#258 A Poem for Halloween

Antichrist has the most disgusting plot description I've ever read.

But "chaos reigns" is stuck in my head.

#257 The Strictest Ethical Test

Richard Couto reviewing Peter Singer's The President of Good and Evil:

"The strictest ethical test is to judge our actions for their consequence on others and to judge others' actions toward us by their intentions. In contrast, the laxest is the opposite -- a stress on good intentions and a denial of the consequences of our actions."

That quote could be a springboard for a lot of discussion about ends, means, consequences, and intentions.

#256 Ratzinger on Belief

As a tie-in to the last post, here's Joseph Ratizinger (fast becoming my go-to theologian) on the "I believe" phrases within the creeds:

"It becomes evident that belief is not the result of lonely meditation in which the 'I', freed from all ties and reflecting alone on the truth, thinks something out for itself [as in philosophical reflection or Christian apologetics]; on the contrary, it is the result of a dialogue, the expression of a hearing, receiving, and answering that guides man through the exchanges of 'I' and 'You' to the 'We' of those who all believe the same way."

The bracketed words above are mine based on the surrounding context of the quote. According to him, the creeds did indeed grow out of the early Christian baptismal confession of "I believe in God... and in Jesus Christ... in the Holy Spirit" which was a response to the question of "Do you believe?"

#255 Creeds and Confessions

An essay question... Do creeds and confessions:

a) create future division,
b) recognize existing division,
c) create future unity,
d) recognize existing unity, or
e) some combination of the above?

Of course, the answer in general has to be e). But more simply, are creeds and confessions a net benefit, net detriment, or a straight-up wash, to the church and the gospel? That question is a historical question. But it leads to a practical question. Would it be beneficial to do produce more ecumenical (or otherwise) creeds at present or at any point in the future? Why? What can they do for us now, if anything? What can they lose for us now, if anything? How should they look if produced and to what purpose?

Historical examples include, but are not limited to, the early Ecumenical Creeds which define what I would consider to be historical orthodoxy; the Augsburg Confession, the Thirty-Nine Articles, and the Belgic Confession, which seem to be the three main documents of the Magisterial Reformation; and the Westminster Confession, the Savoy Declaration, and the 1689 Baptist Confession, which seem to be the three main documents of the Radical Reformation.

#254 The Earliest Christian Hymn

Via Mark Goodacre at Duke University, here is a video performance of the earliest Christian hymn containing both words and musical notation that has ever been found. The papyrus fragment was discovered in 1918 at Oxyrhynchus, Egypt, and dates back to the end of the 3rd century.

Here are the lyrics:

.. Let it be silent

Let the Luminous stars not shine,

Let the winds (?) and all the noisy rivers die down;

And as we hymn the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit,

Let all the powers add "Amen Amen"

Empire, praise always, and glory to God,

The sole giver of good things, Amen Amen.

And here is the YouTube performance:

#253 Will Smith Stars in Isaiah 37:9, The Movie

Yes, the Fresh Prince is going to star in a film version of Isaiah 37:9. The film will be named The Last Pharaoh and it will be a Braveheart-like epic set to be released in 2010. I found this out as I was reading Herodotus' Histories and came across an obscure reference to a king named Tirhakah, a Nubian, i.e. Ethiopian, king of the 7th century BC. The footnote by the editor said that this is the same Tirhakah that appears in the Bible. I was a little surprised because I had read the Bible and didn't remember this guy at all, so I Wikipedied him. And sure enough it's there. According to the Wikipedia article, one scholar credits Tirhakah's campaign against Sennacherib with shaping the western world because it prevented the Assyrian king from destroying Jerusalem and deporting its inhabitants. So we can see why such an obscure historical figure might have value for today's racial narrative, and thus box office value. After all, according to that scholar, Africa technically saved European civilization.

