The IM Saturday Brunch: Sept. 2, 2017 — Labor Day Weekend Edition

THE INTERNET MONK SATURDAY BRUNCH

”It is talk-compelling. It puts you in a good temper, it makes you satisfied with yourself and your fellow beings, it sweeps away the worries and cobwebs of the week.”

The Mercer clan will be camping out on the family farm once more this Labor Day weekend. The weather this year will be autumnal and unseasonably cool, so I don’t know if the kids will be swimming in the pond or just fishing. But this weekend is one to which I look forward all year, and I hope we’ll all get a bit refreshed. It’s also the weekend of the Fulton County Fair, so we’ll be fair walking and enjoying one of the great American traditions.

Wherever you may find yourself, and in whatever circumstances, I hope you’ll have a good weekend as we honor the working men and women of this country who help us enjoy the abundant life we have each and every day. There has been a lot of angst, anger, and anxiety about the U.S. economy and its workers over the past couple of years, but we still enjoy an astoundingly high standard of living and have much for which to be grateful.

• • •

The American Working Conditions Survey

The American Working Conditions Survey (AWCS), was done in 2015 by the Rand Corporation. The AWCS is a survey of individuals designed to collect detailed information on a broad range of working conditions in the American workplace. This report presents detailed findings about the prevalence and distribution of working conditions across the American workforce by age, gender, and education. Here is an overview of its key findings.

Here is the Rand Corp.’s summary of these findings:

The AWCS findings indicate that the American workplace is very physically and emotionally taxing, both for workers themselves and their families. Most Americans (two-thirds) frequently work at high speeds or under tight deadlines, and one in four perceives that they have too little time to do their job. More than one-half of Americans report exposure to unpleasant and potentially hazardous working conditions, and nearly one in five American workers are exposed to a hostile or threatening social environment at work. Positive findings include that workers appear to have a certain degree of autonomy, most feel confident about their skill set, and many receive social support on the job. Four out of five American workers report that their job met at least one definition of “meaningful” always or most of the time.

• • •

Just trying to do her work, officer…

This Salt Lake City nurse found out that doing your job isn’t always easy or appreciated. She explained to a police officer who is trained to do blood draws on suspects that hospital policy forbade him from doing so if the patient is unconscious. He didn’t accept it, and ended up creating the following scene. You can read the full story HERE.

• • •

Working in the Aftermath of Harvey

As we meet for brunch today, let’s especially remember those who have been working tirelessly to help folks in the flood-ravaged communities in Texas, Louisiana and other places affected by Hurricane Harvey.

Photos from The Atlantic

• • •

Prayer for those affected by Hurricane Harvey
Cardinal Daniel DiNardo, Archbishop of Galveston-Houston

May God, the Lord of mercy and compassion, protect all who are still in danger, and bring to safety those who are missing.

May He care in a special way for those who were already homeless, or without support and resources, before this disaster.

We pray in thanksgiving for the first responders who are risking their lives to save others at this very moment.

We include in our intentions the everyday heroes reaching out to help their neighbors in need, those who,
like the Good Samaritan, cannot walk by a person in need without offering their hand in aid.

• • •

Joel Osteen Criticized, Defended

A great deal of attention, most of it negative, was focused on Houston megachurch, prosperity-gospel pastor and television preacher Joel Osteen this week. Huffington Post reports some of the brutal memes that appeared on social media when the perception was that Osteen’s Lakewood Church would not open their massive doors to shelter refugees from the hurricane. Fair or not, as HP says, Joel Osteen became the “poster boy for how not to act in a crisis,” as well as a target for critics of Christian preachers, especially wealthy ones.

Others, such as the Dallas Morning News, have said, “Wait a minute, not so fast.”

Southeast Texas is drowning under the weight of Harvey, yet people nationwide —particularly those outside the state — have settled on making Osteen the villain.

After the pastor’s staff announced on social media Monday that his massive Lakewood Church, formerly an arena used by the Houston Rockets, was “inaccessible due to severe flooding,” the flame-throwing began: Megachurch pastor with great hair and giant bank account hating on poor people.

Lakewood Church has since announced that it’s serving as a distribution center and preparing to take in evacuees. And it’s worth noting that the initial church post, which so fired up the Internet, included helpful information regarding shelters and emergency help.

We aren’t writing in defense of Osteen. Insufficient facts are available to responsibly assess whether or not his church was slow to open its doors to those in need.

But the backlash is an excellent example of what too often happens in the midst of crisis these days: The chance to fire off pre-written narratives without pausing for any evidence.

• • •

A Poem for the End of Summer

A white, indifferent morning sky,
and a crow, hectoring from its nest
high in the hemlock, a nest as big
as a laundry basket …

In my childhood
I stood under a dripping oak,
while autumnal fog eddied around my feet,
waiting for the school bus
with a dread that took my breath away.

The damp dirt road gave off
this same complex organic scent.

I had the new books—words, numbers,
and operations with numbers I did not
comprehend—and crayons, unspoiled
by use, in a blue canvas satchel
with red leather straps.

Spruce, inadequate, and alien
I stood at the side of the road.
It was the only life I had.

From “Three Songs at the End of Summer” (Jane Kenyon)

• • •

The Nashville Statement

“The Nashville Statement is an urgently needed moment of gospel clarity. In a culture nearly defined by sexual confusion and brokenness, the church of Jesus Christ has to proclaim with one voice that God’s good design for gender, marriage, and sexuality. To capitulate to the spirit of the age or wring our hands in outrage at those around us would be to abandon our mission field. The Sexual Revolution cannot keep its promises, and the church must stand ready to receive with compassion the many who are in need of a better hope. The Nashville Statement is part of that mission, and my prayer is that it will help anchor churches and Christians to the gospel of Jesus Christ for years to come.”

Russell Moore
President, Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission

The Tennessean reports:

A national coalition of more than 150 evangelical leaders signed a new statement affirming their beliefs on human sexuality, including that marriage is between one man and one woman and approval of “homosexual immorality” is sinful.

The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood released the list of 14 beliefs, referred to as the Nashville Statement, on Tuesday morning. The statement says the evangelical coalition who signed it are responding to an increasingly post-Christian, Western culture that thinks they can change God’s design for humans.

“Our true identity, as male and female persons, is given by God. It is not only foolish, but hopeless, to try to make ourselves what God did not create us to be,” the statement reads.

The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood convened a meeting of evangelical leaders, pastors and scholars on Friday at the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission’s annual conference in Nashville. The coalition discussed and endorsed the Nashville Statement.

John Piper, the co-founder of The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, called the Nashville Statement, in a news release, a “Christian manifesto” on human sexuality.

