Psalms Week: May Your Kingdom Come

Franz Josef, Photo by Chris Gin

The Book of Psalms is a wilderness book. It is also perfect for the messy, muddy, unpredictable season of Lent. It is filled with laments, the most common type in the book, but the Hebrew name for the book is Tehillim, which means “praises.” There is constant movement throughout the book from lament to praise, from despair to hope and confidence in the Creator-Redeemer God.

Here’s an updated edition of a post I wrote a few years ago for the Lenten season. It gives an overview of the overall message of the Book of Psalms.

• • •

The final composition of Israel’s “hymnal” took place during and after the Babylonian Exile. In its final form, it stands as a book with a unified, coherent message; it is not simply a collection of songs and poems.

The first two psalms introduce the book.

  • Psalm 1 tells us what kind of book this is and instructs us how to read it. It is Torah — God’s fatherly instruction that sets forth “the way of the righteous”. A wise person will meditate on it day and night.
  • Psalm 2 tells us the main message of the book. Though God’s enemies plot and fight against him, he will establish his kingdom through his Son, the Messiah. A wise person will take refuge in him.

The Book of Psalms is the Torah of God’s Messiah. It tells us how God’s kingdom will come, how his will will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Coming out of the Exile, the most devastating experience of Israel’s history, God’s people were hungry for this message. Having seen their kingdom disintegrate and fall apart, having watched God’s enemies sack their royal city and demolish God’s own palace, the Temple, having lived in foreign lands under the “counsel” of ungodly rulers, they were eager for God to reestablish his rule.

Those who dwelt in the wilderness of Exile longed for a new Exodus and “rest” in the Promised Land. Like their prototypical king, David, they tired of being pursued by their enemies, of mourning “by the rivers of Babylon,” far from their true home in desolate places. They hungered and thirsted to see Zion exalted and God’s Temple rebuilt and filled with glory.

And so the Book of Psalms was put together. In this five-part book (akin to the Torah of Moses), through songs that describe the sufferings and triumphs of David and which celebrate how the God of creation will so oversee history that his new creation will emerge, the message of God’s coming Kingdom is proclaimed.

The Book of Psalms, like the Torah, is a “pentateuch” — a five-part book. You can see this in your Bible: “Book I” is the title over Psalm 1, “Book II” over Psalm 42, and so on.

  • It begins with an introduction (Psalms 1-2).
  • It ends with a conclusion (Psalms 146-150).
  • Each part ends with a benediction (41:13/72:18-19/89:52/106:48/150:6).
  • Books I and II are mostly individual psalms of David (1-41/42-72).
  • Book III has mostly community psalms (73-89).
  • Book IV starts with a psalm of Moses and contains mostly royal and story-telling psalms (90-106).
  • Book V brings back David psalms and is dominated by psalms of wisdom, praise, and ascent to Jerusalem (107-150).

In general, we might say that Books I-III set forth the problems faced by God’s people in Exile: despite God’s election of Israel, the enemies of God are winning and God’s people are in the wilderness.

Books IV-V set forth divine answers to God’s people, giving both hope and instruction. Despite appearances, the Lord reigns and will be vindicated. We must take refuge in him.

Why is it important to have this perspective on a book like Psalms? Can’t we just read it and appreciate it for its beautiful, heartfelt poetry that depicts the human condition and our relationship with God?

Psalms, of course, has a long history of use as a devotional and liturgical resource, and this is a legitimate use of its materials. However, as good readers we must also note that it has been carefully put together as a book —  a book that teaches, a book upon which we should meditate, a book with a Kingdom message.

Furthermore, if we recognize the background of the book and the purpose for which it was put together in its present form, we will see that it is really a book that anticipates Christ, the son of David who has been “set on Zion,” God’s holy hill (Ps. 2:6). The prayers of David, the anointed one who ascends his throne through suffering, reveal the depths of the heart of God’s King.

For the most part, the psalms were not written from the perspective of the ordinary believer in Israel. The headings and contents show us that most were composed to reflect David’s experiences or the perspectives of those who served and supported the kings in the temple worship at Jerusalem.

Therefore, knowing the stories of David and the kingdom is a key to meditating on the psalms.

In the historical books, we see the outward circumstances of David’s life, but in the Book of Psalms we gain insight into the king’s mind and spirit. By laying bare David’s heart, Psalms gives the returned exiles a picture of the kind of leadership God desired for them.

The books of Samuel and Kings teach that the Exile happened because of leadership failure. The kings failed to walk in the ways of David, and therefore the people broke the covenant. They did not have his heart for God. As the exiles look for the restoration of God’s kingdom in their midst, the Book of Psalms shows them what kind of king they should follow — an ideal king with David’s heart.

However, even after they returned from the Exile, Israel did not have a king. They remained under foreign domination and had only God’s promise that he would establish the kingdom in David’s house (2Sam 7, Isa 9:6-7, Jer 23:5-6, Ezek 34:22-24, Hosea 3:4-5, Amos 9:11, Zechariah 12:7-9). The ruler portrayed in the Book of Psalms is the ideal King, someone for whom they were waiting, looking, and hoping: the son of David, the ultimate king.

The pages of the New Testament begin with this: “The book of the family tree of Jesus the Messiah, the son of David, the son of Abraham…”

And so begins the story — anticipated in the Book of Psalms — that N.T. Wright calls, “How God Became King.”

• • •

Photo by Chris Gin at Flickr. Creative Commons License

Sermon: Breaking Down Boundaries…One Person at a Time (Lent III)

By Living Water, 2015

SERMON: Lent III
Breaking Down Boundaries…One Person at a Time

So he came to a Samaritan city called Sychar, near the plot of ground that Jacob had given to his son Joseph. Jacob’s well was there, and Jesus, tired out by his journey, was sitting by the well. It was about noon.

A Samaritan woman came to draw water, and Jesus said to her, ‘Give me a drink’. (His disciples had gone to the city to buy food.) The Samaritan woman said to him, ‘How is it that you, a Jew, ask a drink of me, a woman of Samaria?’ (Jews do not share things in common with Samaritans.) Jesus answered her, ‘If you knew the gift of God, and who it is that is saying to you, “Give me a drink”, you would have asked him, and he would have given you living water.’ The woman said to him, ‘Sir, you have no bucket, and the well is deep. Where do you get that living water? Are you greater than our ancestor Jacob, who gave us the well, and with his sons and his flocks drank from it?’ Jesus said to her, ‘Everyone who drinks of this water will be thirsty again, but those who drink of the water that I will give them will never be thirsty. The water that I will give will become in them a spring of water gushing up to eternal life.’ The woman said to him, ‘Sir, give me this water, so that I may never be thirsty or have to keep coming here to draw water.’

Jesus said to her, ‘Go, call your husband, and come back.’ The woman answered him, ‘I have no husband.’ Jesus said to her, ‘You are right in saying, “I have no husband”; for you have had five husbands, and the one you have now is not your husband. What you have said is true!’ The woman said to him, ‘Sir, I see that you are a prophet. Our ancestors worshipped on this mountain, but you say that the place where people must worship is in Jerusalem.’ Jesus said to her, ‘Woman, believe me, the hour is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews. But the hour is coming, and is now here, when the true worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father seeks such as these to worship him. God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.’ The woman said to him, ‘I know that Messiah is coming’ (who is called Christ). ‘When he comes, he will proclaim all things to us.’ Jesus said to her, ‘I am he,the one who is speaking to you.’

Just then his disciples came. They were astonished that he was speaking with a woman, but no one said, ‘What do you want?’ or, ‘Why are you speaking with her?’ Then the woman left her water-jar and went back to the city. She said to the people, ‘Come and see a man who told me everything I have ever done! He cannot be the Messiah, can he?’ They left the city and were on their way to him.

…Many Samaritans from that city believed in him because of the woman’s testimony, ‘He told me everything I have ever done.’ So when the Samaritans came to him, they asked him to stay with them; and he stayed there for two days. And many more believed because of his word. They said to the woman, ‘It is no longer because of what you said that we believe, for we have heard for ourselves, and we know that this is truly the Saviour of the world.’

• John 4:5-30, 39-42
(Excerpt: full text is 4:5-42)

• • •

If ever there was a Gospel story for Christians in these days in which we live it is this one. As Karoline Lewis from Luther Seminary says, “We are living in a time when conversation needs to be cultivated and valued. Practiced and pursued. Longed for and lived. Without real conversation, we lack intimacy and understanding; connection and empathy. Without real conversation, we risk detachment and distance.” And it is especially important that we learn to have conversations with those who are different from us.

