Lee Harmon's Blog, page 86
August 6, 2012
Book review: Living The Questions, the Wisdom of Progressive Christianity
by David M. Felten and Jeff Procter-Murphy
★★★★★
Latin re-ligio: To relink, to reconnect.
Buy this book! If I do a “best of 2012” summary this January, I guarantee this one will be near the top. Heart and head both feel satisfied as I turn the last page.
This is what progressive Christianity is all about. It will toy with your emotions, lift you to the heights of compassion, and fill your soul with awe for the beauty and mystery of life we share. God is in this book, until you set the book down and discover He has wiggled out of its pages and into your soul. Perhaps God was inside you all along, waiting to be reawakened?
Many of us do need reawakening; religion has become a turn-off for many. In no other area of life is the denial of progress held up as a virtue. But according to Felten and Procter-Murphy, stagnation, not change, is Christianity’s deadliest enemy. Vital faith is dynamic, flowing, and moving. Progressive Christianity, by its very name, is about progress. Rethinking the meaning of Christology, atonement, and the Incarnation is part of the journey. Losing interest in the Rapture is a necessary side effect.
“Living the Questions” is an enigmatic title, and the book begins with this insight: “To not ask questions is tantamount to forfeiting one’s own spiritual birthright and allowing other people’s experience of the Divine to define your experience.” It ends with the reminder that “those who embrace mystery are free to interpret the Divine in new and fresh ways.” In the pages between, however, we travel back in time to the Jesus of history, a man of vision and compassion, and a this-worldly concern largely ignored by the creeds of the religion that sprouted in his name. The essence of Jesus’ ministry might be distilled down into one word: compassion.
Then we’re reintroduced to God who, though the scriptures, is Mother, Father, the Wind, a Rock, and finally just Love. God, says John Shelby Spong (who along with Fox and Crossan is quoted liberally in these pages) is the life power itself, the power of love itself, the “Ground of Being.”
One final note: I’m not a poetry reader, but the occasional sprinkling of poetry by Cynthia Langston Kirk was mesmerizing … I suspect in part because the atmosphere of the book primed me to appreciate the poetic.
★★★★★
Latin re-ligio: To relink, to reconnect.
Buy this book! If I do a “best of 2012” summary this January, I guarantee this one will be near the top. Heart and head both feel satisfied as I turn the last page.
This is what progressive Christianity is all about. It will toy with your emotions, lift you to the heights of compassion, and fill your soul with awe for the beauty and mystery of life we share. God is in this book, until you set the book down and discover He has wiggled out of its pages and into your soul. Perhaps God was inside you all along, waiting to be reawakened?
Many of us do need reawakening; religion has become a turn-off for many. In no other area of life is the denial of progress held up as a virtue. But according to Felten and Procter-Murphy, stagnation, not change, is Christianity’s deadliest enemy. Vital faith is dynamic, flowing, and moving. Progressive Christianity, by its very name, is about progress. Rethinking the meaning of Christology, atonement, and the Incarnation is part of the journey. Losing interest in the Rapture is a necessary side effect.
“Living the Questions” is an enigmatic title, and the book begins with this insight: “To not ask questions is tantamount to forfeiting one’s own spiritual birthright and allowing other people’s experience of the Divine to define your experience.” It ends with the reminder that “those who embrace mystery are free to interpret the Divine in new and fresh ways.” In the pages between, however, we travel back in time to the Jesus of history, a man of vision and compassion, and a this-worldly concern largely ignored by the creeds of the religion that sprouted in his name. The essence of Jesus’ ministry might be distilled down into one word: compassion.
Then we’re reintroduced to God who, though the scriptures, is Mother, Father, the Wind, a Rock, and finally just Love. God, says John Shelby Spong (who along with Fox and Crossan is quoted liberally in these pages) is the life power itself, the power of love itself, the “Ground of Being.”
One final note: I’m not a poetry reader, but the occasional sprinkling of poetry by Cynthia Langston Kirk was mesmerizing … I suspect in part because the atmosphere of the book primed me to appreciate the poetic.