“It speaks with forthright clarity, biblical conviction, gospel compassion, cultural relevance, and practical helpfulness,” Piper said. “It will prove to be, I believe, enormously helpful for thousands of pastors and leaders hoping to give wise, biblical, and gracious guidance to their people.”

Of course, people broke into predictable camps when responding to this statement. You can see Russell Moore’s endorsement above — he was one of many listed on the CBMW site affirming the statement, all of them from the Neo-Reformed end of the Christian spectrum, and all but one of them male. On the other side, you have folks like Rachel Held Evans, Daniel Kirk, and Morgan Guyton, who have signed the statement on LGBT+ inclusion in the church by Christians United. In a Huffington Post article, one of its representatives responded to the Nashville Statement with these words:

It’s high time Christians heard from a different moral authority on queer identity, said Brandan Robertson, a pastor and LGBTQ activist who drafted the “Christians United.”

“Conservative evangelicals often get the most air time, polluting the image of Christianity as one that is exclusive, condemning, and archaic,” Robertson told HuffPost. “The reality is that there is a rapidly growing wave of Christians around the world that embrace an inclusive, unifying, healing message, and that’s what I had hoped to portray in this statement.”

Nadia Bolz-Weber, in response, posted “The Denver Statement.” And John Pavlovitch even offered his own “plain language translation” of the Nashville Statement, suggesting that the CBNW piece and its timing reveals the fear and tone-deaf nature of those who drafted it.

Finally, HERE is a summary of 15 reactions for and against the Nashville Statement.

• • •

A Collect for Vocation in Daily Work
Book of Common Prayer

Almighty God our heavenly Father, who declarest thy glory
and showest forth thy handiwork in the heavens and in the
earth: Deliver us, we beseech thee, in our various occupations
from the service of self alone, that we may do the work
which thou givest us to do in truth and beauty and for the
common good; for the sake of him who came among us as
one that serveth, thy Son Jesus Christ our Lord, who liveth
and reigneth with thee and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever
and ever. Amen.

• • •

Finally… “I thank God for the work”

Ordinary Time Bible Study: Philippians — Friends in the Gospel (11)

Bridge across the Canal, Indianapolis (2015)

Ordinary Time Bible Study
Philippians: Friends in the Gospel
Study Eleven: Tom Wright on Phil. 2:12-18

• • •

PHILIPPIANS 2:12-18

What I’m getting at, friends, is that you should simply keep on doing what you’ve done from the beginning. When I was living among you, you lived in responsive obedience. Now that I’m separated from you, keep it up. Better yet, redouble your efforts. Be energetic in your life of salvation, reverent and sensitive before God. That energy is God’s energy, an energy deep within you, God himself willing and working at what will give him the most pleasure.

Do everything readily and cheerfully—no bickering, no second-guessing allowed! Go out into the world uncorrupted, a breath of fresh air in this squalid and polluted society. Provide people with a glimpse of good living and of the living God. Carry the light-giving Message into the night so I’ll have good cause to be proud of you on the day that Christ returns. You’ll be living proof that I didn’t go to all this work for nothing.

Even if I am executed here and now, I’ll rejoice in being an element in the offering of your faith that you make on Christ’s altar, a part of your rejoicing. But turnabout’s fair play—you must join me in my rejoicing. Whatever you do, don’t feel sorry for me.

•

It was an ugly city. The fine old buildings had been pulled down over the years, and they had been replaced by huge square concrete monstrosities. They were designed for function, not good looks — though by the time I went there they were getting tatty and ragged at the edges, and I wondered just how functional they were now. It was a depressing place.

But then, just a few years ago, an architect was appointed by the city council to design a new civic centre right at the heart of the city, in the middle of all that ugliness. They couldn’t afford to pull everything down again, but they could just afford, they reckoned, to begin the process of making the city once more the beautiful place the old pictures showed it to have been.

The architect was not a young man, but he had cherished this sort of opportunity all his life. He went to work on the design, and some while later, when the preparations were complete, he saw the foundations laid. He was then taken ill, and unable to carry on his work on the project. But he still cared passionately about it and gave detailed instructions to his colleagues as to how it was all to proceed.

“After all,” he said to them, “when people think of me, I want them to think of this beautiful building! You’ve got to make it so that it stands like a lighthouse in a dark storm, showing people that there is such a thing as beauty even if everything else around is ugliness. That will be my reward.”

Paul, in this passage, is like that architect. He is looking forward once more to the “Day of the Messiah” — the day when God will bring the whole cosmos to justice and peace, through the return of Jesus as Lord (see 3:20-21). He doesn’t know whether he will live to see that day. But he has designed a building that, if the builders keep working at it the way he’s showed them, will stand out as the one thing of beauty in a world of ugliness, the sign of what God will eventually do to the whole city.

• Tom Wright
Paul for Everyone: The Prison Letters (pp. 105ff)

• • •

Ordinary Time Bible Study
Philippians – Friends in the Gospel

A Review of “A World From Dust- How the Periodic Table Shaped Life” by Ben McFarland

A Review of A World From Dust: How the Periodic Table Shaped Life by Ben McFarland

I originally bought this book on a recommendation from RJS over at Jesus Creed .  RJS is the science blogger at Scot McKnight’s blog who is a PhD professor of chemistry.  Ben McFarland teaches biochemistry and chemistry at Seattle Pacific University in Seattle WA. He grew up near Kennedy Space Center and wanted to be a paleontologist in the second grade. He received a dual B.S. in Chemistry and Technical Writing from the University of Florida and a Ph.D. in Biomolecular Structure and Design from the University of Washington. His research uses the rules of chemistry to redesign immune system proteins. He lives near Seattle with his wife Laurie and his four boys.

Here is a video trailer for the book here .  I bought the book a year ago and was going to do a chapter by chapter review.  But as I got into it, I realized that, despite McFarland’s best effort to write down for the layman, it was just too technical for a casual blog post.  I had just finished Adam and the Genome, and the eyes-glazing-over reaction was fresh in my mind.  To understand a chapter by chapter detail for McFarland’s book would necessitate a college-level understanding of chemistry or would require a lot of digressive explanation which I was afraid would detract from the review.

The book is an examination of the history of life from the perspective of chemistry, specifically the periodic table of the elements.  McFarland’s main point is that chemistry constrains evolution and guides it to certain predictable ends.    In popular imagination, evolution is a messy, chaotic, highly contingent and random process.   This image of randomness in evolution was emphatically insisted on by Stephen Jay Gould. Run the tape over and something entirely different will emerge.  Gould said in his famous 1994 Scientific American article:

History includes too much chaos, or extremely sensitive dependence on minute and unmeasurable differences in initial conditions, leading to massively divergent outcomes based on tiny and unknowable disparities in starting points. And history includes too much contingency, or shaping of present results by long chains of unpredictable antecedent states, rather than immediate determination by timeless laws of nature.