Last week, we heard Jesus talking with a distinguished, respected teacher of the Jewish people, Nicodemus. Now we would expect that, wouldn’t we? Jesus the Jewish Messiah, meeting with a religious leader and having a conversation about salvation? That’s sounds perfectly natural. Even though, as we saw last week, the content of the conversation itself was surprising and paradigm-shattering, the fact that Jesus had such a discussion with a Bible scholar and spiritual man was in no way unusual.

Fast forward to today. Here we see Jesus:

  • A Jewish person crossing a geographical border to go through what the Jews considered an unclean place, Samaria.
  • A Jewish person crossing a political border where people had profoundly different views of culture and society.
  • Jewish person, speaking with a Samaritan.
  • A Jewish man, having a public conversation with Samaritan woman.
  • A Jewish man, treating this woman as a conversation partner about spiritual matters in the same way he encountered Nicodemus.
  • A Jewish man, asking for help from a Samaritan woman.
  • A Jewish man, asking to drink from a Samaritan cup, something the Jews considered ritually unclean.
  • As a Jewish man, Jesus had this encounter with a woman who was on the margins of her own society. She’d had five husbands, whether through death or divorce, and was being cared for by another man. Whatever the specifics of her situation, she was likely a poor, dependent widow to whom society paid little attention.

So then, this story is about a boundary-breaking Savior who entered into a personal conversation with someone other Jewish people would have avoided completely.

Geographical boundaries? Jesus broke through them.

Political boundaries? Jesus disregarded them.

Religious boundaries? Didn’t matter to Jesus.

Gender boundaries? Forget it. Jesus didn’t have a glass ceiling when it came to the way he treated women.

Social class boundaries? Whether it was Nicodemus, a respected member of the Jewish community, or this woman, a marginalized, invisible person in a Samaritan village, Jesus was willing to meet you, to converse with you, to respect you and take you seriously.

As one commentator said:

His simple request for a drink of water provoked a dialogue with a marginalized woman that teaches us that God does not desire any human being to shrivel and die from a broken body or a parched soul. Rather, he longs to quench our deepest needs and desires with the “living water” of his Spirit.

As Jesus traveled from Judea to Galilee he stopped in the town of Sychar around noon time, tired and thirsty from the journey. He sat down by a well and asked a Samaritan woman for a drink of water. And as John tells this story, she actually becomes a spiritual hero, an example to us all of faith and witness.

In this encounter we see a revolution in religious behavior. Jesus was willing to break down any number of strict and polarizing boundaries to have a conversation with a Samaritan woman. This is our God. The God we know in Jesus Christ is relentless in breaking down boundaries and barriers in order to bring his saving love to all the world.

Friends, do I need to tell you that the church has not always been good at this?

We are not always as comfortable in this messy world as Jesus was. We have our boundaries.

There are people we like and feel comfortable associating with.

There are others we avoid like they have some contagious disease.

We distrust people who look different, who don’t speak our language, who don’t share our background or common experiences.

We look down on those we deem morally inferior or broken.

We have our rules, our standards, our comfort zones.

It’s likely we wouldn’t have gone through Samaria like Jesus did, much less sit down and ask this Samaritan woman for help. Much less treat her as an equal conversation partner in religious and spiritual matters.

One person at a time, Jesus came to change the way we all encounter our neighbors. Perhaps this text in this Lenten season is calling us to reconsider who our neighbors are, and how we might see them in a new light. How we might overcome our parochialism, our tribalism, and our tendency to be suspicious of and withdrawn from those who are different from us.

There was one more boundary that Jesus broke, which is the greatest one of all.

In the course of their conversation, the Samaritan woman said this to Jesus: “Our ancestors worshipped on this mountain, but you say that the place where people must worship is in Jerusalem.”

Then Jesus answered her, “Woman, believe me, the hour is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem….the hour is coming, and is now here, when the true worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and truth….God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.”

When Jesus lived, and throughout the history of Israel, it was the Temple that was the meeting place between God and human beings. One of the themes that runs through John’s Gospel is that Jesus came to replace the Temple. He is now the place where we access the presence and salvation of God.

At the end of the story, in verse 42, the Samaritans from the village say this: “We know that this is truly the Saviour of the world.”

Not just the Savior or Messiah of the Jews, but the Savior of the world. Everybody’s Savior. No boundaries. No exceptions. People are no longer required to go this mountain or that mountain, to this temple or that temple, to this priest or that priest, to make this sacrifice or that sacrifice. No, it’s simply about coming to Jesus, about opening your life to the saving work of his Spirit.

No more spiritual boundaries. No more hoops through which we must jump. As Jesus spoke to the Samaritan woman that day, as he spoke to Nicodemus earlier, as you see him talking to individuals throughout the Gospel, he meets us where we are , and in him we find life.

The Internet Monk Saturday Brunch: 3/18/17

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.”

Well, so far, approaching and during Lent at our Internet Monk Saturday Brunch, we’ve featured pancakes, soup, and beer. What shall we highlight today?

How about bread?

Finally, here is an article about “Fasting Bread for Lent” at Catholic Cuisine. Not only is there a recipe and description, but a lesson on the ingredients you can share with children, and this beautiful prayer, which we’ll use as our Lenten Quote of the Week:

Heavenly Father, Let us enter the season of Lent in the spirit of joy, giving ourselves to spiritual strife, cleansing our soul and body, controlling our passions, as we limit our food, living on the virtues of the Holy Spirit;

Let us persevere in our longing for Christ so as to be worthy to behold His most solemn Passion and the most holy Passover, rejoicing the while with spiritual joy. Amen.

BEFORE SINGING, WE MUST EAT

Mockingbird ran a wonderful piece by Rebecca Florence Miller on the tradition of the Lutheran Lenten soup supper held in the church basement.

Here’s a savory sip to whet your appetite:

There is a holy hovering around the sacramentally bubbling soups, an anticipation of the sustenance, laughter, and fellowship to come. After repeatedly being urged to get this party started, the pastor lifts his voice and leads a table prayer, even as a few sneaky folks slide over a wee bit closer to the table. “Amen!” Everyone falls into formation in two lines, one on each side of the table—mothers, dads, gray-haired ladies, bald old fellows, the proper and coiffed, the off-the-cuff and blue-jeaned. Laughing, smiling, anticipating. We, the church.

Some settle into familiar tables, as if resting into the relief of a well-worn pew. But familiar groupings also mix with unfamiliar ones. After all, soup supper isn’t coffee hour. You can sit literally anywhere. Old timers compliment young folks—“great recipe!”—and the favor is returned. Stories flow with the black coffee from the old, silver percolator. Someone remembered to plug it in early; nothing worse than coffee you can see through, as everyone knows. Well done, good and faithful servant, you old bubbling purveyor of koinonia. Without coffee, the people perish, I think it says in the good, old Book.

LOVING YOUR NEIGHBOR…WITH CHRISTMAS LIGHTS

Here’s one of my favorite stories of the year so far.

Last week, an elderly resident of Homewood, Alabama – affectionately known as “Mr. Frank” – went to his mailbox and found a hate-filled letter. This is what it said:

“We are a group of your neighbors who are concerned about the appearance of some homes on the street (and property values.) We are writing to you to ask you to remove your Christmas decorations!!! Also, please consider cleaning up your yard and remove the plants along the edge of the yard.

“It might be in your best interest to consider selling your home so the yard can be properly landscaped and the house torn down (so a new one can be built that is more fitting with the other homes on the street.) Thank you.”

I’ll let Carol Robinson at AL.com take it from there.

“Mr. Frank,” who grew up in his family home and moved back after his mother died, confided to a neighbor about the letter and soon word of the nastiness got around. “He was devastated,” said another neighbor, Carrie Engle. “It horrified all of us that knew about it.”

So they took action. Dozens of neighbors – at least 30 of them – went into their attics and basements and pulled out their own Christmas lights in a brightly-colored show of solidarity. “He told our neighbor the reason he keeps his Christmas lights on his tree is because he sits on his porch and sees people constantly run our stop sign and he’s afraid they’ll hit his tree and get hurt,” Engle said.

As for “Mr. Frank’s” yard, Engle said it’s beautiful, and a source of pride for all of the neighbors. “He works in his yard nonstop and personally I think he does nothing but increase the value of my home,” she said. “He’s taught me more about gardening than anybody. He’s a gentle, kind soul.”