August 5, 2012
Daniel 9:25, Counting down to the Messiah, III of III
Know and understand this: From the issuing of the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One, the ruler, comes, there will be seven 'sevens,' and sixty-two 'sevens.' It will be rebuilt with streets and a trench, but in times of trouble. --Daniel 9:25
//I introduced today's verse in yesterday's post, and it holds the key to Daniel's puzzle. We continue our discussion about Daniel's 490-year prediction until the Messiah's arrival.
To recap: If we count 490 years from the date the Jews returned from exile and began rebuilding the temple according to the decree of Artaxerxes (457 BCE) we arrive at the year 33 CE ... the year many believe Jesus died. That makes Jesus the Messiah. This solution to the puzzle satisfies Christians but not historians, who are required to work within the constraints of the non-supernatural. If, however, we begin counting the 490 years from the date Jeremiah prophesied of a new temple, we get an even worse answer: around 107 BC. No messiah that year, for certain. So what did Daniel mean?
Note that Daniel breaks his prediction period down into two chunks, and then afterward he introduces a final "week" (seven years) of tribulation. So that's how the 490 years are broken down: 62x7 (434 years) plus 7x7 (49) plus 7. Most people add these figures up and reach 490 years. However, it may be that we are not supposed to count these periods consecutively, but concurrently. A 49-year period and a 434-year period, leading to a final 7-year period. If we do it this way, we get something like this:
Seven sevens from the destruction of Jerusalem (586 BC) we reach year 537. Within a year of this date, Cyrus releases the Jews to return to Jerusalem. So set the 49-year prophecy aside; it's a done deal, a completed prophecy.
Yesterday, we concluded that Jeremiah's prophecy would have been assumed sometime before the year of deportation, 597 BC. Figure just a few years before that date. Adding 434 years to roughly this period, we come to about 167 BC.
You know the rest. Seven years of bloody war ensued as Judas Maccabeus, acclaimed as one of the greatest warriors of Jewish history, leads a revolt against the Seleucid Empire. Halfway through this 7-year war, Antiochus IV desecrates the temple as Daniel predicts. (see Daniel 9:27).
Pretty amazing again, huh? How Daniel predicts this victory hundreds of years earlier, and selects Judas Maccabeus as the coming savior? Well, with this interpretation Daniel's prophecy is no longer quite that amazing. Scholars date the actual writing of the book of Daniel to precisely this time in history. Daniel's biographer was not writing prophecy, but history.
//I introduced today's verse in yesterday's post, and it holds the key to Daniel's puzzle. We continue our discussion about Daniel's 490-year prediction until the Messiah's arrival.
To recap: If we count 490 years from the date the Jews returned from exile and began rebuilding the temple according to the decree of Artaxerxes (457 BCE) we arrive at the year 33 CE ... the year many believe Jesus died. That makes Jesus the Messiah. This solution to the puzzle satisfies Christians but not historians, who are required to work within the constraints of the non-supernatural. If, however, we begin counting the 490 years from the date Jeremiah prophesied of a new temple, we get an even worse answer: around 107 BC. No messiah that year, for certain. So what did Daniel mean?
Note that Daniel breaks his prediction period down into two chunks, and then afterward he introduces a final "week" (seven years) of tribulation. So that's how the 490 years are broken down: 62x7 (434 years) plus 7x7 (49) plus 7. Most people add these figures up and reach 490 years. However, it may be that we are not supposed to count these periods consecutively, but concurrently. A 49-year period and a 434-year period, leading to a final 7-year period. If we do it this way, we get something like this:
Seven sevens from the destruction of Jerusalem (586 BC) we reach year 537. Within a year of this date, Cyrus releases the Jews to return to Jerusalem. So set the 49-year prophecy aside; it's a done deal, a completed prophecy.
Yesterday, we concluded that Jeremiah's prophecy would have been assumed sometime before the year of deportation, 597 BC. Figure just a few years before that date. Adding 434 years to roughly this period, we come to about 167 BC.
You know the rest. Seven years of bloody war ensued as Judas Maccabeus, acclaimed as one of the greatest warriors of Jewish history, leads a revolt against the Seleucid Empire. Halfway through this 7-year war, Antiochus IV desecrates the temple as Daniel predicts. (see Daniel 9:27).
Pretty amazing again, huh? How Daniel predicts this victory hundreds of years earlier, and selects Judas Maccabeus as the coming savior? Well, with this interpretation Daniel's prophecy is no longer quite that amazing. Scholars date the actual writing of the book of Daniel to precisely this time in history. Daniel's biographer was not writing prophecy, but history.