Homo sapiens did not appear on the earth, just a geologic second ago, because evolutionary theory predicts such an outcome based on themes of progress and increasing neural complexity. Humans arose, rather, as a fortuitous and contingent outcome of thousands of linked events, any one of which could have occurred differently and sent history on an alternative pathway that would not have led to consciousness.

Ben McFarland respectfully disagrees, and the book builds a case by case empirical basis by examining those chemical factors that constrain the biology.  Ben is a Christian and freely admits this shapes his viewpoint.  But this is no god-of-the-gaps discourse.  As RJS says about Ben :

McFarland is a Christian, and this, of course, shapes his views as my Christian faith shapes mine. But I will also point out that I have colleagues who are not at all religious and are investigating the essence of the chemical toolbox in a manner consistent with McFarland’s approach. I have sat through a number of talks at scientific meetings on this very subject in one fashion or another. As a chemist myself (Ph.D. 1986 UC Berkeley) I find McFarland’s approach compelling and fascinating.

McFarland himself says this:

As Darwin said of natural selection, “I believe in the truth of the theory, because it collects under one point of view, and gives rational explanation of, many apparently independent classes of facts (p. 16).” What natural selection did for Darwin, chemistry does for me. In my view, a chemical sequence and chemical order shape the chaos of biology and history in surprising, yet rational ways, explaining many facts. It is a long story, but it coheres with chemical logic, and it shows that the nature of history is ordered by chemistry. That has reshaped the way I look at every blade of grass and every rock on the beach. I hope you enjoy thinking about this old subject in this new way. (p. xiv)

Ben begins his history with the periodic table.  The periodic table is a tabular arrangement of the chemical elements, ordered by their atomic number (the number of protons in the nucleus), electron configurations, and recurring chemical properties. This ordering shows periodic trends, such as elements with similar behavior in the same column. In general, within one row (period) the elements are metals on the left, and non-metals on the right.  The rows of the table are called periods; the columns are called groups. Six groups have generally accepted names as well as numbers: for example, group 17 elements are the halogens; and group 18, the noble gases.  Note that Ben shows some elements as necessary for biochemical balance, some for biochemical building, some for both building and balance, and some for catalysis or facilitating the chemical reactions.  The periodic table then is a map that will guide us through the history of chemistry on this planet.

Ben begins by discussing the basic building blocks of organic molecules and how they plausibly could have combined to make a cell.  Discussing the three categories of Building, Balance, and Catalysis, he says:

  1. Building. Most of the cell is built from the big six elements for life used as building blocks: the CHON elements (carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen), phosphorus and sulfur.

  2. Balance. A second group of seven elements floats around in the water, unattached, like tiny glinting snowflakes.  These are used because they don’t form long-lived bonds, so they can be pumped in or out to balance (or unbalance) the cell’s overall charge.  This group includes sodium, potassium, calcium, magnesium, chloride, and the oxidized elements phosphate and sulfate.  The singly charged metal ions of sodium and potassium and the doubly charged ions of calcium and magnesium are therefore used in large quantities.

  3. Chemistry. The rest of the elements found in the cell are present in smaller amounts and follow the constant concentrations dictated by the Irving Williams series .  These are the metals located in the middle of the periodic table, the region of transition metals.  Most of these have two positive charges, but they have slightly different shapes, sizes, and relativities, and some have special abilities, which can end up making them useful for very different things.  Each of these has the ability to catalyze different reactions and must be kept around like ingredients in a pantry for when the cell needs to cook something up.

The key philosophical elements that he returns to again and again are flow and consistency.  Life, like a river, flows between boundaries.  The boundaries that constrain the river in a consistent manner are the chemical laws of the universe.  Although life is a seeming flow of random contingencies, those contingencies still obey the chemical laws that constrain them.

Mars, Earth, and Venus

As the earth’s chemistry, through the geologic and cosmologic processes acting on it, changed, they reached a point habitable to life.  Of the whole solar system, Mars and Venus are most like the Earth.  At first they looked the same, colored with black mafic basalt and glowing red magma.  The original planets were all so hot their atmospheres were driven off into space.  The oceans and the air came from within.  Oceans changed the planet.  Water is a transformative chemical, small yet highly charged, seeping into the smallest cracks, dissolving what it can and carrying those things long distances.  Venus, Earth, and Mars don’t look like the moon because they have been washed in water.  Mars is dry now, although the Curiosity rover left no doubt that the red planet was first blue with water.  Venus, too close to the sun, had its oceans turned to steam.  The steamy atmosphere locked in more heat and so on until the oceans of Venus became the hot clouds of Venus; hot enough to melt lead, and probably sterilize the planet.

On Earth, the river of life was able to flow on from organic molecules to cells to proteins to RNA and DNA to complex cells to complex plants and animals with complex brains, all the while obeying and being constrained by the properties of the periodic table (the chemical “banks” of the river).

Ben makes the final point that convergence in evolution supports the thesis of A World From Dust.  Evolutionary convergence is probably best known from the writings of British paleontologist Simon Conway Morris.  Convergent evolution is the independent evolution of similar features in species of different lineages.  The recurrent evolution of flight is a classic example, as flying insects, birds, pterosaurs, and bats have independently evolved the useful capacity of flight.  As RJS says :

The idea that we are products of random chance and historic contingency seems at odds with any reasonable Christian theology. But evolution is not a random process where just anything can happen. Evolution is constrained by chemistry and physics. Historical contingency may well play a much smaller role in the diversity of life we see around us than suggested by Gould. Simon Conway Morris and Ard Louis, professors at the University of Cambridge and the University of Oxford respectively discuss randomness and convergence in this video .

The point being made in this clip is that the scientific definition of randomness does not imply that something is open-ended and purposeless. The evolutionary process is an efficient search algorithm optimizing for specific functions. In fact, the evolutionary process follows well defined roads and paths constrained by the nature of chemistry and physics. Not everything is possible, there are a limited number of possible solutions, stable points in biological space. There is no reason to conclude that evolution demonstrates that we are accidents of nature.

Is this a slam dunk argument?  Well, of course not, and Ben McFarland isn’t presenting it as one.  But it is surely a reasonable counter-argument to the typical evolution-is-random-therefore-unplanned-therefore-there-is-no-creator schtick.  Perhaps you don’t find it persuasive?  I, however, like RJS, find it compelling and fascinating.