Tirhakah wasn't technically the last Pharaoh, by the way. Another point of interest is the Isaiah 37:9 is an exact duplication of II Kings 19:9. So Smith is therefore starring in the film version of II Kings 19:9 as well. Does anyone know if the theory is that the writer of Isaiah used II Kings as a source, or was it the other way around? Clearly somebody was quoting somebody else. I know some people posit one writer for Isaiah 1-39 and another (called Deutero-Isaiah) for 40-66. This passage occurs right at the end of the first.

#252 Interesting Links XXX

Conor Friedersdorf says there's no need to raise taxes on the rich. Instead just quit giving them stuff by means testing them. He's got some suggestions which I like.

In the humor section, Halden Dorge states why men shouldn't be ordained. If you notice, each of the items on the list takes a standard argument against women being ordained and flips it on its head. My favorites? #10 A man's place is in the army, #8 Their physical build indicates that men are more suited to tasks such as chopping down trees and wrestling mountain lions. It would be “unnatural” for them to do other forms of work.

I wouldn't say I'm on the fence on the death penalty. I'm just indifferent to change. Whatever the law happened to be, I'd be indifferent to change. But reading the much-talked about story of Cameron Todd Willingham makes me fine with doing away with it.

Sarah Palin: D-E-R-A-N-G-E-D.

Speaking of that crazy lady, look at these three quotes from John McCain. Ah, politicians!

Doug Bandow talks about the most foolish war of all time, World War I on the occasion of the death of Harry Patch, the last surviving British WWI veteran, at the ripe old age of 111. He quotes the Washington Times report on Patch:

"Mr. Patch did not speak about his war experiences until he was 100. Once he did, he was adamant that the slaughter he witnessed had not been justified. 'I met someone from the German side, and we both shared the same opinion: We fought, we finished and we were friends,' he said in 2007. 'It wasn’t worth it.' His most vivid memory of the war was of encountering a comrade whose torso had been ripped open by shrapnel. 'Shoot me,' Mr. Patch recalled the soldier pleading. The man died before Patch could draw his revolver. 'I was with him for the last 60 seconds of his life. He gasped one word – ‘Mother.’ That one word has run through my brain for 88 years. I will never forget it.'"

Halden Dorge cites Andrew Bacevich on the danger, yes danger, of good intentions. Interestingly, in the comments, James K.A. Smith says he sees Graham Greene's The Quiet American as a sort of parable on Augustine's City of God.

The Netherlands responds to our criticism of their social libertarianism. Apparently, we don't have our facts straight.

On the torture of Mohammad Jawad. "... she will cease to be great."

Warning, if you follow the link at this link, it will lead to a graphic image found in the ancient Roman city of Pompeii. Other graphic images were found at Herculaneum and surely other places in the Roman Empire. I pointed out in the last post that you only need to go back to the history of the Roman empire to see that the so-called "kids these days" aren't any worse than any other generation that walked the earth. Why is the picture relevant to students of the Bible? Because the question before our generation is whether Paul was against homosexuality as per genetics, or if he was against the type of sexual degradation (homo or otherwise) rampant in the Roman Empire. In our day we see a phenomena that Paul likely never witnessed: homosexuals living in committed monogamous relationships. So to him the picture at the linked link above was inextricably linked to the idea of homosexuality. What if he saw what we see? What then? And here's something to think about: both Pompeii and Herculaneum were destroyed by the eruption of Mt. Vesuvius. Jerry Falwell could've predicted that one!

#251 The Mark of the Lamb

A bad-ass quote:

"On the sixth day of the week, and the sixth hour, says St. John, the kingdoms of Christ and Antichrist looked one another in the face in Pilate's court, and the adherents of the False Prophet (Caiaphas) firmly wrote on their foreheads the mark of the Beast, when they said, 'We have no king but Caesar'... Christ's Friday victory is the supreme manifestation also of the Antichrist."