August 4, 2012
Daniel 9:2-3, Counting down to the Messiah, II of III
I, Daniel, understood from the Scriptures, according to the word of the LORD given to Jeremiah the prophet, that the desolation of Jerusalem would last seventy years. So I turned to the Lord God and pleaded with him in prayer and petition, in fasting, and in sackcloth and ashes.
//We continue our discussion from yesterday, and Daniel's prediction of 490 years until the Messiah's arrival.
Note the reference to Jeremiah in today's verse. God told Jeremiah that Babylon would rule for 70 years (see Jeremiah 25:11-12), but Daniel asks again about the 70 years and is given a different answer. Does this mean Daniel's 490-year prediction should also date from Jeremiah's time? Yesterday, we assumed Daniel was counting the years from Xerxes' command to rebuild the city of Jerusalem, but Jeremiah, too, predicted the rebuilding of Jerusalem:
I will bring Judah and Israel back from captivity and will rebuild them as they were before. --Jeremiah 33:7
So, did Daniel’s 490 years begin with Xerxes or Jeremiah? Let's switch from Xerxes to Jeremiah and see where that takes us. Judah's captivity began in the year 586 BC, and 70 years later in the year 516 BC, the temple was rebuilt as Jeremiah prophesied. But if we instead add 490 years to 586 BC, we reach the year 96 BC. Unfortunately, this doesn't help us at all; nothing spectacular happened that year. No Messiah then.
Instead, we need to read Daniel's prophecy a little closer. Skipping ahead to verse 9:25, we read:
"Know and understand this: From the issuing of the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One, the ruler, comes, there will be seven 'sevens,' and sixty-two 'sevens.' It will be rebuilt with streets and a trench, but in times of trouble. --Daniel 9:25
Aha! So the 490 years begin from the date Jeremiah makes his prophecy, not from the date Jerusalem is conquered! In other words, we need to date today's verse: Jeremiah 33:7. That will tell us when to begin counting.
Unfortunately, there is no way to know precisely when this was supposedly penned, because Jeremiah's warnings are not in chronological order, but the majority of his writings center around the first deportation of the Jews under Nebechednezzer (597 BC). Some prophecies appear to be after this date (see chapters 23-25), and some before (see chapter 35). If we add Daniel's 490 years to roughly this period, we come to about the year 107 BC.
Sigh. Another dead end. Nothing spectacular happened in 107 BC either. I'll give you time to contemplate, and we'll solve the puzzle tomorrow.
//We continue our discussion from yesterday, and Daniel's prediction of 490 years until the Messiah's arrival.
Note the reference to Jeremiah in today's verse. God told Jeremiah that Babylon would rule for 70 years (see Jeremiah 25:11-12), but Daniel asks again about the 70 years and is given a different answer. Does this mean Daniel's 490-year prediction should also date from Jeremiah's time? Yesterday, we assumed Daniel was counting the years from Xerxes' command to rebuild the city of Jerusalem, but Jeremiah, too, predicted the rebuilding of Jerusalem:
I will bring Judah and Israel back from captivity and will rebuild them as they were before. --Jeremiah 33:7
So, did Daniel’s 490 years begin with Xerxes or Jeremiah? Let's switch from Xerxes to Jeremiah and see where that takes us. Judah's captivity began in the year 586 BC, and 70 years later in the year 516 BC, the temple was rebuilt as Jeremiah prophesied. But if we instead add 490 years to 586 BC, we reach the year 96 BC. Unfortunately, this doesn't help us at all; nothing spectacular happened that year. No Messiah then.
Instead, we need to read Daniel's prophecy a little closer. Skipping ahead to verse 9:25, we read:
"Know and understand this: From the issuing of the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One, the ruler, comes, there will be seven 'sevens,' and sixty-two 'sevens.' It will be rebuilt with streets and a trench, but in times of trouble. --Daniel 9:25
Aha! So the 490 years begin from the date Jeremiah makes his prophecy, not from the date Jerusalem is conquered! In other words, we need to date today's verse: Jeremiah 33:7. That will tell us when to begin counting.