Real Virtue Is “Second Nature”

Butterfly. Photo by Conal Gallagher

Real Virtue Is “Second Nature”

In a sense, then, to become virtuous is to internalize the law (and the good to which the law points) so that you follow it more or less automatically. As Aristotle put it, when you’ve acquired a moral habit, it becomes second nature. Why do we call things “second” nature? Our “first” nature is the hardwiring that characterizes our biological systems and operates without our thinking about it. At this very moment, you are not choosing to breathe. You are not thinking about breathing. (Well, maybe now you are. But 99.9 percent of the time, you breathe and blink and digest your breakfast without thinking about it.) “Nature” simply takes care of a process that hums along under the hood of consciousness. Those habits that become “second” nature operate in the same way: they become so woven into who you are that they are as natural for you as breathing and blinking. You don’t have to think about or choose to do these things: they come naturally. When you have acquired the sorts of virtues that are second nature, it means you have become the kind of person who is inclined to the good. You will be kind and compassionate and forgiving because it’s inscribed in your very character. You don’t have to think about it; it’s who you are. (In fact, if I have to deliberate about whether to be compassionate, it’s a sure sign I lack the virtue!)

A key question then: How do I acquire such virtues? I can’t just think my way into virtue. This is another difference between laws or rules, on the one hand, and virtues, on the other. Laws, rules, and commands specify and articulate the good; they inform me about what I ought to do. But virtue is different: virtue isn’t acquired intellectually but affectively. Education in virtue is not like learning the Ten Commandments or memorizing Colossians 3:12–14. Education in virtue is a kind of formation, a retraining of our dispositions. “Learning” virtue—becoming virtuous—is more like practicing scales on the piano than learning music theory: the goal is, in a sense, for your fingers to learn the scales so they can then play “naturally,” as it were. Learning here isn’t just information acquisition; it’s more like inscribing something into the very fiber of your being.

• Smith, James K. A..
You Are What You Love: The Spiritual Power of Habit, (pp. 17-18)

• • •

Photo by Conal Gallagher at Flickr. Creative Commons License

“More a matter of hungering and thirsting than of knowing and believing.”

Butterfly. Photo by Bald Wonder

In his book, You Are What You Love: The Spiritual Power of Habit, James K. A. Smith says that “the first, last, and most fundamental question of Christian discipleship” is  “What do you want?”.

This is the most incisive, piercing question Jesus can ask of us precisely because we are what we want. Our wants and longings and desires are at the core of our identity, the wellspring from which our actions and behavior flow.

According to Smith, Christian discipleship is “more a matter of hungering and thirsting than of knowing and believing.”

Since he thinks this is the case, he criticizes our mostly intellectual and didactic approaches to forming disciples. Smith contends that this is because of our assumptions that human beings are, first and foremost, rational creatures. I would also argue that feeding heads by exchanging information is simply easier, and that many churches, particularly of the evangelical variety which emphasize “the sufficiency of scripture,” lack the imagination to consider that spiritual formation involves more than grasping the meaning of words on a page and following a well defined list of behavioral expectations.

We have often written here about how advocates of “spiritual” growth diminish the role of the body in our understanding of faith development. Smith joins a growing number of voices who also call us to recognize the place of our affections and intuitions.

In our recent series, Musings in Moral Theology, we reported how scholars like Jonathan Haidt and Richard Beck have concluded that many of our moral positions and church practices grow out of visceral responses to life rather than rational analysis (which serves a different purpose). In one post I wrote:

Our morality is determined rather by our intuitions, our visceral and emotional responses, our conscious or subconscious loyalty to the group to which we belong. Whatever moral reasoning we do tends to follow intuition and emotion, and its purpose is to (1) confirm what our impulsive self has already decided, and (2) to keep us on good terms with the group with whom we identify.

Now, as I read Smith, I see a similar perspective. He correctly observes that the discipleship models many churches use have failed. There is overwhelming evidence that more knowledge does not translate easily into personal transformation. Changing our minds does not automatically lead to changing our way of life.

James Smith is not suggesting we abandon thinking. Nor is he suggesting that the contemporary model of always following our feelings is the right way. “We don’t need less than knowledge we need more,” he writes. “We need to recognize the power of habit.”

An emphasis on habit recognizes that humans are more than minds needing to be filled with correct information. We’re also more than a bundle of emotional itches to be scratched. Instead, Smith encourages us to embrace “a more holistic, biblical model of human persons that situates our thinking and knowing in relation to other, more fundamental aspects of the human person.”

Following this, he then urges us to realize that we, as holistic human beings, are formed by habits that allow our hearts, minds, and bodies to be encountered by God’s supremely attractive vision of shalom that can captivate us and re-form our desires toward the life of the Kingdom.

Now here’s the crucial insight for Christian formation and discipleship: not only is this learning-by-practice the way our hearts are correctly calibrated, but it is also the way our loves and longings are misdirected and miscalibrated—not because our intellect has been hijacked by bad ideas but because our desires have been captivated by rival visions of flourishing. And that happens through practices, not propaganda. Our desires are caught more than they are taught. All kinds of cultural rhythms and routines are, in fact, rituals that function as pedagogies of desire precisely because they tacitly and covertly train us to love a certain version of the kingdom, teach us to long for some rendition of the good life. These aren’t just things we do; they do something to us. (p. 21)

Photo by Bald Wonder at Flickr. Creative Commons License

Wisdom for Ordinary Time: Eugene Peterson on Abraham, the “Friend of God”

The Long Walk. Photo by amrita bhattacherjee

During Ordinary Time this year, I am reading and meditating on Eugene Peterson’s book, As Kingfishers Catch Fire: A Conversation on the Ways of God Formed by the Words of God. It captures sermons from Peterson’s twenty-nine years as a pastor in Bel Air, Maryland. Occasionally during this season I am posting some reflections on the wisdom I’m finding therein.

• • •

Abraham was not called the friend of God because he was singled out for special benevolent attention by God, a kind of teacher’s pet. He did not live a charmed life. He was called the friend of God because he experienced God accurately and truly. He lived as God’s friend. He responded as God’s friend. He believed that God was on his side, and he lived like it.

• Eugene Peterson, As Kingfishers Catch Fire

•

I chose this Peterson sermon because I have also begun reading James K.A Smith’s book on spiritual formation called, You Are What You Love: The Spiritual Power of Habit. In the spirit of Dallas Willard, Smith emphasizes that we are formed more by what we love than what we think. And, Smith emphasizes, “We learn to love, then, not primarily by acquiring information about what we should love but rather through practices that form the habits of how we love.” We’ll begin our consideration of some of Smith’s thoughts tomorrow.

