were to take this entire passage in context, we find that James is not condemning doubting but actually is speaking to the divided loyalty, a loyalty divided between God and the human condition. I briefly note that in the Old Testament, idolatry is the opposite of faith, not doubt. After a brief survey of English translations, only the NLT uses the phrase ‘divided loyalty.’ The root of the word means ‘to judge’ which fits well with the theme of 1.9-11. (I would also contend that ‘faith’ here may be better understood as faithfulness.)

For context in translating διακρινόμενος as ‘divided loyalty’ in v6, I would look at v8 and 4.8 in which we find the person in question called ‘double-minded’ (δίψυχος). This double-minded individual is not as he is because she doubts, but because this person has not fully surrendered to God. The endurance, then, through the trial is not having the ‘perfect effect.’ As a matter of fact, but dividing loyalties, the person indeed may not actually be enduring anything. Further, this divided loyalty is causing all sorts of other issues for the person, and indeed the congregation, when he is led to choose the wealthy over the poor. The opposite of this person is the person who endures testing and is proven to be δόκιμος (v12), or tested and approved (I note the connection here to Paul’s use of ἀδόκιμος in 1st Cor 9.27).

This passage is calling for us to choose God over the human condition, whether it is weakness in trails and persecution or in trying to differentiate between the wealthy and the poor in our synagogues (2.2). Further, in giving our loyalty to God completely, this will prove that we are indeed genuine. We must settle our minds on God, which doesn’t exclude doubt, but includes the fact that in all things, our focus is on God.

March 23rd, 2010

Wisdom’s Righteous Man as James’ Example of Suffering and Vindication

This conversation started on Rodney’s post, here. I thought that I might give a fuller explanation of my thoughts here.

As many of you know, I believe in Wisdom Christology, finding in it the most able and biblical understanding of the nature of Christ. It is historical and historically associated with primitive Christianity. Through this lens, I admit, I generally read the New Testament documents. One of the earliest is the Epistle of James. Contrary to popular and wrong opinion, it is written by a real brother of Jesus – not a cousin or step-brother. James is writing in the Wisdom Tradition, much like that which his Brother stood in earlier.

Read the rest of this entry »

March 11th, 2010

Timothy Luke Johnson on the New Christian Reality

James’ critique cuts deeper than that, however, for he challenges the very view of reality assumed by such “friends of the world.” Their speech betrays a perception of the world as a closed system of limited resources, available to their control and manipulation, yielding to their market analysis and sales campaign. When James recommends that they say “If the Lord wills it, we will both live and do this thing or that thing,” he is not recommending an empty piety, but a profoundly different understanding of reality. He challenges their construal with the perception given by faith and friendship with God; that the world is an open system, created by God at every moment, and infinitely rich in the resources provided by God for humans to exist and prosper in cooperation, rather than competition. And within this understanding, their pretension and boasting is not the symptom simply of foolish heedlessness. It is the symptom of something evil – Letter of James, pp 307-8

November 29th, 2008

Sirach 4. 20-31 – Indifferent Humility

Continuing our Commentary on Sirach 4:20-31

(20)  Observe the right time, and beware of evil; and do not bring shame on yourself.

Like other passage in Sirach, we find echoes in Paul,

Redeeming the time, because the days are evil. (Ephesians 5:16 NKJV)

This passage is about individual wisdom, that which should guide us. It is the proverbial wisdom that must be kept about us, in order that we do not find ourselves in shame.

(21)  For there is a shame which brings sin, and there is a shame which is glory and favor.
(22)  Do not show partiality that harms your soul, nor show respect that brings your downfall.
(23)  Do not withhold a word in time of need, and do not hide your wisdom in comeliness.
(24)  For wisdom is known by a word, and instruction through the words of the tongue.
(25)  Never speak against the truth, but be mindful of your ignorance.
(26)  Do not be ashamed to confess your sins, and do not try to force the river’s flow.

We see much of the same thought in James 5.16, when the Apostle tell us to confess our sins one to another.

(27)  Do not subject yourself to a foolish man, nor show partiality to a ruler.

This is a restatement of v22. To defer to a slave or show partiality to a ruler is a form of self-abasement. Both do the person a disservice.

v21-26 speaks of two shames – one which is sinful (that which we gain through unrighteous acts or through inaction) and that which brings glory and favor (with God – that which is gained by the righteous acts that we do or seek to do, such as repentance or being unbiased to slaves and rulers alike.)