Engle said the neighborhood has turned it into a teaching moment, for both adults and kids alike. She has three children, ages 16, 13 and 9, and said the ordeal has upset them. “I was telling them that this was bullying, and we’re taught to love our neighbors so that’s what we should do,” she said.

Already loved, “Mr. Frank” has become increasingly popular in recent days. Engle estimates that he’s received between 50 to 100 cards in his mailbox, as well as baked goods. Here’s what her own 9-year-old, Cade, wrote to him: “Dear Mr. Frank, I’m so sorry that that person rote (sic) that note. We do not want you to leave. Don’t put your Christmas lights up, keep them up. It looks so pretty.”

Thank you, Homewood residents, for loving your neighbor.

TEN THOUGHTS ON LOVE FROM A WEDDING WRITER

Lois Smith Brady writes for the wedding pages of the NY Times. She’s used to hearing clichés about love, but when someone says something truly original it gets her attention. She wrote an article discussing ten of those contributions.

Here are a few of them:

  • “I now know what love is,” one man said. “It’s when someone becomes part of every breath, in what way I do not know. But I couldn’t breathe without her.”
  • “In a sense, the person we marry is a stranger about whom we have a magnificent hunch.”
  • “Of my own accord, I present myself, my days, my nights and my life. I present them freely and willingly because they cannot be better spent than in your company.”

Few things nourish the heart more than love well spoken.

YES! A WIN FOR THE OXFORD COMMA!

I myself have always been a fan. I guess that puts me on one side of a bitter debate. Do we use the “Oxford comma,” or is it unnecessary?

Here’s the debate: In a list of three or more items — like “bread, milk and vegetables” — some people would put a comma after milk, and some would leave it out. A lot of people feel strongly about it. I myself always do, for I feel it distinguishes each separate item on the list, whereas without it, it might be implied that the second and third items have a different relationship between each other than the first and second.

How much does it matter? Possibly up to $10 million.

The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, in a recent 29-page court decision, made a ruling that could cost a dairy company in Portland, Me. that much.

Here’s the story:

In 2014, three truck drivers sued Oakhurst Dairy, seeking more than four years’ worth of overtime pay that they had been denied. Maine law requires workers to be paid 1.5 times their normal rate for each hour worked after 40 hours, but it carves out some exemptions.

…The debate over commas is often a pretty inconsequential one, but it was anything but for the truck drivers. Note the lack of Oxford comma — also known as the serial comma — in the following state law, which says overtime rules do not apply to:

The canning, processing, preserving, freezing, drying, marketing, storing, packing for shipment or distribution of:

(1) Agricultural produce;

(2) Meat and fish products; and

(3) Perishable foods.

Does the law intend to exempt the distribution of the three categories that follow, or does it mean to exempt packing for the shipping or distribution of them?

Delivery drivers distribute perishable foods, but they don’t pack the boxes themselves. Whether the drivers were subject to a law that had denied them thousands of dollars a year depended entirely on how the sentence was read.

If there were a comma after “shipment,” it might have been clear that the law exempted the distribution of perishable foods. But the appeals court on Monday sided with the drivers, saying the absence of a comma produced enough uncertainty to rule in their favor.

And who said grammar doesn’t matter?

QUESTIONS OF THE WEEK

  • Why am I just no good at memorizing Scripture?

THIS WEEK IN MUSIC…

We had a wonderful opportunity to have a house concert last night in our home, welcoming Frank Lee and Allie Burbrink to share their old time songs along with phenomenal banjo and guitar accompaniment.  About 25 of us gathered, had a St. Patrick’s Day feast with Irish stew and shepherd’s pie and some good Irish beer, and enjoyed some fantastic music.

Here’s a taste of Frank & Allie…

Fridays with Michael Spencer: 3/17/17

May Iris 2016

From a 2009 post by Michael Spencer

The following is from a 2008 interview with Richard Foster:

What is the discipline that you think we need to be exploring more at this point?

Solitude. It is the most foundational of the disciplines of abstinence, the via negativa. The evangelical passion for engagement with the world is good. But as Thomas à Kempis says, the only person who’s safe to travel is the person who’s free to stay at home. And Pascal said that we would solve the world’s problems if we just learned to sit in our room alone. Solitude is essential for right engagement.

I so appreciated in Bonhoeffer’s Life Together the chapter, “The Day Alone,” and the next chapter, “The Day Together.” You can’t be with people in a right way without being alone. And of course, you can’t be alone unless you’ve learned to be with people. Solitude teaches us to live in the presence of God so that we can be with people in a way that helps them and does not manipulate them.

Another thing we learn in solitude is to love the ways of God; we learn the cosmic patience of God. There’s the passage in Isaiah in which God says, “Your ways are not my ways,” and then goes on to describe how God’s ways are like the rain that comes down and waters the earth. Rain comes down and just disappears, and then up comes the life. It’s that type of patience.

In solitude, I learn to unhook myself from the compulsion to climb and push and shove. When I was pastoring that little church, I’d go off for some solitude and worry about what was happening to people and how they’re doing and whether they would get along without me. And of course, the great fear is that they’ll get along quite well without you! But you learn that’s okay. And that God’s in charge of that. You learn that he’s got the whole world in his hands.

Silence and solitude played a large part in my conversion. I wanted to play church basketball as a teenager, and to be on the team you had to do a “vigil,” which was 2 hours alone with a Bible and a lot of questions. It was one of the first times in my life I really sensed the presence of the living God speaking to and seeking after me.

I took a retreat at Merton’s monastery back in the 1980’s, when guests stayed in the old dormitory. The silence was thick. It wrapped around me and even though I was in a big room, I was intimidated. The silence the rest of the time was manageable, but that night silence was alive, big, ubiquitous.

This past year, my sabbatical gave me a lots of solitude and silence, and I wasn’t ready for it. I planned a week at St. Meinrad, and left after three days. The silence was driving me crazy. I traded it for the silence of the Brescia College library. More manageable for me.

In sabbatical orientation we talked about silence. They said don’t be afraid to sleep. Lots. That was good silence. I tend to forget that, and like too many adults, I get too little sleep. I should be asleep now.

My community is almost never silent, and when we are, we aren’t listening for God as much as we are listening for the next bit of trouble to break out. To really be silent, you have to stop listening. Go beneath the water and let the world above go on without you.

You aren’t silent to be pointed out as someone being silent. No, you are silent to pray. To hear. To hear the nothing that is the world in the presence of God, who is a crashing, blasting, exploding silence.

We’re a distracted world, piping in the noise any way we can. We now have devices that enable endless talking. We are in one another’s presence, but we can’t talk because we can’t be quiet. We have to talk into devices and listen to devices. Even at a seminar or prayer or a silent retreat.

Tell people they can’t have their talking gadgets and watch their faces.

This is one reason I’ve started playing chess again. It’s a game that values silence. It’s little noises are imperceptible to most people. Sighs. Clinking chessmen. Near silence, with movement only permitted in a complete respect for the game.

This is what prayer should be like. A canvas of silence, and on it we paint sparely, with few words and sounds. Our presence in His presence is noisy. His silence is absolute resolution to all our cacophony.

We gave up the tv. There won’t be silence, but there will be more silence of a kind. Less noise. More room to breath, sleep, read, pray, listen to the quiet.

Silence is no sacrament, no theological thing, no Protestant-Catholic thing. It is simply a good thing. A gift of immediacy; an invitation to the gifts that are as close as a heartbeat.

Lewis has Screwtape say that heaven is music, but hell is noise. Music has its pregnant, wondrous silences. Noise has nothing, but disturbs everything.

Silence is, in these times, incredibly cheap. Purchase some. Spend it wisely. Do something wonderful with it. Learn to be comfortable in it, rather than to run from it. Look into the silence, and see who is there, and how long he has been waiting.

Adam and the Genome 6: Chapter 3- Adam’s Last Stand? (Part 2)

strong>Adam and the Genome 6: Chapter 3- Adam’s Last Stand? (Part 2)

We continue our review of the book, Adam and the Genome: Reading Scripture after Genetic Science, by Dennis Venema and Scot McKnight. Today, Chapter 3- Part 2

In Part 1 of Chapter 3- Adam’s Last Stand?, Dennis summarized two methods of estimating the size of ancestral populations based on the present characteristics of that populations genome.  If there was a “bottleneck” of only two people then the genetic consequences would be severe: at maximum, four gene-forms (two from each parent) would be passed on by Adam and Eve. Interbreeding in the very small population after the bottleneck would result in the further loss of some alleles due to chance alone. In short, the genetic impact of such an event would leave a stamp on the genome of that species that would persist for tens of thousands of generations as mutations slowly generated genetic diversity.