As for Eugene Peterson, his sermon about Abraham, the friend of God, is directly in line with Smith’s arguments. In the quote above, he notes that Abraham lived as God’s friend, that the portrait we have of Abraham in the Bible is of one whose life was a journey of discovery and formation as God and the patriarch related to one another long ago.

And get this: being God’s friend didn’t meant that Abraham was heroically good or above average in virtue or untainted by sin. Abraham is not conspicuous in the human qualities that we usually admire. He lied to protect his own skin in exchange for the sacrifice of his wife’s reputation. He laughed at God when the divine promises sounded absurd to him. He played the coward with Abimelech.

What friendship means is that two persons are in touch with each other and share important interests. And that is what the friendship of God and Abraham is all about. Abraham was in touch with the God who was in touch with him. He accepted God’s concern for him as the reality of his life, and he returned it by making God the center of his life. He obeyed, he journeyed, he prayed, he believed, and he built altars. He did none of this perfectly. But perfect is not a word we use to describe friendship relationships. Perfect is a word that refers to inanimate things — a perfect circle, say, or a perfectly straight line. With persons we talk of response, growth, listening, and acting. Abraham did all of that in relation with God, whom he was convinced was determined to be a good friend to him. (p. 20)

Photo by amrita bhattacherjee at Flickr. Creative Commons License

11th Sunday after Trinity: Pic & Cantata of the Week

Snack at Three. Photo by David Cornwell

(Click on picture for larger image)

• • •

The Gospel text for this Sunday in Bach’s day was the parable of the Pharisee and the Publican (Luke 18: 9-14). To help us meditate on this story of penitence and forgiveness, this warning against self-justification and spiritual pride, we present a lovely tenor aria from Bach’s cantata BWV 113, “Herr Jesu Christ, du höchstes Gut” (Lord Jesus Christ, you highest good).

This aria is accompanied one of the most delightful flute parts Bach ever wrote. It perfectly conveys the “sweet word full of comfort and life” being sung about.

May we rest in the comfort of God’s forgiveness through Jesus today!

Jesus takes sinners to himself!
Sweet word full of comfort and life!
He grants true rest to the soul
and calls comfortingly to each:
your sin is forgiven.

• • •

Photo by David Cornwell at Flickr

The IM Saturday Brunch: August 26, 2017

THE INTERNET MONK SATURDAY BRUNCH

”It is talk-compelling. It puts you in a good temper, it makes you satisfied with yourself and your fellow beings, it sweeps away the worries and cobwebs of the week.”

August Night on the Front Porch

Sorry to keep harping on the solar eclipse from last Monday, but there remain a few silly examples of Christians and others making use of the heavenly phenomenon that we have to report before we close the topic.

DEUX EX MACHINA

The image above, supposedly of the solar eclipse, was posted by Dan Asmussen. In a Facebook post, he raved “Best photo so far … Not sure anyone can top this one!” His post was shared more than 1.7 million times. Of course, many Christians jumped on this magnificent “evidence” of a sign in the heavens — the eclipse had produced the sign of the cross!

Snopes.com, however, discovered that Asmussen’s image was created in 2011 from an image on Obsidian Digital, from the website DeviantArt. Obsidian Digital changed the orientation of the original image of the eclipse by using software to turn it on its side for the cross effect, Snopes explained. As RNS commented, this once, “God” truly was in the machine.

• • •

DON’T WASTE, RECYCLE!

• • •

ONE FINAL BIT OF ECLIPSE MADNESS

I’m not sure this needs any comment. Here is Jim Bakker’s take on the eclipse:

God came to me in a dream and said I should tell the world that I am plunging the world into darkness to remind people I’m still mad at the Obama years,” said Bakker on his online radio show. “Obama legalized witchcraft, sexual deviants getting married and schools started teaching transgenderism.

Bakker said it would take eight years of Donald Trump for America to “get right with God.”

I think it’s time to move on along to something a little less crazy and strange…

• • •

COSPLAY AT GEN CON 50

Some of the costumes folks wore last week here in Indianapolis at the 50th Gen Con convention:

• • •

WHY ARE EVANGELICALS SCARED OF WOMEN’S BREASTS?

Virgen de la leche, Circle of Gil de Siloe

Jonathan Aigner reports:

According to the Charlotte Observer, Amanda Zilliken was nursing her 4-month-old daughter on the back row of Elevation’s stadium-style seating when an usher illumined her with a flashlight, directed her out of the sanctuary and into [the bathroom].

The volunteer told her that she was welcome back to her seat, “as soon as she was finished.”

Hurt, angry, and humiliated by the experience, Zilliken approached other staff and volunteers after the service, but they were less than supportive.

Elevation did release a statement on the incident, stating that they have no official policy against breastfeeding women. They added: “We have several designated areas for nursing moms at Ballantyne specifically – one private to allow pumping and it’s close to the auditorium for convenience and the other in the actual baby area with a TV to allow mothers to still be part of the worship experience.”

Disappointingly, they did not explain why this particular mom was directed to the place where human waste is eliminated.

Aigner mentions other instances he read about where similar, humiliating instances occurred in churches. Then he launches an eloquent defense of welcoming mothers and their babies into church and not forcing them to leave public spaces to nurse.

You see, my beloved wife is my hero. After nine months of nurturing his sweet little life from the inside, she began doing the same after his birth. While recovering from the major surgery involved in his delivery, she gave more of herself to feed him as often as he needed. Through pain, tears, exhaustion, and spit up, she sustained him on her own for the first months of his precious life.

It was the most selfless, beautiful relationship I’ve ever witnessed. Determined, patient, pure love. I don’t think there could be a clearer illustration of Christ’s love and grace for his church.

So I find it despicable for a representative of any church to try and squelch that relationship, to guilt a mom for feeding her child, to show her the door as if she’s engaging in some sort of histrionic lactation.

He concludes the article by citing an example when the Pope himself, at the Sistine Chapel, openly gave permission to women to feed their babies when hungry. In fact, in the history of the church, some of the most beautiful artistic images of Mary and Jesus portray her suckling him at her breast. In fact, here is a page with twenty such renderings of Mary breastfeeding our infant King. One of the venerable names given to Mary traditionally is “Our Lady of the Milk.” This may have roots in a 4th century grotto in Bethlehem. It is considered sacred because, it is said, while the Holy Family took refuge there before their flight into Egypt, Mary was nursing Jesus, when a drop of milk fell to the ground, turning the cave white. To this day the Franciscans maintain a shrine there called the Milk Grotto. Its centerpiece is the Blessed Virgin nursing the infant Jesus.