Unfortunately, there is no way to know precisely when this was supposedly penned, because Jeremiah's warnings are not in chronological order, but the majority of his writings center around the first deportation of the Jews under Nebechednezzer (597 BC). Some prophecies appear to be after this date (see chapters 23-25), and some before (see chapter 35). If we add Daniel's 490 years to roughly this period, we come to about the year 107 BC.
Sigh. Another dead end. Nothing spectacular happened in 107 BC either. I'll give you time to contemplate, and we'll solve the puzzle tomorrow.
August 3, 2012
Daniel 9:24, Counting down to the Messiah, I of III
Seventy 'sevens' are decreed for your people and your holy city to finish transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the most holy.
//Today's topic stems from N. T. Wright's new book, How God Became King. Daniel actually says "Seventy weeks" in his prophecy, but most people (such as the NIV translation quoted above) recognize this to mean seventy times seven (490) years. That's how long it will take, according to Daniel, before the Messiah arrives and sets things right.
Today's readers may recognize seven as a sort of special number, but it meant far more to Bible readers in Daniel's day. The seventh day is the Sabbath. The seventh year is a sabbatical year. Every seven-times-seven years is declared a jubilee; slaves are freed, land sold off by the family is restored to its original owner, everything returns to the way it belongs.
Daniel's promise sounds very much like a jubilee of jubilees! Wait four hundred ninety years, says Daniel, and God will set things right once and for all!
Now, let's carry this topic a little further than Wright does. If we count 490 years from the date the Jews returned from exile and began rebuilding the temple according to the decree of Artaxerxes (457 BCE) we arrive at the year 33 CE ... the year many believe Jesus died. Pretty amazing, huh?
We'll look at this from another angle tomorrow, and see if it's really as amazing as it appears.
//Today's topic stems from N. T. Wright's new book, How God Became King. Daniel actually says "Seventy weeks" in his prophecy, but most people (such as the NIV translation quoted above) recognize this to mean seventy times seven (490) years. That's how long it will take, according to Daniel, before the Messiah arrives and sets things right.
Today's readers may recognize seven as a sort of special number, but it meant far more to Bible readers in Daniel's day. The seventh day is the Sabbath. The seventh year is a sabbatical year. Every seven-times-seven years is declared a jubilee; slaves are freed, land sold off by the family is restored to its original owner, everything returns to the way it belongs.
Daniel's promise sounds very much like a jubilee of jubilees! Wait four hundred ninety years, says Daniel, and God will set things right once and for all!
Now, let's carry this topic a little further than Wright does. If we count 490 years from the date the Jews returned from exile and began rebuilding the temple according to the decree of Artaxerxes (457 BCE) we arrive at the year 33 CE ... the year many believe Jesus died. Pretty amazing, huh?
We'll look at this from another angle tomorrow, and see if it's really as amazing as it appears.
August 2, 2012
Book review: Jesus Have I Loved, but Paul?
by J. R. Daniel Kirk
★★★★★
This one gets off to a bit of a slow start, but finishes strong. With an enigmatic subject like Paul, and a provocative title like this one, I expected a more pointed discussion. It's only when we reach the midpoint that the really controversial topics emerge: women's role in the church, slavery, homosexuality, marriage and divorce, etc.
Kirk begins his book by confessing his early ambivalence toward Paul. Only after much study, and by recognizing that Paul's teachings and Jesus' teachings do steer toward one another, did he come to appreciate Paul's slant. This acceptance appears to have come at a cost: Kirk began to realize that not only did Paul tend toward Jesus in his teachings, but Jesus tended toward Paul!
For example, Jesus says we should not judge one another. But is that the whole story? Worry about the log in your own eye, and ignore the speck of dust in your neighbor's? Hardly. Jesus says get the log out of your eye so that you can see to help your brother get rid of his problem. If we condemn Paul for encouraging what looks like strict judgment of others (1 Cor. 5:12-13), we should remember Jesus' admonition to recognize others by their fruits and beware.
Paul may best be understood under the lens of Storied Theology. By telling the story of mankind, from Adam and Eve through Paul's day, he fits the Gentiles into the cosmic plan of God. He brings non-Jews into the fold, makes them feel like they belong, and defines their role as full participants.