This information can be used, then, to estimate the minimum number of people that could have existed at any point in time. First we ask how many different alleles there are for a number of genes within the current population. Correcting for the rate at which we know new forms of genes appear (mutation), we can calculate the minimum number of people needed to generate the current amount of diversity. Numerous studies analyzing many different genes all point to a bottleneck. However, these studies are all clear: during the bottleneck, there were several thousand individuals, not two.

The second method, independent of the first, is called “linkage disequilibrium”.  In population genetics, linkage disequilibrium is the non-random association of alleles at different loci (i.e. where on the chromosome the genes are located). Loci are said to be in linkage disequilibrium when the frequency of association of their different alleles is higher or lower than what would be expected if the loci were independent and associated randomly.  Based on the number of allele combinations that we observe in this population, how many ancestors do we need to invoke in order to explain what we observe?  In this case, rather than estimating mutation frequency, the calculations require knowing how often crossing over happens between two loci.  This is also something we can measure directly in humans and other animals, and there is a well-characterized relationship between chromosome distance between two loci and crossing over frequency.  As Dennis says:

“We’ve now done this sort of analysis for millions of pairs of loci (yes—millions) for each chromosome pair in our genome (all 23 pairs).  And what is the final tally after crunching all that data and counting up ancestors.  The results indicate that we come from an ancestral population of about 10,000 individuals—the same result we obtained when using allele diversity alone.”

The third and last method that Dennis outlines is called “incomplete lineage sorting” or ILS.  This method, like disequilibrium analysis, is virtually unaffected by varying estimations of mutation rates.

  • While humans and chimpanzees are the closet living relatives as species, we expect that some human genes will be closer matches to other apes such as gorillas.
  • When a population undergoes a speciation event some genes will have two or more alleles within the population as a whole.
  • As populations separate, they will both inherit that diversity. The two alleles are represented as shaded boxes on a phylogeny or “family tree” in Figure 3-5
  • The common ancestral population of gorillas, chimps, and humans has two alleles of one gene (“A” and “a”) within the population.
  • As the population separates into 1) human-chimp and 2) gorilla, both populations inherit both alleles.
  • In the gorilla lineage “a” is lost, leaving only variant “A”.
  • As chimps and humans split, “A” is lost and “a” is retained in the chimp lineage while in the human lineage “a” is lost and “A” is retained down to the present day.
  • The final pattern is:
    • Humans and gorillas have “A”
    • Chimps have “a”
  • Gorillas and humans now have more closely related alleles than either does with chimps.
  • This pattern lets us know that the common ancestral population of humans and chimps had both “A” and “a”
  • Also the common ancestral population of gorillas, humans and chimps had both “A” and “a”.
  • If you have a way to infer what genetic variants were present in a population, you have a way to estimate its population size.
  • Scientists predicted in advance of sequencing the gorilla genome, an ILS of 25%.
  • When gorilla genome was sequenced the observed rate was 30%.
  • Scientists predicted in advance of sequencing the orangutan genome, an ILS of 1%.
  • When the orangutan genome was sequenced the observed rate was 0.8%.
  • Those results indicated that the estimation of ancestral population size leading eventually to humans was accurate.

Dennis concludes:

“Put most simply, DNA evidence indicates that humans descend from a large population because we, as a species, are so genetically diverse in the present day that a large ancestral population is needed to transmit that diversity to us.  To date, every genetic analysis analyses estimating ancestral population sizes has agreed that we descend from a population of thousands, not a single ancestral couple.  Even though many of these methods are independent of one another, all methods employed to date agree that the human lineage has not dipped below several thousand individuals for the last 3 million years or more—long before our lineage was even remotely close to what we would call “human”.  Thus the hypothesis that humans descend solely from one ancestral couple has not yet found any experimental support, and it is therefore not one that geneticists view as viable.”

In the next section, Dennis addresses the question that genetics can’t answer: what did we look like and how did we behave?  That question can only be answered by the fossil record, which because of its nature cannot conclusively reveal who our direct ancestors might be; it can only show remains that would be those of close relatives.  At the time of publication of Origin of the Species by Darwin there were no known fossils that seemed to be intermediate between apes and humans.  A few Neanderthal remains weren’t well understood and were also very similar to modern humans.  At the time, there was a widespread expectation within the scientific community that an evolutionary lineage would be a ladder-like progression from one species to the next culminating in modern man.  You know the one I’m talking about; that looks like a police lineup (that has been endlessly parodied).

From Darwin’s ideas, scientists and the public expected there to be a series of “missing links” connecting humans to apes that could be found in the fossil record and that any such species would be direct ancestors of humans.  Since brain size was the obvious difference; scientist expected that “ladder” to show increasing cranial capacity i.e. evolution from the chin up and only then from the chin down.  This expectation would hamper research into human evolution for many decades.  One result of that false expectation was the fraudulent “Piltdown Man” with a human skull and an orangutan jaw with the teeth filed to shape them to the expected form.   As the paleontological data continued to accumulate the data increasingly showed that Piltdown man did not fit the pattern; that the pattern was indeed evolution from the chin down first.  Scientific suspicion of Piltdown man grew until the teeth filing was uncovered.  It should be noted for the record, that careful scientific investigation by evolutionary anthropologists eventually uncovered the fraud, not creation scientists doing “creation research”; although the creationist literature loves to cite Piltdown man as an example of how “science gets it wrong” and how we should “doubt science rather than the Bible when they conflict”.  It was “science” that eventually uncovered the fraud, but, as I’ve said before, the YEC are an irony-free community.

As we have seen for cetaceans, eventually a picture emerged that gives us a reasonable idea of how possibly our lineage changed as we parted ways with the lineage leading to chimpanzees.  Though chimps are our closest living relatives, there are a number of species in the fossil record known as “hominins” that are more closely related to us than to chimps.

“Probable hominins” like Ardipithecus ramidus, a species that lived in Africa about 4 million years ago (mya) had skeletal characteristics intermediate between upright walking and the climbing of trees, and a small cranial capacity of 300-350 cubic centimeters (cc) (modern humans are about 1,300-1,400 cubic centimeters).  Australopithecus afarensis (aka Lucy) about 3-4 million years ago shows further shifts toward walking and a cranial capacity of 400-550 cc.  Later still we see pre-modern Homo erectus (“Upright Man”) dating to about 1.8 mya with full bi-pedalism and a cranial capacity of 700 cc.

The Smithsonian has an insightful illustration with careful artist renderings:

In Dennis’ words:

“Similar to what we discussed regarding whales, we cannot be certain that any of these species is in fact a direct ancestor of present-day humans.  What these species show us is the probable path of our actual lineage, since these species are at least close relatives of our ancestral line.  The evidence thus suggests that our lineage over the past 4 million years passed through an Ardipithecine-like species, on to an Australopithecine-like species, and then through various shades of Homo until our species is first preserved in the fossil record 200,000 thousand years ago.  And as we have seen for languages, the process was a continuous one of average change within a population over time.  What we see in the fossil record matches up with what we see in our DNA.”

In other words, we have failed to reject the hypothesis that humans share a common ancestral population with apes.

• • •

Other posts in the series:

Scott Lencke: Evangelicalism’s World of Worship

First Presbyterian Church, Columbia, TN

Note from CM: Today we hear from the evangelical world and get a glimpse at what’s happening in evangelical worship. Thanks to Scott Lencke for sending along this piece. He’s on to something here that led many of us to move where traditions of liturgical, sacramental worship prevail. Scott blogs at Prodigal Thought.

• • •

Evangelicalism’s World of Worship
by Scott Lencke

I work at a modern music and ministry college – Visible Music College. We’re focused on training musicians, producers and managers in their musical field and faithful character to effectively impact the church and music industry. Because of this setting, I’m constantly thinking about worship, especially through the avenue of music within the collective church setting (yes, I’m happy that worship is bigger than music).

In this post, I wanted to offer some reflections on the evangelical world of worship.

What I notice day in and day out is that we are constantly focused on the internal, or what is happening on the inside of us. We see it as the most important aspect of worship. Of course, what is going on on the inside is important. Scripture makes that very clear.