The Miraculous Lactation of St. Bernard, Cano

And what shall we say of this painting, “The Miraculous Lactation of St. Bernard”? The artwork depicts the spiritual nourishing of St. Bernard of Clairvaux by the milk of Our Lady. He had a legendary mystical experience in which he prayed before a statue of the Madonna and Child, asking her, “Show yourself a mother” (“Monstra te esse Matrem”). The statue came to life and and squirted milk from the breast onto the Saint’s lips.

Evangelicals may laugh and deride such mysticism, but in my view it portrays a spirituality and view of life much more natural and human than the kind that thinks some kind of holy trauma will occur if they allow nursing in church. Sheesh. Grow up.

• • •

BABYLONIAN TRIGONOMETRY

Fascinating article at LiveScience, even for someone as clueless about mathematics as I am.

Scientists recently decoded a clay tablet from ancient Babylonia that dates to around 3,700 years ago, and found that it contains the oldest trigonometric table in the world.

The tablet, discovered in the early 1900s and first interpreted in 1945, has long fascinated mathematics scholars, but they were puzzled by its description of triangles, which researchers recently linked to a type of trigonometry.

These ancient mathematical inscriptions predate the earliest known evidence of trigonometry — thought to have originated around 120 B.C. with Greek astronomer Hipparchus — by approximately 1,000 years, the researchers reported in a new study.

This finding suggests that the Babylonians, not the ancient Greeks, were the first to study trigonometry — the mathematics of triangles — perhaps using it in architectural calculations for constructing pyramids, temples and palaces, the study authors wrote.

…Thousands of years ago, mathematicians in Babylonia used a base 60 numerical system rather than the base 10 system that forms the foundation of modern arithmetic. In the study, the authors used the ancient base 60 system to demonstrate how scribes would have arrived at the numbers that were chiseled on Plimpton 322.

“The tablet not only contains the world’s oldest trigonometric table; it is also the only completely accurate trigonometric table, because of the very different Babylonian approach to arithmetic and geometry,” Mansfield said.

• • •

ANOTHER REASON TO NOT CHECK YOUR PHONE WHILE DRIVING

• • •

LESSONS OF A BUTLER

At Bloomberg, Brandon Presser writes a riveting piece about how he an accepted an offer from New York’s Plaza Hotel to join its team of butlers, describing a few of the lessons he learned doing the job. At the Plaza, he writes, there is “a coterie of 10 servicemen (and one woman!) who trot around the property’s 20 floors day and night, making sure 282 rooms’ worth of guests feel like royalty.”

Over my short tenure, I delivered laundry to Middle Eastern princesses and fetched lobsters out of wishing wells—and listened to colleagues delight in the oddities of their jobs, from fielding requests for Viagra or comforting a weeping woman over spilled blueberries. Serving the world’s rich and famous, it turns out, plumbs the depths of an alternative universe that readily embraces the absurd without even batting an eye. And that was only the beginning of what I learned.

…One butler told the story of how he was asked to replace all the furniture in a suite because the guest didn’t like the color blue. Another was sent off to scout the city’s reliquaries for a justice of the peace trophy—a prize for a newly minted lawyer. Another arranged for a live tarantula flown in from Africa to be served as a meal. Of course, butlers always deliver with a straight face.

Here is his description of one of the twelve lessons he enumerates in the article:

Bath Time Can Be Awkward

Another common request for the butler team is to draw baths with a signature blend of salt, oil, and roses—especially during the colder months of the year. But the butler’s duties aren’t necessarily complete once the tub is full. Bal, the Plaza’s resident bath-time specialist, said that 95 percent of the time, he’s asked to remain within arm’s reach as bathers suds-up. Most of them, he said, want more hot water or scented oil, and are happy to keep him on hand while they relax in the nude. He is often left to pull the plug from the drain, elbow-deep in leftover water.

It gets weirder. One of my butler colleagues at a previous job in London was asked to ship in and set up a guest’s order of fresh oysters in the bathtub. He diligently filled the tub with ice and laid the oysters out, only to discover that the guest wanted the oysters placed in the tub around his soaking body. Eventually, the client seemed satisfied: He purchased the room next door for his butler so he’d always be near.

• • •

AND THEN THERE’S THIS…

Yes, this is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen…

• • •

GREAT SATIRE (note: this is satire)

There’s a wonderful satire piece at Laughing in Disbelief, satirizing televangelists, the Trump administration, Southern Baptists and otherwise ugly Americans. The piece brilliantly satirizes them all.

I feel the need to let you know that this is satire, because, well you know, enough people thought it wasn’t satire that Snopes was obliged to put up a page reporting that it is, indeed, satire, at least temporarily assuaging the holy furor of non-satirical, clueless about satire, satire-averse white Southern Baptist American Christians and other Church Ladies everywhere. Apparently, they failed to notice that the satirical article itself gives repeated clues and links that say over and over again, “This is satire, this is satire!” And that the site itself is known as a satire site. And that its name, “Laughing in Disbelief,” is a pretty good clue in and of itself that this site will probably include humorous articles that may include satire.

At any rate, here is part of the satirical article people apparently complained about, not getting that it is satire:

Reykjavik, Iceland. See the church? U.S. televangelists cannot preach there. (Note: satire)

Reykjavik, Iceland – This island nation situated in the North Atlantic took a monumental leap forward today by passing legislation banning American televangelists. [click the link to see if this is satire.]

The Icelandic Psychological Defense Act (IPDA) takes effect immediately. No American televangelist may set his or her foot in the small nation of 330,000 souls. No programming by such people may be shown on Icelandic television or played on the radio.

Genesis of the Icelandic Psychological Defense Act

Like most of the world, Iceland is watching the United States of America with growing concern. President Trump won the election in part by blowing demagogic dog whistles so loud even racist German Shepherds across the Atlantic could hear. Many in Iceland wondered if he could’ve won without the support of conservative churches and their faith-based flocks hoping for the biblical apocalypse?

The answer is obvious.

Prime Minister Andrew Kanard touted the IPDA while soaking in one of the many hot springs the country enjoys:

We in Iceland value our relationship with the United States of America. It is a great nation with a history they should be proud of. Currently, however, they seem to off whatever medication their doctor prescribed for them. Iceland wishes to support our friend in need. In that spirit, we are sending teachers over there to educate and assist rural communities infected with ignorance and superstition. What we will not do is allow ourselves to be invaded by that ignorance and superstition which is propagated by televangelists.

