Sunday, June 17, 2018

Isn't the Bible self-contradictory? part 3


Letter to Fidel Labrador continued…
So, Paul makes the point that God wants to adopt us as His sons and daughters. This is huge. Paul is saying that God is the perfect family. Father, Son and Holy Spirit and His purpose is to make you part of that family. This will not be accomplished by ritual law. If the law won’t get us adopted by God, what’s it for? First Timothy 8 and following helps clear it up:

 Now we know that the Law is good, if one uses it legitimately. We realize that law is not enacted for the righteous, but for the lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinful, for the unholy and profane, for killers of father or mother, for murderers, for the sexually immoral, for homosexuals, for slave traders and liars and perjurers, and for anyone else who is averse to sound teaching…

 (Note to the squeamish and the politically correct: If you think the above is judgmental inappropriate, bullying, etc., it’s the Bible. When a Catholic priest can’t quote the Bible, then we might all as well move to Canada.)  If we are saved by faith and justified by faith what is the point of the law? St. Paul is very clear about this. He says that the law exists to make us aware of right and wrong. We can kid ourselves about our spiritual condition, but if we are slave trading mother killers we need to make some changes.  St Paul is as clear as can be. The law won’t save you, but it will sure let you know you need saving, that is if you pay attention to it.
The moral law which enjoins self-restraint and charity is the mirror of the divine face. If we look into it clearly, we will see our own deformity and God’s perfect beauty. But what about the ritual laws? In the five books of Moses that the Jews call the Torah, there are 613 laws. We Christians only follow 10. What’s up with that?  Ten laws reflect the very nature of God. For instance, “Thou shalt not kill” Why? God is the Giver and Lord of life. “Thou shalt not steal.” Why? God is generosity. “Thou shalt not commit adultery.” Why? God is faithful and so on.  Some of the 613 laws are liturgical laws, in effect applications of the first three commandments. Some are moral precepts extending the remaining 7 of the Ten Commandments. 
Then there are the Khukim, a whole lot of the commandments that seem to make no sense at all, such as Leviticus 26:1, “Thou shalt not bow down on a smooth stone.” Numbers 15: 28 “You must have tassels on four cornered garments” Why? Everyone’s got a theory, but no one quite knows. I might as well add my hair brained theory to the rest. Perhaps you’ve seen the movie Forrest Gump. When Forrest, not the sharpest quill on the porcupine, goes off to the army, he meets a fellow called Bubba, who is also not a rocket scientist. The drill sergeant singles the pair out for special attention and makes them clean the barracks floor with a tooth brush. They happily comply and end up being the two best soldiers in the outfit. 
I think the Almighty was doing the same thing with Israel. Religion as a moral code was something of an anomaly in the ancient world, especially monotheistic religious morality. The ancients worshipped some randy gods who really didn’t care a fig about humanity. If you gave them the occasional goat or chicken you might get them not to smite you for no good reason at all other than divine irritability and you might get them to do what you wanted, like cause your neighbors crops to wither and to make his wife develop the vapors, but the idea that a supremely holy god might demand holiness and moral integrity was absurd. To this sort of practical voodoo that was ancient religion, and for that matter the religion of a whole lot of people today, the Egyptians added gods that looked like swamp creatures. There was Bashtet, a cat and Hathor, half cow and half woman and then there was Anubis, half man and half jackal. My absolute favorite Egyptian deity is Tawaret, the goddess of childbirth and fertility who has the front of a hippopotamus, the back of a crocodile and the attributes of a cat. If that doesn’t say “Worship me!”, what does? I remember hearing the story of a Hindu who was perplexed that Jews and Christians worship only one god.  He said that he couldn’t possibly manage without a few hundred of them. If you think you must convince the gods to do your bidding, then a lot of gods are useful. Strike out with one and move on the the next. If you think that God is to be served and loved, then one will do quite nicely.
This whole idea that the gods existed to be placated and. if possible taken advantage of, is paganism and is still with us. After a few centuries in Egypt, the descendants of Israel were pagans. God did not make Israel wander in the desert to get Israel out of Egypt so much as to get Egypt out of Israel. The Law of Moses set religion on its head by making religion about a right relationship between God and humanity and not about the manipulation of powerful forces for one’s own benefit.
The quote from the first letter to Timothy mentioned above says that “the Law is good, if one uses it legitimately” Notice “law” and “legitimately”. This is exactly what the text says. The word for law is “nomos” and the word for legitimately is “nomimos.”  The law is just that: law. It doesn’t save you. It instructs you. It reins you in. People quibble about whether the covenant with the Jews is still in effect or do we Christians believe that we have replaced the Jews. Nonsense. There is no covenant with the Jews. The covenant of Sinai was made with the house of Israel. Remember Israel, whose name used to be Jacob, who had twelve sons who, in their turn, were the founders of twelve tribes?  The tribe of Judah, who most people call Jews, was one tribe. There were 11 others. I maintain that the Jews are still Israel. It’s just that they are not the whole Israelite enchilada, or should I say blintz. It is interesting to note that there is no new Israel mentioned in the New Testament. There is a new covenant and a New Jerusalem but no new Israel. There is just Israel. And I would maintain that we Christians are part of the House of Israel. 
Is the old covenant still in effect? I suppose as far as it goes it still is. It never promises resurrection or life after death or the forgiveness of willful sin.  The covenant with the house of Israel can be summed up very simply: “I will be your God and you will be My people.” That’s the purpose of the Law of Moses. Israel belongs to the Lord just as surely as Forrest Gump and his friend Bubba belonged to the drill sergeant.
Next week: I am not really any closer to wrapping this up than I was weeks ago. The bait and switch about the salacious ancient Roman gossip must be getting tiresome, but I promise it’s coming.  