May these words of my mouth and this meditation of my heart
    be pleasing in your sight,
    Lord, my Rock and my Redeemer. (Ps 19:4, emphasis added)

But the things that come out of a person’s mouth come from the heart, and these defile them. (Matt 15:18, emphasis added)

However, this focus on the internal also means we can easily disdain external practices.

This really comes to light when we get defensive about possible judgment for our response in worship, especially in the corporate setting. “Worship is about what’s going on in the heart, our motivations. It’s not about what you see on the outside. Don’t judge me!”

Again, I understand the point. However, we forget that, at least right across Scripture, the people’s response in worship did actually involve outward practices. Not occasionally or semi-regularly, but regularly.

My sense of why we hold this primary obsession with the internal is three-fold:

a) It was a massive pushback to “dead” ritualistic practices within more traditional settings of the church. We don’t want to become like those Catholics or Episcopalians.

b) We are products of modernist Enlightenment that channels everything through the internal thought process (“rationalism”).

c) There may also be some reaction against overly heightened expressions within a more Pentecostal or charismatic setting, perhaps because of a disdain for “emotionalism.” It’s interesting that the Pentecostal or charismatic settings were a movement and reaction against some of the overly-cerebral realities of the late 1800’s and early 1900’s where the church had begun to get entangled in Enlightenment perspectives.

I am constantly gripped by how actively involved the Hebrews were in worship. I’ve been reading through Leviticus this week and it involves a lot of active participation of bringing, doing, speaking, offering, etc. Not dead rituals, but rather expressions that were very important in the ancient setting that helped form the people. The Levitical measures are not important to us, but definitely to them. Of course, they can become dead rituals. But they don’t have to be.

Not only that, but the words used for praise in the Psalms have activity connected to them. Those are words such as shabach, tehillah, barak, halal, etc.

Because of our internal (and individualistic) focus in our western setting, we run to passages like John 4 – where we’re told that true worship is in spirit and truth – and we believe our primarily internal focus on worship is authenticated by Jesus himself. Worship is about the spirit, which is inside us, and it’s about truth, which is what we know (and we know in our heads and hearts). Thus, we see Jesus and the New Testament basically denouncing the old settings or worship and supporting a mainly internal focus on worship.

While true worship is in spirit and truth, this by no means throws out external and active practices. Again, go to the Psalms. We love the Psalms, right? The Psalms are ok. Leviticus, not so much.

But it’s the Psalms themselves – the “worship book” of the Scripture – that makes clear that activity and participatory practices are very important. Oh, and pretty much the full tenor of Scripture makes active and external expression a real part of our worship. Look at much of Paul’s letters where he touches on things, which is more than just 1 Corinthians 12-14. And don’t forget that the two passages I quoted above (from Ps 19 and Matt 15) speak of both external and internal realities.

A connected point that I’ve also become aware of is how non-sensory we are in our worship. Well, in today’s world, for some reason dimmed house lights with blue and purple stage lighting seems to be what creates the right “atmosphere” of worship (note the sarcasm). Still, we typically only involve the two senses of seeing and hearing in our worship. Yet the Hebrew setting involved all five senses, including touch, taste and smell. Read the Scripture and see how it is overflowing with touch, taste and smell in the gathered worship setting.

That’s a good question: How could we better engage all five senses in our worship gatherings today?

I believe that, as we engage in fully-orbed sensory expression, it will also help build active and outward expression in worship. Not that we create a setting by which folk are judged, but rather to open space for our whole selves to be involved in worship. Actually, by the mere fact of including something like The Lord’s Table in our worship we are calling people to actively express their faith and to do so in a very sensory experience. Have you ever thought about how all five senses are used in Communion? Perhaps we should celebrate it more than once a quarter or once a month.

In all, my evaluation is that we are not very holistic in the evangelical world of worship. We have lots of gadgets, gear, instrumentation, CD’s (or downloads), lighting, auditoriums, etc. We’ve got a lot of stuff in our world. But we are missing some real opportunities at engaging in an active, participatory worship that involves our whole response. This includes the internal and external; heart and body; sight, smell, hearing, taste and touch. This is worship in spirit and truth.

Klasie Kraalogies: As Mist Before the Sun: The Slow Relief of Unbelief (4)

Still Life with Bread and Wine, la Porte

Note from CM: Thanks to Klasie for sharing his story with us. This is the final installment.

• • •

AS MIST BEFORE THE SUN: THE SLOW RELIEF OF UNBELIEF
by Klasie Kraalogies

Part 4

When, therefore, we maintain that pleasure is the end, we do not mean the pleasures of profligates and those that consist in sensuality, as is supposed by some who are either ignorant or disagree with us or do not understand, but freedom from pain in the body and from trouble in the mind. For it is not continuous drinkings and revellings, nor the satisfaction of lusts, nor the enjoyment of fish and other luxuries of the wealthy table, which produce a pleasant life, but sober reasoning, searching out the motives for all choice and avoidance, and banishing mere opinions, to which are due the greatest disturbance of the spirit.

• Epicurus

♦︎

I will make prodigious use of quotations this week – because sometimes, why say something in ones own muddling prose, while it is possible to synthesize some so more mire succinct from other, greater minds.

Deconverting is easy – but changing one’s thought patterns, finding new view on the universe that makes sense is difficult. More difficult still is dealing with the internal emotional fallout – emotional patterns built up over nearly 4 decades takes some time to readjust to reality, once the veils have been removed. Blinding light causes the inner man to blink.

There are many things to find – how does the universe work? What about free will? How does one live? How does one endure suffering? And ultimately, what about death? I can on some things here. Last week someone ask about family – it is something I do not wish to speak about much in the public. Suffice to say, at least one of my children arrived at unbelief before me, the rest came of their own accord. I never attempted to become an evangelist, even in my own household. But my parents – they still don’t know. They live in the opposite hemisphere, and at their age, and especially with the state of health one of them is in, I simply do not bring the topic up, and skirt around issues. What good can be done anyway? But let’s leave that there.

I’m very glad you asked me that, Mrs. Rawlinson. The term `holistic’ refers to my conviction that what we are concerned with here is the fundamental interconnectedness of all things.

• Douglas Adams, Dirk Gently’s Holistic Detective Agency

I mentioned Spinoza. Between Spinoza and, funnily enough Douglas Adams’ Dirk Gently, I was quite convinced that we live in a deterministic universe. I am sorry, but there is no way around it – our emotional revulsion none withstanding. My university training in Dynamical Systems pointed the way to a useful definition – I started understanding reality as a, for all intents and purposes, a non-linear deterministic system. Meaning prediction is quite futile. Thus it appears as if we have free will.

Of course, James Gleick put it much better:

It struck me as an operational way to define free will, in a way that allowed you to reconcile free will with determinism. The system is deterministic, but you can’t say what it’s going to do next.

• James Gleick, Chaos: Making a New Science

OK – but how to live in this? I don’t mean things like being a conservative or a liberal – I pretty much accepted that the only way to deal with these matter is in a rationalistic manner (shades of John Stuart Milne, I know). I had already discovered that morality is part of our evolutionary inheritance – and without getting into the debate, which merits a few posts by itself, I refer you to Frans de Waal, the Dutch-American primatologist. A good place to start is The Bonobo and the Atheist.

But just – how to think about life? Eventually, I went back to Epicurus – who really got a bad rap, especially from the Early Church, who spread enormous falsehoods about Epicureanism and the Epicurean communities. Essentially, Epicureanism stands in sharp contrast to Hedonism. It states that you cannot add to pleasure, once you have eliminated pain (see quote above). Once you have eliminated hunger by simple good food, you add no pleasure by gorging yourself – which is the message of Hedonism and the modern way of indulgence. But he does add this – and here I failed dramatically in my religious life, because religion destroyed friendship after friendship:

We should look for someone to eat and drink with before looking for something to eat and drink.

Epicurus

In addition to the Epicureans, the Stoics are also helpful. Marcus Aurelius is most useful when discussing the continuing travails and fears of this life:

Never let the future disturb you. You will meet it, if you have to, with the same weapons of reason which today arm you against the present.

• Marcus Aurelius, Meditations

And so, of course, are the admonitions of his fellow Stoic, Epictetus:

He who laughs at himself never runs out of things to laugh at.

• Epictetus

Thus, the thing that caused my great anxiety had finally been resolved by well, story.