Kirk writes as a studied believer, meaning his perspective is most definitely that of a practicing Christian, yet he's been around the block long enough to realize that every question about the Bible has a dozen scholarly answers ... half of them legitimate. For example, Kirk acknowledges that many of the Pauline letters may be pseudonymous, and he focuses more intently on the universally recognized authentic letters, yet he doesn't press the issue.
Kirk doesn't sit on the fence when it comes to interpreting the words of the Bible, though. Paul doesn't pull punches, and neither does Kirk. Still, this is a respectful and thought-provoking book.
★★★★★
This one gets off to a bit of a slow start, but finishes strong. With an enigmatic subject like Paul, and a provocative title like this one, I expected a more pointed discussion. It's only when we reach the midpoint that the really controversial topics emerge: women's role in the church, slavery, homosexuality, marriage and divorce, etc.
Kirk begins his book by confessing his early ambivalence toward Paul. Only after much study, and by recognizing that Paul's teachings and Jesus' teachings do steer toward one another, did he come to appreciate Paul's slant. This acceptance appears to have come at a cost: Kirk began to realize that not only did Paul tend toward Jesus in his teachings, but Jesus tended toward Paul!
For example, Jesus says we should not judge one another. But is that the whole story? Worry about the log in your own eye, and ignore the speck of dust in your neighbor's? Hardly. Jesus says get the log out of your eye so that you can see to help your brother get rid of his problem. If we condemn Paul for encouraging what looks like strict judgment of others (1 Cor. 5:12-13), we should remember Jesus' admonition to recognize others by their fruits and beware.
Paul may best be understood under the lens of Storied Theology. By telling the story of mankind, from Adam and Eve through Paul's day, he fits the Gentiles into the cosmic plan of God. He brings non-Jews into the fold, makes them feel like they belong, and defines their role as full participants.
Kirk writes as a studied believer, meaning his perspective is most definitely that of a practicing Christian, yet he's been around the block long enough to realize that every question about the Bible has a dozen scholarly answers ... half of them legitimate. For example, Kirk acknowledges that many of the Pauline letters may be pseudonymous, and he focuses more intently on the universally recognized authentic letters, yet he doesn't press the issue.
Kirk doesn't sit on the fence when it comes to interpreting the words of the Bible, though. Paul doesn't pull punches, and neither does Kirk. Still, this is a respectful and thought-provoking book.
August 1, 2012
Luke 19:26-27, Killing the Unfaithful
"He replied, 'I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but as for the one who has nothing, even what he has will be taken away. But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them--bring them here and kill them in front of me.'"
//Today's verses conclude Jesus' parable about the nobleman who went away into a far county, and left silver pieces to ten slaves. One of them was unfaithful, and didn't invest the money to earn more. From this unfaithful servant, the nobleman takes even the one silver piece that he has and gives it to another.
Then Jesus concludes the parable with this lesson: If you don't want me to be king over you, then come here and die in front of me.
Harsh, eh? What is Jesus talking about? The answer lies just a few verses later, when we realize this parable has been a lead-in to Jesus' arrival in Jerusalem. As Jesus tops the Mount of Olives and looks down on Jerusalem, he weeps over what is to be their fate:
As he approached Jerusalem and saw the city, he wept over it and said, "If you, even you, had only known on this day what would bring you peace--but now it is hidden from your eyes. The days will come upon you when your enemies will build an embankment against you and encircle you and hem you in on every side. They will dash you to the ground, you and the children within your walls. They will not leave one stone on another, because you did not recognize the time of God's coming to you." --verses 41-44.
This, of course, happened 40 years later in the war of 67-70 CE when the Romans overran Jerusalem. In Luke's parable, Jesus is looking ahead to the destruction of Jerusalem and warning his listeners that if they cannot accept him as king, they will soon be slaughtered.
//Today's verses conclude Jesus' parable about the nobleman who went away into a far county, and left silver pieces to ten slaves. One of them was unfaithful, and didn't invest the money to earn more. From this unfaithful servant, the nobleman takes even the one silver piece that he has and gives it to another.
Then Jesus concludes the parable with this lesson: If you don't want me to be king over you, then come here and die in front of me.