Sunday, June 10, 2018

Isn't the Bible self-contradictory? part 2


Letter to Fidel Labrador continued...
Just to refresh your memory, St Paul says, “We maintain that a person is justified by faith apart from the works of the law.”  However, St. James says, “As you can see, a man is justified by his works and not by faith alone.”  These two statements sure seem contradictory. Hold on one minute.  St Paul says we are not justified by works of the law.  St. James says we are justified by works and faith together. “Works of the law”, a phrase, is quite different from the single word “works.” 
There is one other place in early Jewish literature where the phrase works of the law appears, albeit, in Hebrew. Let us turn to the Dead Sea Scrolls, always a fun read. There is a scroll titled 4QMMT, Miqsat Ma’aseh haTorah or more easily, "Some Works of the Law".  It deals with such important issue as dogs being forbidden entry into Jerusalem and several regulations about the impurity of the leper during the period of purification until final purification. Who among us has not lost sleep over these questions? A particularly interesting issue deals with the purity of the streams of liquids poured from a pure vessel into an impure one. As you all know from your regular reading of the book of Leviticus, a clay or porcelain vessel once made ritually impure, cannot be purified and must be destroyed. And you all must know if a dead rodent falls into a clay vessel, that vessel is made unclean. The question is this: if one pours water from a clay pitcher into the unclean clay bowl, can the ritual impurity that infests the clay bowl travel up the stream of water and defile the clay pitcher so that it too must be broken? The Pharisees said no, the Qumran loonies said yes and St. Paul said, “Are you for real?” (I am of course paraphrasing the words of Sacred Scripture). The scroll ends with the statement, “And these are some works of the law.”  So, it seems that the phrase “works of the law” is a very specific reference to the important issues of clay bowls, dogs in Jerusalem and whom temple priests may marry. When St. Paul says we are not justified by works, he is clearly referring to ritual taboos such as grain offering left overnight in the temple and the rules regarding the slaughter of pregnant animals et alia. These things will never justify a person. So just what is justification?
Read Romans the eighth chapter, 28th verse and following:
"And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love Him, who have been called according to His purpose.  For those God foreknew He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters.  And those He predestined, He also called; those He called, He also justified; those He justified, He also glorified.”
St. Paul is insistent that God’s purpose is to adopt us as His children. In order to do this, He must make us look like His Only Begotten Son, Jesus the Messiah, the only person worthy of divine sonship.   So, what did Jesus look like? If you could get into a time machine and go back to the carpenter shop in Nazareth 2,000 years ago you wouldn’t walk out saying, “Oh, what beautiful blue eyes He has, just like the calendar on the refrigerator!”  You would probably think, “Boy was He kind and patient. He was so generous, He undercharged me!”  What did Jesus look like? There is a perfectly good description of Jesus in the Bible. We find it in Galatians the 5th chapter verses 22 and 23:
 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.
That’s what Jesus looked like. That’s what you would have thought had you asked Him to fix your plow or cart. St. Justin Martyr who was born just 70 years after the death and resurrection of the Lord in Nablus in the Holy Land 20 or 30 miles from Nazareth and about half way to Jerusalem. He tells a beautiful story about Our Lord the carpenter.
People were poor in Galilee. A farm animal was a big investment. The ox that pulled the plow was the most expensive thing a poor farmer might own. Think of it as a very expensive piece of farm machinery. If an animal was chafed or injured by its harness and yoke, the animal might be infected and die. Jesus had a reputation for being so good with animals that his animal collars and yokes were perfect. People came from all over Galilee to have their animals fitted for collars by Jesus. When Jesus stood up and said, “Take my yoke upon you and learn from me. My yoke is easy, my burden light.” I suspect He was telling a bit of a joke. His hearers would have smiled and thought, “Yes, this is the carpenter/yoke-maker turned rabbi.” Jesus was saying in effect, if you think I’m good with animals I am much better with the human heart.
This is what Jesus looked like, meek and humble of heart. The word humble in the text is an interesting word. It is “tapeinos” and means “undistinguished.”  Children and sinners were drawn to Jesus. The great and mighty weren’t. That’s what Jesus looked like. He set you at ease if you were nobody. He made you nervous if you thought you were somebody. God’s purpose is to make me look like Him, ordinary and kind and generous. I would rather look rich and important. It’s going to take a lifetime to convince me that looking like Jesus is the way to go. To be just is to be godly. It is to look like God who looks like Christ.
I remember the story of Mother Teresa washing the feet of a dying leper. The leper who believed in reincarnation and that he was suffering for sins committed in a past life asked her, “Why are you doing this?” Mother Teresa said, “Because I want to be like Jesus.” The leper asked, “Does He look like you?” “No,” she said, “but I try to look like Him. The leper said, “If this is true, I want to be a Christian.”
Years ago, I was a guest on an evangelical news show that was broadcasting the installation of a Catholic archbishop. I was there to explain weird Catholic things to the Protestants. They were particularly interested in the hats. There was a famous Protestant dean of a famous evangelical institute who preceded me on the air. As I heard what he was saying I felt so sorry for him. He was talking about Mother Teresa. He insisted that though she might be a fine person, if she believed that her good works would save her she was damned. If one thought he was saved by a work, he was certainly headed for hell. How could he have so misunderstood the Scriptures? Christ clearly says that if we fail to do good works He does not know us and that we should depart into that fire prepared for the devil and his angels.
To believe is to trust. If I trust Jesus, I am going to do as he asks. No matter how much I insist that I trust Him, if I refuse to do what He asks I neither trust nor love Him. That’s what St. James is saying. St. Paul is saying that no amount of avoiding pork and breaking unclean clay pots will make us look like God and make us worthy of heaven. He does however say that, “Because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath against yourself for the day of God’s wrath, when his righteous judgment will be revealed. God “will repay each person according to his works.”  (Romans 2:5-6)
It is only by trusting Christ and consequently obeying Him by loving one another that we can be made to look like Him and be adopted by God. They are not contradicting each other at all.
The gossip about Roman emperors is sure to be in next week’s adventure packed article.
To be continued…..

Sunday, May 27, 2018

Isn't religion the cause of all wars?


Dear Rev. Know-it-all;
I was shocked to discover that most of the wars in the world today are religious wars. Religion is the source of everything bad. War, the Crusades, the Inquisition, overpopulation, persecution, prejudice; it’s all religious. I have no idea whether or not there is a God, but if religious people would just leave the rest of us alone, we would all be fine.
Respectlessly,
Bella Koes

Dear Bella,
Let us first define our terms. We read in James 1:27 that, “Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, to visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unspotted from the world.”

The Greek term, (remember them, the Greeks, precise to the point of tediousness?) is “threskeia”, which means “worship, religion, especially expressed in (religious) cult, that is, ritual.” Translating the text into Latin, the word is religio, whence comes our word religion. Religio meant holding scrupulously to the ceremonies due the gods. There is no clear agreement among scholars as to the origin of the word. It seems to come from “re” and “ligare” thus would have something to do with holding back or tying down.