As a Christian, the spectre of death hung over me.  Hell chased me. Then – when I cast those beliefs aside, the fear of a final annihilation did the same. Which, as an aside is an interesting point, as it directs our thoughts to the very origin of our beliefs. Just think about that. It is of course ironic that I kept on fearing death, because I have had far more than my share of close encounters with the sharp scythe. Gunshot, food poisoning in the jungle, lightening, car accident… and no, I am not here to talk about that. Though somehow, I was lifted out of that fear when I met DEATH – the character, in Terry Pratchett’s Discworld.

LORD, WHAT CAN THE HARVEST HOPE FOR, IF NOT FOR THE CARE OF THE REAPER MAN?

• Terry Pratchett, Reaper Man

His ruminations in the books struck me hard:

Was that what it was really like to be alive? The feeling of darkness dragging you forward?

How could they live with it? And yet they did, and even seemed to find enjoyment in it, when surely the only sensible course would be to despair. Amazing. To feel you were a tiny living thing, sandwiched between two cliffs of darkness. How could they stand to be alive?

Obviously it was something you had to be born to.

• Terry Pratchett, Reaper Man

THAT’S MORTALS FOR YOU, Death continued. THEY GOT A FEW YEARS IN THIS WORLD AND THEY SPEND THEM ALL IN MAKING THINGS COMPLICATED FOR THEMSELVES. FASCINATING.

• Terry Pratchett, Mort

Yes – we come from a void, billions of years that we did not exist that somehow doesn’t scare us. Why ruin the life we have with the fear of the time after we are gone? In Reaper Man, DEATH himself finds that he is somehow mortal. His reaction is the best:

SEE! I HAVE TIME. AT LAST, I HAVE TIME. 

Albert backed away nervously.

‘And now that you have it, what are you going to do with it?’ he said.

Death mounted his horse.

I AM GOING TO SPEND IT.

• Terry Pratchett, Reaper Man

And so I come to the end of this series. To quote Terry Pratchett again –

‘Do you know what happens to lads that ask too many questions?”

Mort thought for a moment.

“No,” he said eventually, “what?”

There was silence.

Then Albert straightened up and said, “Damned if I know. Probably they get answers, and serve ’em right.

• Terry Pratchett, Mort

Instead of oblivion, I discovered life and light. I discovered courage to stand, and joy to be found. I renewed my fascination with the magnificence of this earth, and the universe (multiverse?) beyond. In life, in matter, and in the complicated, surprising, unpredictable beauty of the math behind it all. It might appear senseless – in the words of James Gleick:

The ceaseless motion and incomprehensible bustle of life. Feigenbaum recalled the words of Gustav Mahler, describing a sensation that he tried to capture in the third movement of his Second Symphony. Like the motions of dancing figures in a brilliantly lit ballroom into which you look from the dark night outside and from such a distance that the music is inaudible…. Life may appear senseless to you.

• James Gleick, Chaos: Making a New Science

And yet – it is fantastic. The existential fear need not be. Yes, we will meet the struggles, even if we must hold to the fading words of the such as Marcus Aurelius (seriously, read him). We will contend with the ups and downs of our internal personae.

And yet –

Dwell on the beauty of life. Watch the stars, and see yourself running with them.

• Marcus Aurelius

Region Inside the Large Magellanic Cloud, NASA

Open Forum: U.S. Health Care

Note from CM: We are going to close comments. I want to thank everyone who contributed today to a good discussion. Thanks for keeping things civil. Each of you have given the rest of us something to think about. We aren’t going to solve anything today, but discussions like this are essential. I encourage and challenge you to take whatever you are learning on this subject and write your congressional representative with your opinions about what he/she should do.

• • •

My vocation is in health care. Though I was in congregational ministry for years, even then I had an interest in the complementary “ministries” of spiritual/pastoral care and health care. The summaries of Jesus’ own ministry in the Gospels are wholistic as well:

Jesus went throughout Galilee, teaching in their synagogues and proclaiming the good news of the kingdom and curing every disease and every sickness among the people. (Matthew 4:23)

My wife is a nurse. I’ve always enjoyed visiting people in hospital and health care settings and when they were laid up or shut in at home for health reasons. I found joy in talking with doctors and health care professionals, feeling that we were partners in the work of providing care for people so that they might find healing and health in any number of ways.

When we began taking mission trips in the 1990’s, they were medical mission trips. Doctors and nurses joined our teams and while some of us focused on singing, testifying, and preaching, they held clinics and worked with local health care professionals in the towns and villages we visited.

I am passionate about health care. I am fortunate to work for an organization with a CEO who understands that this work is about serving our community to enhance health and well being and not to make huge profits for shareholders. The doctors who have served my family and me with our health needs have had this same spirit of public and personal service. We chose them largely for that very reason, and when we had to change doctors, it was often because they stepped away from doctoring because they either felt couldn’t function with integrity in the system or because they had family concerns of their own that required their compassionate presence and attention.

It is from this sacred, vocational, public service perspective that I view health care. If I had been more gifted and understood more when I was younger, I might have pursued a path of missionary medicine or service with an organization like Doctors without Borders.

As you might imagine, I have strong feelings about what is happening in Washington these days.

However, to me, the current debate is only part of a much bigger problem of not recognizing health care in the terms I have outlined above.

Instead we have invested it with all kinds of political buzzwords and concepts such as “freedom,” “the free market,” and an intrinsic distrust of “the government” and “socialism.”

As a result, we have one of the most expensive, wasteful, inefficient, and ineffective health care systems in the world. Tens of millions of people remain uninsured and without proper access to good health care. Administrative costs are outrageously high. The system is hopelessly complex and notoriously bad at what it’s supposed to do. Study after study shows U.S. health outcomes to be mediocre at best and in some cases, appalling bad.

As a Christian whose vocation is in the field of health care, this situation is intolerable to me.

See this 2014 study, for example, which found that the U.S. spends more than ten other industrialized countries but comes in dead last with regard to health outcomes.

What would I, as someone whose vocation is in health care and who is passionate about health care, want in an ideal health care system?

  1. Universal health care, with fair access for all people, including free choice of doctor and hospital for all, not as a privilege for the few
  2. Simplified, efficient, and cost-effective administration
  3. Private doctors, hospitals, and health care professionals continue to provide care.

In my perspective, the only answer that makes any sense going forward is one that provides universal health care with a single-payer system, sometimes called Medicare for all.

Here is the description of such a system by Physicians for a National Health Program:

Single-payer national health insurance, also known as “Medicare for all,” is a system in which a single public or quasi-public agency organizes health care financing, but the delivery of care remains largely in private hands. Under a single-payer system, all residents of the U.S. would be covered for all medically necessary services, including doctor, hospital, preventive, long-term care, mental health, reproductive health care, dental, vision, prescription drug and medical supply costs.

The program would be funded by the savings obtained from replacing today’s inefficient, profit-oriented, multiple insurance payers with a single streamlined, nonprofit, public payer, and by modest new taxes based on ability to pay. Premiums would disappear; 95 percent of all households would save money. Patients would no longer face financial barriers to care such as co-pays and deductibles, and would regain free choice of doctor and hospital. Doctors would regain autonomy over patient care.

Here’s a link to bill HR 676, the single-payer bill that is in Congress today.

One thing I’ve never understood is why economic conservatives aren’t out there leading the charge for this kind of system. Single-payer universal health care would be the greatest boon to business this country has ever seen. Can you imagine what businesses, large and small, could do with the extra money they would have by not having to provide health benefits for their employees? How many people would consider starting up new businesses if they didn’t have to negotiate the huge hurdle of providing health benefits to prospective workers?

This is why Warren Buffet once called health care “the tapeworm of the American economy.” It sucks life and vitality out of the business sector.

At any rate, there are literally hundreds of angles to this discussion.

I want to open it up to you today and have you state your opinions and arguments.

As we do, please remember what this site is all about. I am not primarily interested in marking off my political territory here and demonizing anyone who disagrees. In the realm of civic engagement there is always room for people of goodwill to come at things from a variety of angles and perspectives and to have vigorous discussions. As long as we are all committed to the common good, I have no problem with that.

And I am most interested, as a Christian, in trying to understand how something like the way we seek the health and well being of our families, our neighbors, and our communities grows out of a Jesus-shaped perspective on life.

So please listen well and seek wisdom in what you say. Don’t start calling people names or treating them with disdain. If that starts happening, comments will be deleted without explanation or apology.