Harsh, eh? What is Jesus talking about? The answer lies just a few verses later, when we realize this parable has been a lead-in to Jesus' arrival in Jerusalem. As Jesus tops the Mount of Olives and looks down on Jerusalem, he weeps over what is to be their fate:
As he approached Jerusalem and saw the city, he wept over it and said, "If you, even you, had only known on this day what would bring you peace--but now it is hidden from your eyes. The days will come upon you when your enemies will build an embankment against you and encircle you and hem you in on every side. They will dash you to the ground, you and the children within your walls. They will not leave one stone on another, because you did not recognize the time of God's coming to you." --verses 41-44.
This, of course, happened 40 years later in the war of 67-70 CE when the Romans overran Jerusalem. In Luke's parable, Jesus is looking ahead to the destruction of Jerusalem and warning his listeners that if they cannot accept him as king, they will soon be slaughtered.
July 31, 2012
Focus on the Author: Cheryl Petersen
Author of 21st Century Science and Health
//I hope to mix in the occasional author bio, or perhaps an author’s personal motivation/inspiration for writing a book. Authors, if I’ve reviewed your book (or if I have it for review) feel free to contribute a short post, if you’d like further exposure. To kick off this idea, here’s a short note from the author of 21st Century Science and Health. The Dubious Disciple review can be found at here. http://www.dubiousdisciple.com/2012/07/book-review-21st-century-science-health.html
When Cheryl sent a review copy of her book, I bluntly asked about her authority to basically rewrite the founding document of her religion. It’s a pointed question, to be sure, but Cheryl replied quite gracefully as follows:
Hi Lee,
The authority behind a revision was a tough tough question for me because I had nothing to go on except a persistent resilient internal demand that an update is sensible, practical, legitimate, and necessary.
I avoided revising for years, justifying my neglect with the fact that I’d risen in the church ranks and was heavily involved in what church authorities approved of. I was a Journal listed Christian Science practitioner, taught by a respected Teacher in the movement who also was on the Board of Directors. But, I could see and more importantly, admit, that my actions appeared futile and hypocritical. Why could I speak and write in contemporary words but insist readers read an outdated book?
To put it bluntly, I finally admitted I was following church authorities before I was following Christian Science.
In a roundabout way, it was the public that gave me permission to revise Science and Health. The public wanted a book they could read and understand, referring as nearly as possible to what Eddy dubbed Christian Science. It is all ironic now, because the public was basically telling me they didn’t want to come to me anymore for insight and healing, they wanted to read about Christian Science and get to know God on their own, with God.
Honest, moral, spiritually minded, scholarly, and courageous people in the public actually worked with me for years, until the revision had enough momentum that I was left to continue the project.
When it came time to copyright, my name was affixed to 21st Century Science and Health, because I have done the greater majority of the work.
There are some church members who feel adamantly that a revision is wrong, they absolutely can’t envision reading anything but Eddy’s last version of Science and Health. A very few people believe the Christian Science Board of Directors should be the only outlet for a revision however, I’ve had extensive communication with the Board and their mentality is excruciatingly afraid to admit to a revision. In fact, the fear and confusion was so predominant that I withdrew my church membership in order to break contact with that mentality.
I have studied extensively Bible revisions and history, however I firmly believe the Science and Health is not a Bible, nor is it part of the Bible. Therefore, my technique for revising is different.
I apologize for the length of my answer. Your question was excellent.
Sincerely, Cheryl
//I hope to mix in the occasional author bio, or perhaps an author’s personal motivation/inspiration for writing a book. Authors, if I’ve reviewed your book (or if I have it for review) feel free to contribute a short post, if you’d like further exposure. To kick off this idea, here’s a short note from the author of 21st Century Science and Health. The Dubious Disciple review can be found at here. http://www.dubiousdisciple.com/2012/07/book-review-21st-century-science-health.html
When Cheryl sent a review copy of her book, I bluntly asked about her authority to basically rewrite the founding document of her religion. It’s a pointed question, to be sure, but Cheryl replied quite gracefully as follows:
Hi Lee,
The authority behind a revision was a tough tough question for me because I had nothing to go on except a persistent resilient internal demand that an update is sensible, practical, legitimate, and necessary.
I avoided revising for years, justifying my neglect with the fact that I’d risen in the church ranks and was heavily involved in what church authorities approved of. I was a Journal listed Christian Science practitioner, taught by a respected Teacher in the movement who also was on the Board of Directors. But, I could see and more importantly, admit, that my actions appeared futile and hypocritical. Why could I speak and write in contemporary words but insist readers read an outdated book?