• • •

THIS WEEK IN MUSIC

During this week in 1970 £3 would have bought you a ticket for several days of pretty good music — or if you waited until fans tore the fences down, it was all free! It was the Isle of Wight Festival, sometimes called Britain’s “Woodstock.” An estimated 600,000 people attended, topping the 400,000 who partied in the rain in New York. Among the notable performances were Jimi Hendrix’s final U.K. concert before his death a few weeks later. But IOW’s finest moment came when The Who played what may have been their best set ever. Here’s how one person remembers it:

Probably the most magnificent set I have ever seen was perpetrated by The Who. Townshend ambled on stage throwing off waves of channeled energy that were probably just a tiny bit more apparent to those at the front of the stage . Certainly the best little band ever, they were happy , they were together and they were amazing . From two o’clock to after five in the morning they stormed their way through Tommy, some new numbers and the prodigious rock medley that wound the whole thing up. Sometimes you really do come across an experience that will not allow itself to be said in just a few words on paper . For me The Who played what could only be the best set that they’ve ever done , but that’s only for me.

• • •

A CALL TO PRAYER AND SYMPATHY

Please keep in mind those being affected by Hurricane Harvey today and intercede for them to the One who calms the seas.

Ordinary Time Bible Study: Philippians — Friends in the Gospel (10)

The Washing of the Feet, Duccio di Buoninsegna

Ordinary Time Bible Study
Philippians: Friends in the Gospel
Study Ten: Humility We Must Sing to Imagine

• • •

There are some things that can, perhaps, only be said in poetry, and perhaps this [Phil 2:5-11] is one of them.

• Tom Wright

PHILIPPIANS 2:5-11

Think of yourselves the way Christ Jesus thought of himself. He had equal status with God but didn’t think so much of himself that he had to cling to the advantages of that status no matter what. Not at all. When the time came, he set aside the privileges of deity and took on the status of a slave, became human! Having become human, he stayed human. It was an incredibly humbling process. He didn’t claim special privileges. Instead, he lived a selfless, obedient life and then died a selfless, obedient death—and the worst kind of death at that—a crucifixion.

Because of that obedience, God lifted him high and honored him far beyond anyone or anything, ever, so that all created beings in heaven and on earth—even those long ago dead and buried—will bow in worship before this Jesus Christ, and call out in praise that he is the Master of all, to the glorious honor of God the Father.

•

As we mentioned last week, this is one of the most discussed theological texts in the New Testament is Philippians 2:5-11, the “Christ-hymn” that describes the “kenosis” of Jesus.

Gerald F. Hawthorne’s interpretation of Phil. 2:5-11 is one of my favorite commentary passages that I have read in biblical studies.

He first describes the near universal agreement that “vv 6-11 constitute a beautiful example of a very early hymn of the Christian church.” Scholars, however, have a number of different ideas about how the hymn might have been structured. Whatever the versification of the hymn might have been, it is clear that it has two basic parts. There are four main verbs: the first two have Jesus as the subject, the second two have God. The hymn then naturally falls into the story of (1) Jesus’ acts of humbling himself, and (2) God’s act of exalting Jesus.

Hawthorne notes that Paul himself may be the author of the hymn or it may come from another source. The striking insight that I learned many years ago from him when considering this passage is that it appears to be a meditation on an event recorded in the Gospel of John.

“…may be the result of deep meditation…on one particular event from the life of Christ as recorded in the gospel tradition — Jesus washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:3-17). Although verbal parallels between John 13:3-17 and Phil 2:6-11 are few, but nonetheless significant, the parallels in thought and in the progression of action are startling. So precise in fact are these parallels that it is difficult to consider them the result of mere coincidence.

Hawthorne uses the following diagram to portray these parallels:

This hymn, whether Paul wrote it or not, emphasizes Jesus’ act of humility using an “descent-ascent motif that is prominent in the Johannine story.”

Gerald Hawthorne also notes another important parallel between the way both John and this epistle reflect on the foot-washing story:

It is also interesting and instructive to note that the purpose of each pericope is similar. The Johannine account is an acted parable to summarize the essence of Jesus’ teaching: “Whoever wants to be great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to hold the first place among you must be everybody’s slave” (Mark 10:43-44), while the Philippian text is a hymn to illustrate powerfully Paul’s teaching, which at this point is identical with that of Jesus:  humble, self-sacrificing service to one another done in love is a must for a Christian disciple who would live as a Christian disciple should (Phil 2:3-4).

• • •

Ordinary Time Bible Study
Philippians – Friends in the Gospel

Signs in the Heavens

Signs in the Heavens

Matthew 24: 29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: 30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

The post on Saturday and Monday’s eclipse (saw it from work with the glasses) got me thinking about signs and portents in the heavens.  As Chaplain Mike noted in Saturday’s post, people have always thought astronomical phenomena, especially total solar eclipses, portend some kind of meaning.  Moderns both secular and religious cannot seem to resist attaching some kind of meaning (most often judgement, it seems) to, what seems on the face of it, to be naturally occurring phenomena with completely explainable series of causes and effects.

Ancient man could be reasonably be forgiven for attaching superstitious meaning to astronomical phenomena since it was both rare and seemingly unexplainable.  Although it should be noted that supposedly by 20 B.C. the Chinese knew how eclipses were caused … By 8 B.C. the Chinese could predict eclipses by using the 135 month period; and by A.D. 206 they could predict eclipses by analyzing the motion of the moon. By A.D. 390 they could predict how much of the moon would be in shadow.  In the west, Hipparchus (second century BC), Pliny (first century AD) and Ptolemy (second century AD) were aware of the cyclic nature of eclipses, though the degree to which they could be predicted for a specific location is debatable.  Ptolemy ( ca 150 AD] represents the epitome of Grecian astronomy, and surviving records show that he had a sophisticated scheme for predicting both lunar and solar eclipses.

What excuse do modern men and women have for attaching meaning to the phenomena?  Perhaps there is some excuse for evangelicals and other Christians to attach meaning.  The bible in several passages, both old and new testaments speaks of “signs” in the “heavens” that have meaning, usually judgment, I’m having a hard time thinking of any heavenly signs that don’t portend judgment, except maybe for the star of Bethlehem.  As the opening quote in the post from Matthew 24 indicates; the return of Jesus is to be accompanied by signs in the sky.  So, it could be argued, attaching meaning to astronomical phenomena is “biblical”, I suppose.  But isn’t this really an artifact of an ancient viewpoint?  Viewed from the earth with the naked eye, eclipses and comets or meteorites streaking across the sky seem impressive, but not compared to a supernova or a gamma ray burst which are orders of magnitude… well… magnitudinous.  In fact, to the ancients, stars were little twinkly things that could fall to earth, whereas we moderns know that many “stars” we view are galaxies made up of hundreds of billions of stars. And then compare Antares to our sun…

The best you could say if some “judgement” or biblical event coincided with some astronomical “sign” would be that it was a providential coincidence, like maybe the star of Bethlehem.