Sermon: On the Verge of a Whole New Life (Lent II)

Omaha Ice Storm. Photo by Jan Tik

SERMON: Lent II
On the Verge of a Whole New Life

Now there was a Pharisee named Nicodemus, a leader of the Jews. He came to Jesus by night and said to him, ‘Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God; for no one can do these signs that you do apart from the presence of God.’ Jesus answered him, ‘Very truly, I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God without being born from above.’ Nicodemus said to him, ‘How can anyone be born after having grown old? Can one enter a second time into the mother’s womb and be born?’ Jesus answered, ‘Very truly, I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God without being born of water and Spirit. What is born of the flesh is flesh, and what is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not be astonished that I said to you, “You must be born from above.” The wind blows where it chooses, and you hear the sound of it, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.’ Nicodemus said to him, ‘How can these things be?’ Jesus answered him, ‘Are you a teacher of Israel, and yet you do not understand these things?

‘Very truly, I tell you, we speak of what we know and testify to what we have seen; yet you do not receive our testimony. If I have told you about earthly things and you do not believe, how can you believe if I tell you about heavenly things? No one has ascended into heaven except the one who descended from heaven, the Son of Man. And just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in him may have eternal life.

‘For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life.

‘Indeed, God did not send the Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.

• John 3:1-17

• • •

In about a month, God willing, we will welcome another grandchild into this life and into our family. Our daughter is expecting her third, and we know it is going to be a little girl, so she will have a son and two daughters.

This is our oldest daughter who’s going to have the baby. Our first child. She has made our life interesting from the day she was born. That was quite a day. What a coming into the world she had!

It was a Sunday in November in our little village in southern Vermont. The weather forecast was not encouraging. An ice storm was making its way toward us. My very pregnant wife and I went to church that morning — we lived right across the road from the church building — and worshiped with our little congregation. She was starting to feel some strange sensations.

That afternoon the storm blew in and we realized that the strange sensations had turned into painful, regular contractions. We called the hospital late in the day and they told us to come in.

This was going to be a challenge. We lived up in the mountains about 20 miles from town. Our regular route was a paved road down to a main highway that wound along the river into town. But that was the year they were rebuilding the covered bridge which we had to cross over on the way to town. It was closed, and the only route that would get us down and past the bridge was a steep unpaved gravel road that would likely be a nightmare covered in ice.

We didn’t know what to do. But we figured out who would. We called our friend Sonny, a neighbor up the road who, it seemed, was always helping people and could always figure things out in a pinch. Sonny came down to the house, we waited for a moment when Gail wasn’t doubled over in pain, and we loaded her into his 4-wheel drive pickup. He would take her down the steep gravel road and I would follow behind in my little Volkswagen Rabbit sedan.

We got to the top of the road, and it looked daunting. Sonny stopped and I got out of my car and walked up to the truck in the icy rain and asked what we were going to do. The ice was building up on the gravel and it looked like the fastest slide I ever saw. Sonny decided we would try going down the narrow shoulder. So that’s what we did. He put one set of wheels on the shoulder as far over as he could go and crept down the hill.

I remember he had to stop at least once as Gail had a contraction and maybe another time to take a look at the road and plan a route around some obstacle. For all his common sense and skill, Sonny was a nervous kind-of guy, and you should have seen the look on his face. I’m sure he was more scared than Gail and I were. But then again, we’d never done this before, so what did we know?

Somehow, we made it to the bottom of that icy hill. Sonny helped Gail and she stepped down gingerly from the truck just in time to have another contraction before she climbed in our little car. We had descended far enough on the mountain that the road wasn’t as slick as the hill we’d come down, and so we were able to make it the rest of the way.

When we arrived at the hospital we made our way to what they used to call a “birthing room,” which we had reserved in advance. It was simply a room with a bed and without all the equipment and monitors they have in regular labor rooms, and the husband was allowed to participate in the process and stay with mom and baby afterward. Going in we realized that we were part of a whole company of mothers giving birth that night. By the time we arrived, the hospital had run out of labor rooms, and women were on gurneys in the hallways, groaning and waiting for their turn as their partners tried to comfort them.

It was like a movie, I tell you.

Thankfully, it all ended happily with the birth of a little girl, and along with her we entered a new world, a new life that night. Out of the darkness, into the light. Out of the cold, into a warm world of love and belonging. Out of the storm, into a haven. Out of a daunting, challenging journey into another journey. We had no idea what new adventures, challenges and blessings were ahead of us. We went into that hospital a couple, we came out a family. A whole new world, a whole new life.

A man named Nicodemus, a prominent Jewish leader and teacher came to Jesus one night. As a Pharisee, I imagine he expected that this rabbi he met with would engage him in a discussion about the Bible and theological topics. But as I read this morning’s Gospel text, I get the idea that he soon found himself in an ice storm, feeling lost and wondering how he was going to make it to the bottom of the hill and back to some kind of normal place.

Nicodemus came to Jesus and then Jesus started talking to him about things like being “born from above,” and being “born anew,” about water and spirit and flesh, about winds that blow and you don’t know where they come from or where they go, about being “born of the Spirit,” and earthly things and heavenly things, and people ascending into heaven and descending from heaven, about someone called the Son of Man being lifted up like a Moses’s snake in the wilderness. About believing. About eternal life.

We are not told in today’s text how Nicodemus responded to all of this. The author breaks into the story in verse 16 and let us, the readers, know what this conversation is all about. It’s about God loving the world and about Jesus coming into the world to save it.

But I’m not sure Nicodemus got that out of this one bewildering, confounding conversation.

I have an idea this gifted Jewish leader and teacher was feeling as young and vulnerable, as confused and filled with wonder as we were realizing we had just experienced the miracle of birth and stood on the verge of a whole new life.

This is what Jesus does to people. You encounter him, expecting one thing, and suddenly it’s like a splash of cold, icy rain in your face. It’s like the butterflies in your stomach as you look down the icy hill and prepare to descend. It’s like the wind rising up out of nowhere, shaking the trees. It’s like hearing words you’ve heard before, but now they have a whole new meaning. It’s like watching a new baby emerge from her mother’s womb into dazzling light and the sound of voices and getting an unceremonious slap on your behind. You don’t know whether to laugh or cry.

Whatever Nicodemus felt that night, it must have seemed like the dawning of a new world. It must have been like coming out of the darkness into the light. It must have felt like being born anew into a whole new life of possibilities.

Have you met this Jesus?

I can’t think of a better time to approach him than during the Lenten season, the springtime, when new life is being born and the whole world is coming alive once more.

That’s what he came to do for us. He brings us out of the darkness into the light, out of the storm and into the warmth and love of a family. Free and forgiven. Born anew, born from above. A whole new start. A whole new life.

“For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life.

 ‘Indeed, God did not send the Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.”

• • •

Photo by Jan Tik at Flickr. Creative Commons license

The Internet Monk Saturday Brunch: 3/11/17 – Lenten Beer Fast 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.”

Welcome to a special edition of the Internet Monk Saturday Brunch. The last thing you might expect to be served at a Lenten brunch is beer, right?

Ah, but this is one of the reasons Internet Monk is such a special place. We know what our readers want and we know how to loosen tongues for good conversation around the table.

So welcome to this Lenten Beer Fast edition of our IM weekly soirée.

According to Crux:

Back in the 1600s, Paulaner monks moved from Southern Italy to the Cloister Neudeck ob der Au in Bavaria. “Being a strict order, they were not allowed to consume solid food during Lent,” the current braumeister and beer sommelier of Paulaner Brewery Martin Zuber explained in a video on the company’s website.

They needed something other than water to sustain them, so the monks turned to a common staple of the time of their region – beer. They concocted an “unusually strong” brew, full of carbohydrates and nutrients, because “liquid bread wouldn’t break the fast,” Zuber noted.

This was an early doppelbock-style beer, which the monks eventually sold in the community and which was an original product of Paulaner brewery, founded in 1634. They gave it the name “Salvator,” named after “Sankt Vater,” which “roughly translates as ‘Holy Father beer,’” Zuber said.

HERE is the account of a contemporary man who tried out the monks’ beer fast for himself.

And so, this fine Saturday, we join him and all the monks in raising a glass to the end of another week in Lent. Welcome to brunch!

LENTEN QUOTE OF THE WEEK

Or, as many have sung since…

WRONG TIME TO GIVE UP BEER…

Leandra Ruiz is crying in her beer. The woman from Harlingen, Texas entered an online contest to win a home delivery from Budweiser driven by their iconic Clydesdales.