(28)  Fight even to death for the truth and the Lord God will fight for you.

This verse seemingly stands out, as God is but once mentioned in this section, and as a passive, almost outside Force.

(29)  Do not be reckless in your speech, or sluggish and remiss in your deeds.
(30)  Do not be like a lion in your home, nor showing pretense with your servants.

As we have seen in this passage, Sirach uses parallelism that is so often found in the Hebrew. Here he uses the opposite of event to bring the truth. v29 prohibits both aggressive speech and apathetic language. Both do wrong to the person. v30 again says the same thing in that it orders the person to be sober in the home – neither given to exaggeration or vanity.

In regards to verse 30, we find that the household codes written by the Apostle Paul echoes Sirach.

And you, masters, do the same things to them, giving up threatening, knowing that your own Master also is in heaven, and there is no partiality with Him. (Ephesians 6:9 NKJV)

Both authors have the same idea – in which the way we treat those around us, especially those ‘under’ us, we will be treated by He who is above us.

(31)  Let not your hand be extended to receive, but withdrawn when it is time to repay.

October 16th, 2008

Exposing the 'Jesus' Brother' Fraud – Yahoo News

via Exposing the ‘Jesus’ Brother’ Fraud – Yahoo News

For as long as man has worshipped a god, there have been forgers, crafty hucksters who seize on a believer’s desire to possess material proof of the divine. In Jerusalem, it is a bountiful trade. The old adage is that if all the splinters of the True Cross were gathered from across Christendom, it would yield a wooden crucifix the size of a Manhattan skyscraper. Even back in the Middle Ages, pilgrims visiting Jerusalem told of hawkers who sold counterfeit bones and relics of saints.

But indisputable historical evidence that Jesus Christ, or any of the other Biblical prophets, truly existed is something that eludes religious scholars. There was therefore much excitement in 2001 when a reclusive Tel Aviv collector, Oded Golan, announced that a stone reliquary had come into his possession inscribed with the words “James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus.” The discovery of the ossuary was hailed in some quarters as a spectacular archeological find – solidly circumstantial proof, at last, of Christ’s existence. For it would have held the remains of the Apostle James, who was killed in 62 A.D. and is described in the Bible as Jesus’ brother.

When the James ossuary toured Canada in October 2002, it attracted thousands of the curious and faithful. Some visitors kneeled in quiet prayer. But back in Israel, police detectives, along with a growing posse of Biblical scholars, were growing skeptical of the ossuary’s authenticity. After a two-year investigation, police in December 2004 charged the antiquities collector and four others of forgery, alleging that the James ossuary was a clever fake, and that Golan had masterminded an international ring of thieves that over the past 20 years had duped major museums and collectors out of millions. Put on trial, Golan denied the charges and some experts and the pious rallied to his side. Nevertheless, one of the detectives insisted: “Oded Golan played with our beliefs, the beliefs of Jews and Christians. That is why it’s the fraud of the century.”

The extraordinary story of how Israeli detectives built a case against Golan and his alleged cohorts is the subject of Unholy Business: A True Tale of Faith, Greed and Forgery in the Holy Land by Nina Burleigh, a former TIME staffer who now writes for People. In fast, noir-ish prose – imagine Sam Spade in the Holy Land – Burleigh tracks her story through the twilight world of Arab grave robbers and smugglers to the glimmering salon of a billionaire collector in Mayfair whose mission, writes Burleigh, is “proving the Bible true.” Past accounts of the James Ossuary are fiercely partisan, written by debunkers or true believers. But Burleigh keeps her balance, and her humor, as she sifts – far more diligently than many archeologists – through the evidence. She also has unprecedented access to all the major players in the James Ossuary debate: dogged police detectives, sharp-witted antiquarians, Bible-besotted collectors and suspected forgers of near-genius.

Like any other Holy Land story, it’s a potent mix of religion and politics. As Burleigh writes: “Where historians seek clues to the puzzle of the ancient worlds, evangelical Christians seek proof of the literal interpretation of the Bible and nationalist Israelis want evidence of ancient Jewish inhabitation.”

The James Ossuary provided all of that, and more. At first detectives from the Israel Antiquities Authority suspected that the ossuary was authentic but had been stolen from a site by Arab grave diggers and sold to Golan. Israeli sleuths say they discovered that the limestone casket was indeed authentic, and dated back to the correct period of 60 A.D. But the key inscription, linking the object to Jesus Christ, was a clever fake. An analysis of the patina also revealed the presence of Tel Aviv tap water. In his defense, Golan claims it was because his mother occasionally scrubbed the ossuary with soap and water, not realizing its historical value.