Well, that got me to thinking which miraculous phenomena in the bible I was willing to accept based on that ancient document scribe’s testimony; and what phenomena that my modern mind just can’t swallow.  And by what criteria I was making that distinction.

First of all, I accept the resurrections, both Jesus’ and his raising of Lazarus, Jairus’ daughter, and the widow’s son (Luke 7:11-17).  Peter raising Dorcas and Paul raising Eutychus are in as well.  I can’t think of a healing account in the New Testament that I don’t believe.  So God’s grace giving us soteria and shalom is something that seems consistent with his character especially as demonstrated by Jesus.  My own experiences with my friend with the regrown kidney and my own “resurrection” from a burst appendix seem to bear out that grace as well.  Why some get it and some don’t has always bothered me and I have no convincing explanation to offer, and bearing in mind God’s rebuke of Job’s friends, wouldn’t offer one if I did.

The miracles of abundance like the water to wine at the wedding feast of Cana and the feeding of the 5000 also seem consistent with a gracious God.  The walking on the water I also believe but I would have trouble with it if it wasn’t for part with Peter.  I cannot bring myself to believe the disciples would lie about that or make up a story that includes Peter walking then faltering.  They just weren’t that type of men.  Same with stilling the storm at sea, they were utterly shocked at that.

However, the cursing of the fig tree (Mark 11:12-25) I just don’t get.  I know it’s supposed to be about the barrenness of Israel; but the parable in Luke 13 seems more consistent with God’s nature regarding barren fig trees (and Israel).

The biggest problem with New Testament miracles I have is with Matthew 27:52f and the resurrections following the crucifixion.  It just seems strange and out of place.  Remember Michael Licona where in a passage in his 2010 book, The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach, Licona questioned the literal interpretation of the story of the resurrection of the saints in Matthew 27, suggesting the possibility that it might be apocalyptic imagery?  Remember evangelicals going ballistic?

In the Old Testament, the miraculous flour bin and the raising of the son of the widow of Zarephath by Elijah in 1 Kings 17 and 2 Kings 4:1-7 Elisha and the widow’s oil I’m good with as well as the healing of Naaman of leprosy.  Again, for same reasons as in the New Testament, it seems coincident with God’s gracious nature.  Maybe you think you see a pattern in my criteria; Mike the Geologist—you just don’t like judgement; you’re the sloppy agape’ type.  But I’m good with the handwriting on the wall for the Babylonians, that arrogant SOB had it coming.  Same with Daniel in the lion’s den; his persecutors got what was coming to them after he was miraculously delivered.   Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego; and the fourth one like unto a son of man—you go pre-incarnate Christ, not even the smell of smoke indeed!  And the 10 plagues on Egypt?  What the heck, Pharaoh, after the first nine why would you bring such a sorrowful judgment on your own people to let their first born sons be killed.  It’s not like you weren’t warned.  Stubborn leader, answerable to no one, brings destruction to his own nation…hmmm… why does that sound familiar?

I’m sorry for the rambling nature of this post; obviously I’m just spit-ballin’ here.  The one OT miracle I just don’t believe happened was Joshua’s long day (Joshua 10:12-14),  or the corollary story that the sun’s shadow moved backward ten steps – exactly 40 minutes, the story says – on the stairway of Ahaz at the time of Hezekiah’s illness (2 Kings 20:10-11).  Now when the ancients believed the earth was the center of the cosmos the sun not moving, or going backwards, although still a big deal, was at least conceivable.  But now… for the sun to stand still in the sky means the earth would stop in its rotation.  The immediate consequence of that would be 1100 mile per hour winds due to the atmosphere continuing its motion at its original speed.  Therefore, everything that’s not firmly attached to the bedrock will be swept off the ground; huge rocks, topsoil, buildings, vehicles, will be lifted up and swept away by the atmosphere.  Wind speeds of 1100 mph; an F5 tornado is classified as speeds over 200 mph.  Let that sink in.

Defenders of literal biblical inerrancy have to justify this stuff, else their house of cards comes down.  Some twaddle from Henry Morris for example:

Some quibble about the language employed, suggesting that Joshua thought the sun “moves,” instead of the earth. The fact is, the motion of any heavenly body must be given in terms of relative motion (since all objects in the universe are moving in some way). Scientists normally assume the fixed point of zero motion to be the one which makes their equations most convenient to use, and this usually is the earth’s surface at the location of the observer. Joshua’s language was . . . quite scientific!

Furthermore, many scholars have documented numerous traditions of a “long day” (or “long night,” in the western hemisphere) about the time of Joshua. The biblical story is well supported as a real fact of history. There was a long day!

Want to know who the “many scholars” are: go here .  The “scholars” include Immanuel Velikovsky and his 1950 book, Worlds in Collison.   Same argument for dinosaurs co-existing with humans: people have dragon legends.

I realize I am leaving myself open to charges of inconsistency by both the fundies and the atheists.  A miracle is a miracle, God can do anything, and the bible is infallible; what real basis do you have for picking and choosing?  Science?  And if you are going to go with science, why don’t you treat biblical accounts the way you treat any other religious holy book?

The thing is that either position is consistent within its own framework, but I don’t have to choose either framework; it is not a strict dichotomy.  As Chaplain Mike put it so brilliantly yesterday that it bears repeating today:

What would it be like if we as Christians believed that the Bible was written for us:

…to encourage us to think more, not less?

…to help us develop wisdom so that we can come to conclusions and make decisions maturely on our own, not simply give us answers and rules to follow?

…to engage us in an ongoing struggle to find truth, not to lead us to think we have all the answers?

…to make us more curious about our world and other areas of learning, such as the sciences, literature, and the arts, and not less?

…to give us material about which we can faithfully argue and disagree with one another, not to resolve all arguments and disagreements?

…to force us to trust by taking us deeper into places of mystery, wonder, and bewilderment, rather than taking away all our doubts and questions?

…as a tool more for contemplation and conversation with God and each other than as a handbook for life, a rulebook, or a book of doctrines?

…to form us into people who are more authentically human and more involved in the world, not less?

…to enable us to find more common ground with our neighbors, not less?

…to help us focus fully on fulfilling the greatest commandments of loving God and our neighbors?

There is a sign to believe in.