To put it bluntly, I finally admitted I was following church authorities before I was following Christian Science.
In a roundabout way, it was the public that gave me permission to revise Science and Health. The public wanted a book they could read and understand, referring as nearly as possible to what Eddy dubbed Christian Science. It is all ironic now, because the public was basically telling me they didn’t want to come to me anymore for insight and healing, they wanted to read about Christian Science and get to know God on their own, with God.
Honest, moral, spiritually minded, scholarly, and courageous people in the public actually worked with me for years, until the revision had enough momentum that I was left to continue the project.
When it came time to copyright, my name was affixed to 21st Century Science and Health, because I have done the greater majority of the work.
There are some church members who feel adamantly that a revision is wrong, they absolutely can’t envision reading anything but Eddy’s last version of Science and Health. A very few people believe the Christian Science Board of Directors should be the only outlet for a revision however, I’ve had extensive communication with the Board and their mentality is excruciatingly afraid to admit to a revision. In fact, the fear and confusion was so predominant that I withdrew my church membership in order to break contact with that mentality.
I have studied extensively Bible revisions and history, however I firmly believe the Science and Health is not a Bible, nor is it part of the Bible. Therefore, my technique for revising is different.
I apologize for the length of my answer. Your question was excellent.
Sincerely, Cheryl
July 29, 2012
Mark 12:15-16, Render to Caesar ...
Shall we give[tribute to Caesar], or shall we not give? But [Jesus], knowing their hypocrisy, said unto them, Why tempt ye me? bring me a penny, that I may see it. And they brought it. And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription? And they said unto him, Caesar's.
//One theme running through the New Testament is the contrast between the Kingdom of Heaven and the kingdom of Caesar. In today's verse, Jesus is asked whether it is appropriate to pay taxes to Rome, and he requests a coin. Holding up the penny, Jesus asks two questions: Whose image is on the coin, and whose inscription?
All Jews knew full well the commandment to avoid graven images, yet they were carrying the image of Caesar around in their pockets. They also knew full well how the inscription on the coin declared Caesar to be the "son of god." The criticism in Jesus' lesson is unmistakable.
But then, Jesus throws them for a loop. Unexpectedly granting approval for the Jews to carry such coins, he tells them to render to Caesar that which belongs to Caesar and to God that which belongs to God.
The Kingdom of Heaven, Jesus seems to be saying, has nothing to do with the politics of this world, and is not at all in conflict with Roman occupation. Lift your eyes above your mundane dreams of political redemption from the Romans, and recognize the reign of God where it truly lives.
//One theme running through the New Testament is the contrast between the Kingdom of Heaven and the kingdom of Caesar. In today's verse, Jesus is asked whether it is appropriate to pay taxes to Rome, and he requests a coin. Holding up the penny, Jesus asks two questions: Whose image is on the coin, and whose inscription?
All Jews knew full well the commandment to avoid graven images, yet they were carrying the image of Caesar around in their pockets. They also knew full well how the inscription on the coin declared Caesar to be the "son of god." The criticism in Jesus' lesson is unmistakable.
But then, Jesus throws them for a loop. Unexpectedly granting approval for the Jews to carry such coins, he tells them to render to Caesar that which belongs to Caesar and to God that which belongs to God.
The Kingdom of Heaven, Jesus seems to be saying, has nothing to do with the politics of this world, and is not at all in conflict with Roman occupation. Lift your eyes above your mundane dreams of political redemption from the Romans, and recognize the reign of God where it truly lives.
July 28, 2012
Isaiah 49:3, The Real Suffering Servant?
He said to me, "You are my servant, Israel, in whom I will display my splendor."
//Every Christian knows about the Suffering Servant passage in Isaiah chapter 53. This became an important theme for New Testament writers in describing a new kind of Messiah. Jesus, Christians insist, died as prophesied by Isaiah. As a suffering servant.
He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering. ... he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed. ... He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth. --excerpts from Isaiah 53.
But you're unlikely to find a Jew who interprets Isaiah chapter 53 the way Christians do. The suffering servant, they say, is a picture of Israel. Not of a man. Before Jesus arrived on the scene, not a single Jewish text interpreted the passage messianically.