Believers and scientists alike were shocked by the accusations that not only was the James Ossuary a fake but so were two other rare objects of Biblical significance – an inscribed pomegranate and the gold-flecked Jehoash Tablet which both supposedly came from Solomon’s Temple, destroyed by the Babylonians in the 6th century B.C. Those two relics are linked to Golan’s workshop, say police. As Burleigh describes it, the debate over the authenticity of these sacred items pitted scientists against believers. She writes: “The faithful – those who believe in a higher, supernatural power that leaves a material record of itself for man to literally hold and behold – must also confront and grapple with the painful presence of doubt.”

Meanwhile, Golan’s trial, with its parade of more than 75 scientists and Biblical scholars, is likely to drag on for another year. But Golan maintained, in an interview with TIME, that he is innocent of all charges and that since the trial began experts have come forth, he says, to prove that both the inscriptions on the James ossuary and the Jehoash table are genuine. Even after the judge finally decides whether Golan was an innocent collector or a master forger, it’s likely that the debate between skeptics and believers over the James ossuary – and its supposed proof of Christ’s historical existence – will rage on long afterwards.

September 4th, 2008

From the Bible that is rarely read: Sirach 15.11-20

Do not say, “Because of the Lord I left the right way”; for he will not do what he hates. Do not say, “It was he who led me astray”; for he had no need of a sinful man. The Lord hates all abominations, and they are not loved by those who fear him. It was he who created man in the beginning, and he left him in the power of his own inclination. If you will, you can keep the commandments, and to act faithfully is a matter of your own choice. He has placed before you fire and water: stretch out your hand for whichever you wish. Before a man are life and death, and whichever he chooses will be given to him. For great is the wisdom of the Lord; he is mighty in power and sees everything; his eyes are on those who fear him, and he knows every deed of man. He has not commanded any one to be ungodly, and he has not given any one permission to sin. (Sirach 15:11-20 from the Revised Standard Version RSV)

I remember being in grade school, 2nd grade I believe, and quickly running a foul of a classmate. He was a PK – preacher’s kid and new to the school. I remember sitting in the cafeteria before school began and having a conversation about the devil – yes, I know, but hey, I didn’t have the blog then! – and he said that it was the devil who makes him do ‘bad things’. It is the same excuse that many people use today – speeding, cursing, violence – ‘the devil made me do it.’ Obviously, this was a problem a few centuries before Christ as well. Sirach confronts it with a very abrupt statement – Don’t blame anyone but yourself. We have free will as a creation of God – we can employ it for good or evil.

Recently, I have been asked about the idea of apostasy. Apostasy involves the idea of falling away from God. It is right to be reminded that nothing can remove us, but we sure can jump ship! The very idea that people would blame God for their sin, transgression, or apostasy appalls Sirach. I have actually met people that blame either the Church or perhaps the Pastor (or the easiest thing to do, is to blame the pastor’s wife) or perhaps a member. The real fault lies in the person themselves. They have chosen to ‘leave the right way’, to ‘fall away’ as the King James Version puts it.

The Greek here is a paraphrase of the Hebrew (yes, contrary to the KJVO myth Sirach was written in Hebrew originally) which reads ‘Say not, From God is my transgression, for that which he hates he made not.’ This leads us to a slightly different understanding of the verse, but both implying that God does not make sin and would not lead people into it. James clearly echoes Sirach here, when he says,

Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am tempted by God”; for God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He Himself tempt anyone.  (James 1:13 NKJV)

It is interested to note the Hebrew addition to verse 13(b). The Greek says, ‘The Lord hates all abominations, and they are not loved by those who fear him’ to which the Hebrew adds ‘and he will not let it come hear those that fear him.’ Again, Paul agrees here when he says,

For I am persuaded that neither death nor life, nor angels nor principalities nor powers, nor things present nor things to come, nor height nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans 8:38-39 NKJV)

Sirach here sees the orthodox idea of sin – that it is by our own inclination, will, and choice. We must choose to live sinless lives. Sirach says that before us is fire (the curse) and water (the blessing) and it is up to each and everyone of us to choose between the two, but if we choose the fire, then it is not because of God that we do this, the blame falling on our own shoulders.