Then she gave up beer for Lent. O ye of little faith.

Surprise, surprise, she won the Budweiser contest! And the whole neighborhood turned out as Ruiz watched the impressive horses trot down the street and pull up in front of her home to deliver the prize. As the winner, she even got a ride around the block.

Whaddya wanna bet she broke her Lenten fast to celebrate?

WRIGLEY GETS ITS OWN BEER

It used to be, whenever one thought of the Chicago Cubs, Old Style beer came to mind, and in Harry Caray’s day Budweiser came to the fore.

⚾︎

Well, last week the Chicago Cubs, Wrigley Field and Chicago-based Goose Island brewery (now owned by Anheuser Busch) expanded their partnership, announcing a Cubs-themed craft beer – the 1060 Wit. The brew will be unveiled on April 10 at Wrigley Field, and will only be available on draft at kiosks around the ballpark and at Goose Island’s taprooms on Fulton Street and Clybourn Avenue.

The press release described the beer like this: It is “inspired by traditional Belgian Wits, using a lot of unmalted wheat along with orange peel and coriander. It’s lightly fruity and a touch spicy with low bitterness that is a natural fit for the ballpark and refreshing on hot Chicago days.”

Doesn’t sound hardy enough for Lent, but in the bleachers? Yeah, I can go for that.

THE NEW “BEER HOTEL” — HAPPIEST PLACE ON EARTH?

And then there’s this, from the Washington Post:

There’s a craft beer company from Scotland called Brewdog that hasn’t sold any beer yet here in the United States. But it plans to. How to get the word out? Many business owners would resort to the traditional methods like advertising or marketing campaigns. But the owners at Brewdog have decided to do something different to create a buzz and build a community. They’re starting a hotel. A beer hotel.

Located in Columbus, Ohio and conveniently next to Brewdog’s 100,000 square foot brewery, guests at the company-owned hotel called The DogHouse will soon be able to enjoy certain amenities that only super-serious beer loving lunatics will appreciate.

According to the Daily Mail, the hotel will feature a “craft beer spa, complete with hop face masks, malted barley massages, “Hoppy Feet” pedicures, plus hop-infused shampoo and shower gels.” (hop-infused shower gels?). But that’s not all. Rooms will overlook the feeders inside the brewery and there will be mini-fridges filled with specially chosen craft beers…located in rooms and in the showers, of course. The brewery’s finest offerings will be on tap throughout the facility and guests can enjoy brewery tours as well. Oh, and let’s not forget the “deluxe beer-infused breakfasts, lunches and dinners, with beers matched to every course.” Yum. Burp.

I see a possible location for our first Internet Monk retreat!

FOOD AND WINE’S LIST OF THE 25 MOST IMPORTANT CRAFT BEERS EVER BREWED

To cap off our special emphasis today, here’s a ramble through the history of craft beer in the U.S., courtesy of Food and Wine. These are not necessarily the “best” craft beers today, but they represent important developments in the craft beer movement.

Here’s how F&W compiled the list:

To help better appreciate the history of American craft beer, we reached out to 21 experts from across the American beer scene, including legendary brewers like Ken Grossman and Jim Koch, industry representatives like Julia Herz, and veteran writers like Aaron Goldfarb and Joshua Bernstein.

We asked each voter to nominate five to seven American beers that they consider to be the “most important of all time.” The only stipulations were that the beer must have started production after 1960, and it must have met the generally-accepted definition of “craft beer” at the time it was introduced. Voters were limited to two beers from any one brewery and encouraged to diversify their choices across years, states and styles. In the case of brewers, they were allowed to vote for themselves; however, every single beer on this list received multiple votes, meaning a brewer’s self-endorsement only counted if it was seconded by another voter. The final order was determined strictly by the votes received, with the exception of any ties, at which point we used our editorial judgment to determine ranking.

Read the list and see what you think. And then, feel free to chime in. Which craft beer(s) got your attention and moved you to become a fan?

LIAR, LIAR…

According to an article at NBC News, “Reports of electronic cigarette batteries exploding have been documented across the country. Battery malfunctions have been known to cause burns on the hands and face, fractured bones and even loss of eyesight.”

It couldn’t have happened to a more stereotypical victim.

Stephen Gutierrez is a defense attorney in Florida who was representing a client in an arson case when his pants appeared to spontaneously combust, and he began to feel the heat. He rushed out of the courtroom with smoke pouring out of his pocket, and ran to the bathroom where he emptied some e-cig batteries from his pants and into a basin of water.

[Insert lawyer joke of your choice here.]

THE BOY WHO PLANTED TREES…

One of my all-time favorite stories is Jean Giono’s The Man Who Planted Trees, the tale of a shepherd who, day after day, planted seedlings in an effort to reforest an area in the foothills of the Alps. It’s a lovely tale that reinforces the practice of doing small acts of good over a long period of time to accomplish remarkable things.

There’s a young man today who’s taking this story seriously.

Nine year old Felix Finkbeiner was a fourth grade student in Uffing am Staffelsee, south of Munich, Germany, when his class studied climate change. The boy’s attention perked up, and he pursued the subject so passionately that he was invited to speak to the United Nations General Assembly as a teenager.

National Geographic reports that the young Finkbeiner, still not out of his teens, now leads “a remarkable environmental cause that has since expanded into a global network of children activists working to slow the Earth’s warming by reforesting the planet.”

Today Finkbeiner is 19—and Plant-for-the-Planet, the environmental group he founded, together with the UN’s Billion Tree campaign, has planted more than 14 billion trees in more than 130 nations. The group has also pushed the planting goal upward to one trillion trees—150 for every person on the Earth.

The organization also prompted the first scientific, full-scale global tree count, which is now aiding NASA in an ongoing study of forests’ abilities to store carbon dioxide and their potential to better protect the Earth. In many ways, Finkbeiner has done more than any other activist to recruit youth to the climate change movement. Plant-for-the-Planet now has an army of 55,000 “climate justice ambassadors,” who have trained in one-day workshops to become climate activists in their home communities. Most of them are between the ages nine and 12.

Truly, a little child shall lead them.

QUESTIONS OF THE WEEK

LENT WITH NEIL YOUNG: THE PRETTY SONGS

This old guitar ain’t mine to keep
Just taking care of it now
It’s been around for years and years
Just waiting in its old case
It’s been up and down the country roads
It’s brought a tear and a smile
It’s seen its share of dreams and hopes
And never went out of style

• This Old Guitar (from Prairie Wind)

Neil Young’s After the Gold Rush and Harvest were two of the albums most important to me in my coming of age years. At that time, I spent a lot of time learning to strum and pick my acoustic guitar, trying to write songs, and expressing my own feelings as a youth while “Mother Nature [was] on the run in the 1970’s.”

It was Neil Young’s folky, “pretty” songs that inspired me back then. The intimate poetry of his lyrics, his use of major 7th chords, his vulnerable voice — they all spoke to me in a deeply personal way.

Over the years, Neil Young has continued to produce appealing folk songs, some commercially successful, but others embedded like jewels in his many album releases. Here’s a list of 24 of my favorites from his career. It’s a great resumé.

  1. Expecting to Fly (with Buffalo Springfield)
  2. Tell Me Why (After the Gold Rush)
  3. Only Love Can Break Your Heart (After the Gold Rush)
  4. Helpless (with CSN&Y)
  5. Heart of Gold (Harvest)
  6. Old Man (Harvest)
  7. The Needle & the Damage Done (Harvest)
  8. See the Sky About to Rain (On the Beach)
  9. Borrowed Tune (Tonight’s the Night)
  10. New Mama (Tonight’s the Night
  11. Long May You Run (with Stills-Young Band)
  12. Comes a Time (Comes a Time)
  13. Lotta Love (Comes a Time)
  14. Sail Away (Rust Never Sleeps)
  15. From Hank to Hendrix (Harvest Moon)
  16. Harvest Moon (Harvest Moon)
  17. One of These Days (Harvest Moon)
  18. Dreamin’ Man (Harvest Moon)
  19. Silver & Gold (Silver & Gold)
  20. The Great Divide (Silver & Gold)
  21. The Painter (Prairie Wind)
  22. Falling Off the Face of the Earth (Prairie Wind)
  23. Here for You (Prairie Wind)
  24. This Old Guitar (Prairie Wind)

One of Young’s very best songs from the list is the utterly romantic “Harvest Moon,” from the 1992 album of the same name. Here’s the “Unplugged” version. Love the broom!