In my upcoming book about John's Gospel, I rely heavily upon this image of a suffering Messiah. This is, I feel, true to the teachings of John. See John 12:35, where John quotes word-for-word the very verses in Isaiah leading up to the Suffering Servant passage, and concludes that "Isaiah said this because he saw Jesus' glory and spoke about him."
So who's right? Jews or Christians? The 53rd chapter of Isaiah is imbedded within a long discourse, as God pleads: "Listen to me, my people; hear me, my nation." (Isaiah 51:4). "Listen to me, O Jacob, Israel, whom I have called." (Isaiah 48:12). And, of course, today's verse, which names the servant. It is Israel.
While by no means conclusive, the Jewish interpretation of their own scripture does seem most logical.
//Every Christian knows about the Suffering Servant passage in Isaiah chapter 53. This became an important theme for New Testament writers in describing a new kind of Messiah. Jesus, Christians insist, died as prophesied by Isaiah. As a suffering servant.
He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering. ... he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed. ... He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth. --excerpts from Isaiah 53.
But you're unlikely to find a Jew who interprets Isaiah chapter 53 the way Christians do. The suffering servant, they say, is a picture of Israel. Not of a man. Before Jesus arrived on the scene, not a single Jewish text interpreted the passage messianically.
In my upcoming book about John's Gospel, I rely heavily upon this image of a suffering Messiah. This is, I feel, true to the teachings of John. See John 12:35, where John quotes word-for-word the very verses in Isaiah leading up to the Suffering Servant passage, and concludes that "Isaiah said this because he saw Jesus' glory and spoke about him."
So who's right? Jews or Christians? The 53rd chapter of Isaiah is imbedded within a long discourse, as God pleads: "Listen to me, my people; hear me, my nation." (Isaiah 51:4). "Listen to me, O Jacob, Israel, whom I have called." (Isaiah 48:12). And, of course, today's verse, which names the servant. It is Israel.
While by no means conclusive, the Jewish interpretation of their own scripture does seem most logical.
July 27, 2012
Book review: God, Freedom, and Evil
by Alvin Plantinga
★★★★
How do I rate a book that will bore most of you but titillate the rest? Half way between two stars and six stars, I guess.
I’m secure in my status as a religion nerd, so I’ll admit I loved it. This is an introduction to philosophical apologetics, a short little book that can be read in a couple hours, and understood in five or six hours. Philosophical reflection, Plantinga assures us, is not that different than just thinking hard. It’s is an excursion into the joy of logic … for the fun of it, not necessarily to reach any meaningful conclusions. He spends half the book discussing the problem of evil, and the other half on natural theology. Thus half of the book presents a case against God and half attempts to prove he exists. In the second half, Plantinga briefly introduces the Cosmological Argument and the Teleological Argument, and then spends the rest of the book on the Ontological Argument.
Plantinga’s argument against the problem of evil is fascinating yet unsatisfying, and his discussion of the ontological argument is equally fun but equally unconvincing … like one of those puzzles where you know there’s something wrong and can’t quite place your finger on it.
One note: Do not try to read an electronic version! The constant referring backward to numbered arguments will be very frustrating without a paper copy.
★★★★
How do I rate a book that will bore most of you but titillate the rest? Half way between two stars and six stars, I guess.
I’m secure in my status as a religion nerd, so I’ll admit I loved it. This is an introduction to philosophical apologetics, a short little book that can be read in a couple hours, and understood in five or six hours. Philosophical reflection, Plantinga assures us, is not that different than just thinking hard. It’s is an excursion into the joy of logic … for the fun of it, not necessarily to reach any meaningful conclusions. He spends half the book discussing the problem of evil, and the other half on natural theology. Thus half of the book presents a case against God and half attempts to prove he exists. In the second half, Plantinga briefly introduces the Cosmological Argument and the Teleological Argument, and then spends the rest of the book on the Ontological Argument.
Plantinga’s argument against the problem of evil is fascinating yet unsatisfying, and his discussion of the ontological argument is equally fun but equally unconvincing … like one of those puzzles where you know there’s something wrong and can’t quite place your finger on it.
One note: Do not try to read an electronic version! The constant referring backward to numbered arguments will be very frustrating without a paper copy.