In the Church, we talk about the virtue of religion, which is a dimension of the virtue of justice. Justice is that virtue which gives to each his due. It is impossible to give God what He is owed, but our attempt to do so is called religion. In the common understanding religion is “...all that God stuff, do unto others etc.” It can be thus argued, that Christianity, and especially Catholic Christianity, is not itself a religion, but a faith and a fellowship that has a necessary religious component. (Boy is this boring. What is he talking about?) Just this: you’re assuming that you know what religion is, and you don’t. “It’s all that God stuff, no?”

We need to define our terms. There are lots of religions. In the above-mentioned passage, St. James says that some religion can be foolish. You are making the claim that religion is the source of human suffering. Which religions? Let’s look at the question of war and religion in tedious detail. The United Nations seems most interested in wars that involve a thousand or more fatalities a year, so we’ll start there. In this list are included:

  1.  the Arab-Israeli Conflict with a grand total of 50,000 - 90,000 fatalities since its inception, then
  2.    the Somali Civil War, 300,000 - 400,000 fatalities, then
  3.  the Afghan Civil War 1,500,000–2,000,000 fatalities, a war into which we have recently jumped with both feet and a patriotic smile, though it was originally a Muslim vs. Communist war, then
  4. the civil war in Darfur, Sudan, 450,000 (+/-) fatalities, then
  5.  the Iraq War, 500,000 - 1,500,000, then
  6. the war in North-West Pakistan 13,900 dead and, finally,
  7.  the Mexican Drug War 10,000 fatalities or so.