-- A. Farrer, A Rebirth of Images: The Making of St. John's Apocalypse, p. 259

With six words, these folks made a decisive pledge of allegiance and so received the mark of the beast. With three words, "Jesus is Lord," the Jews of the seven churches of Asia Minor would pledge allegiance to Christ and receive His mark. This is essentially Farrer's thesis: to receive a mark means to pledge allegiance.

Modern Christians are fascinated by the mysterious mark of the beast. But misinterpretation can grow out of our neglect for historical context when we treat the Bible as if it were a golden story book that simply dropped from heaven. Now, if any book of the Bible could be said to have dropped straight out of heaven, it's Revelation. Yet God unveiled his heavenly plan using earthly imagery. Using scripture and other ancient sources to interpret scripture can help us to have a historically and culturally grounded understanding of the connection between marks and allegiance in the ancient world. To paraphrase Ben Witherington, a text without context is just a pretext for whatever you want it to be.

I can come up with six sources which I think support Farrer's thesis that to receive a mark means to pledge allegiance.

First, the mark or seal is a dominant theme of the book of Revelation, but this passage should give an idea of the seal of Christ. Revelation 7:1-4:

"After this I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth, holding back the four winds of the earth so no wind could blow on the earth, on the sea, or on any tree. Then I saw another angel ascending from the east, who had the seal of the living God. He shouted out with a loud voice to the four angels who had been given permission to damage the earth and the sea: 'Do not damage the earth or the sea or the trees until we have put a seal on the foreheads of the servants of our God.' Now I heard the number of those who were marked with the seal, one hundred and forty-four thousand, sealed from all the tribes of the people of Israel."

Second, here's a contrasting mention of the Beast's mark. Revelation 14:9-10:

"A third angel followed the first two, declaring in a loud voice: 'If anyone worships the beast and his image, and takes the mark on his forehead or his hand, that person will also drink of the wine of God’s anger...'"

Third, we have extra-canonical historical precedent for a Jewish idea of sealing by mark specifically on the forehead. Pss. Sol. 15:6,9:

"The mark of God is on the righteous so that they may be saved.... the mark of destruction is on their [sinners] forehead."

Fourth, the precedent goes way back. Ezekiel 9:4-6:

"The Lord said to him, 'Go through the city of Jerusalem and put a mark on the foreheads of the people who moan and groan over all the abominations practiced in it.' While I listened, he said to the others, 'Go through the city after him and strike people down; do no let your eye pity nor spare anyone! Old men, young men, young women, little children, and women – wipe them out! But do not touch anyone who has the mark.'"

Fifth, if you need a non-Jewish reference, check out Herodotus' Histories 2.113 where he is discussing the story of Paris (of Trojan War fame) and how, after stealing Helen from the Spartans, had blown off course toward the coast of Egypt:

"On the shore there was - and in fact there still is - a sanctuary of Herakles to which anyone's servant may flee for asylum, have himself branded with sacred marks, and devote himself to the service of the god. This custom has been in effect since the beginning, and it is still the rule in my time."

Sixth, a more oblique reference, but for me, it's the clincher. Exodus 12:3-13:

"Tell the whole community of Israel, ‘In the tenth day of this month they each must take a lamb for themselves according to their families... Your lamb must be perfect, a male, one year old; you may take it from the sheep or from the goats. You must care for it until the fourteenth day of this month, and then the whole community of Israel will kill it around sundown. They will take some of the blood and put it on the two side posts and top of the doorframe of the houses where they will eat it. They will eat the meat the same night... I will pass through the land of Egypt in the same night, and I will attack all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both of humans and of animals, and on all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgment. I am the Lord. The blood will be a sign for you on the houses where you are, so that when I see the blood I will pass over you, and this plague will not fall on you to destroy you when I attack the land of Egypt.'"

With the lamb's blood, God was essentially providing a mark for his people. All they had to do was choose to apply the mark. In Egypt the whole community of Israel killed the perfect lamb around sundown. In Pilate's court, the whole community of Israel killed the perfect lamb around sundown.

He took the bread, broke it, gave it to his disciples and said, "This is my body."