 There are many other smaller-scale armed conflicts that are currently causing a smaller number of violent fatalities each year, but still worth an honorable mention.
 8)       The Colombian drug war 50,000 to 200,000 fatalities, 
9)       the Communist/ Islamic Insurgency in the Philippines about 120,000 dead, then
10)   the Kashmiri Insurgency in India, perhaps 60,000 gone, then
11)   the Niger Delta and
12)   Baluchistan conflicts, (who knows how many dead?) and finally in India,
13)   Naxalite Maoist insurgency whatever that may be!
I have not mentioned the Northern Irish situation, because at the time it seems to be over, but the famous conflict between Protestants and Catholics was not what it seemed. Many of the so-called Catholics were actually Maoist Communists. The conflict seems to be ending because the combatants are just getting too old to continue. You can only do so much damage from a wheel chair.
So, of the twelve wars listed above, 10 involve Muslims, 1 involves Communists, and two involve drug dealers, admittedly in Catholic countries, though I suspect the drug lords don’t attend church that often. In the above list there is not one Vatican paid Swiss Guard mentioned. So those miseries cannot be directly pinned on the Pope.
I mentioned above that the word “religion” may actually mean to restrain or tie back. I would venture that some religions, like Islam, make war a positive virtue. Remember that Mohammed was himself a general who mandated beheadings. Other religions seem to restrain the impulse to kill. Jesus and Buddha seem downright opposed to war, though their followers occasionally ignore them. Still, I would venture that Christian/Catholic religion performs the function of restraining what seems to be the favorite pastime of humanity: murder on the grand scale. Where Catholicism has been practiced, war, though not eliminated, has been held back. Have you ever heard of the Peace of God and the Truce of God?
The Peace of God was the protection from military violence won by special groups in medieval society. These included the clergy and their possessions; the poor; women; peasants along with their tools, animals, mills, vineyards, and labor; and later pilgrims and merchants: in short, the vast majority of the medieval population who neither bore arms, nor were entitled to bear them.
The Truce of God, while often confused and later merged with the Peace, protected certain times of the week and year from the violence of the feudal class: no private or public wars were to be waged from Wednesday evening until Monday morning, during certain Saints’ days, during Advent, Lent, and Rogation days, also Holy Week, Easter Week and the 12 Days of Christmas, with its partridges and pear trees. This peace, though often broken, extended from the 800's until the Reformation in the 1500's. The Pope could excommunicate violators and people actually worried about such censures for almost 700 years.
The History Channel and Hollywood have convinced you of the myth of the scheming evil popes bent on world domination who were overthrown by the glorious Reformation and the still more wonderful Enlightenment. Look at the numbers. If conducted by the rules, medieval wars were not much more violent than modern English soccer matches. (I’m joking, but not by much.) Remember you could only kill other knights and the technology of killing had not yet benefitted from the Enlightenment of the 1700's and the wonderful scientific revolution which has made our lives so much richer and our war so much more deadly. Medieval wars just didn’t kill as many people as modern wars do.
War in Europe really came into its own when the papal domination of western Christianity was overthrown. That’s when the “wars of religion,” really got rolling, principally in France, Germany and England. These probably killed 10,000,000 (ten million) over the course of a century, certainly an inspiring achievement, but nothing compared to the progress we’ve made as we gradually shake off Christianity altogether. Take away the pope, and ten million die. Let’s see what happens when we take away Christianity all together. 
There is an interesting little book about the death toll caused by Communism. The introduction, by editor St├ęphane Courtois, himself a former Maoist/Communist, asserts that “...Communist regimes... turned mass crime into a full-blown system of government.” He cites a death toll which totals 94 million, give or take, not counting the “excess deaths” (decrease of the population due to lower than the expected birth rate). The breakdown of the number of deaths is as follows:
  • ·         65 million in the Peoples Republic of China
  • ·         20 million in the Soviet Union
  • ·         2 million in Cambodia
  • ·         2 million in North Korea
  • ·         1.7 million in Africa
  • ·         1.5 million in Afghanistan
  • ·         1 million in the Communist states of Eastern Europe
  • ·         1 million in Vietnam
  • ·         150,000 in Latin America
  • ·         10,000 deaths “resulting from actions of the international communist movement and communist parties not in power."
Courtois claims that Communists are responsible for a greater number of deaths than any other political ideal or movement, including Nazism. Let us remember that both Communism and Nazism are socialist systems that deny the claims of God on humanity. The state is supreme, not God. Communism has killed about 100,000,000 (One hundred million) for political reasons. We’re not talking war here, just political ideology. Nazism “only” killed 25,000,000 (twenty-five million) for political reasons, 6 million of them being Jews. This does not include the 40,000,000 killed because of combat in the Second World War.
So, take away the pope, ten million dead. Take away God, two hundred million dead, counting war. There are a lot more wars and religions we could go into, but enough is enough. I think you get the picture. Still, it is worth mentioning a religion that incorporates war as a divine mandate, such as Islam. Communism has been responsible for the deaths of maybe 100 million people. Bill Warner of the Center for the Study of Political Islam says, “Approximately 270 million nonbelievers died over the last 1,400 years for the glory of political Islam.” If he is correct, Hitler comes in third, a mere piker, a veritable camp fire girl.
"Wait a minute! You papists can’t get off that easy! What about the Crusades, the Inquisition and the conquest of the Americas?"
Aren’t I always warning you not to get your religion from the Discovery Channel? The Inquisition, though not something to be proud of, really didn’t give it everything they had. The Vatican has opened meticulous records kept over the 400 years of the Inquisition’s heyday and in Spain and Portugal perhaps 2,000 - 3,000 were killed.
How about the Crusades? In the course of two centuries perhaps one or two million died and let us remember these were defensive wars. A very political religion burst out of the Arabian Peninsula with the express intention of taking over the world, a hope still warmly cherished by many Muslims. Christian lands were conquered, and Christians killed. Remember that the Middle East was solidly Christian at the time. Around 1000 AD, Caliph Hakim of Cairo killed the entire Christian population of Jerusalem, burned every Christian shrine in the Holy Land, and hacked the tomb of Christ to pieces. Imagine what would happen in today if a Christian tried to destroy the Ka’aba in Mecca! For us the Tomb of Christ is comparable to the Ka’aba, the central shrine of Islam.
Those assaults started the Crusades. If not for the Crusades, the slaughter of Christians would have continued unabated, until the followers of Jesus of Nazareth, the Prince of Peace, were either dead or converted to the banners of the armies of Islam. As for the conquest of the Americas, true, there were atrocities on the part of gold crazed conquistadors, but the rights of the native Americans were defended by the priests and friars who followed in the wake of the conquerors. Most of the dead were killed by microbes, and that encounter between the microbes of the old world and the people of the Americas was inevitable.
So, there you have it. Where Catholic Christianity has been practiced, the murderous human spirit has been restrained. Where secularism and warrior religions are practiced, the deaths are counted in the hundreds of millions. Once again, I would like to remind you, don’t believe everything you see on television.
Rev. Know-it-all