I've always liked the Beatitudes. They lay the foundation and introduction to the Sermon on the Mount. It wasn't until very recently that I realized the very obvious fact that these are simply Jesus' teachings of the law and the prophets. I had made the connection with the main body of the sermon ("You have heard it said...") but I had to have the connection with the beatitudes poked right into my eye.
Here is Psalm 37:11 - "But the meek will inherit the land and enjoy great peace." Sounds a whole lot like "Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth", eh? That was when I realized that Jesus was taking a whole swath of the teaching of the prophets and encapsulating them for the average person in a very succinct sermon. Jesus was truly a brilliant teacher and it is no mystery why his followers called him "Rabbi" - despite his vocation of carpenter.
Much of the beatitudes can be found replayed in Isaiah who was, in my estimation, one of the most cogent, complete and far-reaching prophets in all of scripture. He was also prolific. He covered the specifics of his contemporary political and spiritual situation (early chapters and throughout), the birth of Christ (ch 7), the death of Christ (ch 55) and he pairs the judgment of God with His promise, often in the same chapter. It would be easy to spend a lifetime just studying Isaiah and never reach the bottom of its depth.
It is only in the past year or so that I have been able to really reach back through the Hebrew scriptures and very easily link them to the New Testament. The more I read the former, the more I see the stories, people and concepts reflected in the words of the latter. Jesus didn't change humanity's relationship with God, but he did change how we relate to Him. The Sermon on the Mount spells that out very clearly and Jesus connects the old with the new in brilliant fashion.
Friday, September 02, 2005
Thursday, September 01, 2005
Spooky Action at a Distance
I've always been a big believer in general revelation. That is, God reveals himself and speaks to us through His creation. I think Paul lays out a pretty solid argument for this in his letter to the Romans "For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse." (1:20)
Jesus uses nature quite a bit in his parables when teaching and I believe that not only could God's fingerprint NOT be on His creation, but He built in these analogies to give us even if we never had the written or spoken word.
So here is my hypothesis: as we learn more and more about God's creation, we learn more and more about God. Ancient peoples couldn't see the microscopic, let alone conceive of quantum mechanics - and why should they? Understanding relativity is of little use when growing crops and herding animals. Yet, we have been given the great opportunity to see farther and smaller and great minds explore the strange world of quarks, atoms and wavparticleal duality.
This is leading somewhere, I promise. You see, yesterday during prayer we began to pray for those abroad, specifically in Oaxaca. It was brought to my mind that we are bound to those people and that place and that what happens here affects what happens there and vice-versa. I suppose you could extend that idea to prayer in general. Our hope is that our words are heard by God and have an effect on people and places far away from us. As I was praying, I was reminded of "spooky action at a distance."
Spooky action at a distance (and I don't claim to know much more than rudimentary basics) essentially works by a process of entanglement. Somehow two atoms get entangled so that the state of one is known if the state of the other is known even if the two arseparateded by great distances (theoretically.) Changing the state of one of the atoms also changes the state of the other.
Now I'm not sure this is general revelation, but I contend that there is "spiritual spooky action". God entangles us with other people and places spiritually and therefore empowers us to affect them via intercessary prayer and the state of one place somehow affects the state of the other. This is most certainly a bit on the fringe of my thinking and all very hypothetical (which means it bears testing out) but it seems to have an intuitive sense to me. Paul writes to the Corinthians that we are one body - if one part hurts, the whole thing hurts, if one part celebrates, the whole part celebrates. Even the concept of the "sins of the fathers" seems to bind people together not only through space but time.
I wish I was much more versed in physics, especially at this level, but the more I learn about it, the more I see ties to who God is and how he works. That makes sense, though. How can we not see the marks of the Creator upon creation?
Jesus uses nature quite a bit in his parables when teaching and I believe that not only could God's fingerprint NOT be on His creation, but He built in these analogies to give us even if we never had the written or spoken word.
So here is my hypothesis: as we learn more and more about God's creation, we learn more and more about God. Ancient peoples couldn't see the microscopic, let alone conceive of quantum mechanics - and why should they? Understanding relativity is of little use when growing crops and herding animals. Yet, we have been given the great opportunity to see farther and smaller and great minds explore the strange world of quarks, atoms and wavparticleal duality.
This is leading somewhere, I promise. You see, yesterday during prayer we began to pray for those abroad, specifically in Oaxaca. It was brought to my mind that we are bound to those people and that place and that what happens here affects what happens there and vice-versa. I suppose you could extend that idea to prayer in general. Our hope is that our words are heard by God and have an effect on people and places far away from us. As I was praying, I was reminded of "spooky action at a distance."
Spooky action at a distance (and I don't claim to know much more than rudimentary basics) essentially works by a process of entanglement. Somehow two atoms get entangled so that the state of one is known if the state of the other is known even if the two arseparateded by great distances (theoretically.) Changing the state of one of the atoms also changes the state of the other.
Now I'm not sure this is general revelation, but I contend that there is "spiritual spooky action". God entangles us with other people and places spiritually and therefore empowers us to affect them via intercessary prayer and the state of one place somehow affects the state of the other. This is most certainly a bit on the fringe of my thinking and all very hypothetical (which means it bears testing out) but it seems to have an intuitive sense to me. Paul writes to the Corinthians that we are one body - if one part hurts, the whole thing hurts, if one part celebrates, the whole part celebrates. Even the concept of the "sins of the fathers" seems to bind people together not only through space but time.
I wish I was much more versed in physics, especially at this level, but the more I learn about it, the more I see ties to who God is and how he works. That makes sense, though. How can we not see the marks of the Creator upon creation?
Wednesday, August 31, 2005
Writer's Block
I haven't been writing much lately - my muse seems to have left me. I am trying to force myself to write more, though, so that this writing muscle doesn't atrophy. You may see random posts up here as I rant about something or brain dump on some obscure topic. This is me just trying to get the pump started again.
I'll be looking for more extended topics (e.g. Lord's Prayer, Job, etc.) that I can spend a few days wrapping my head around, but until then I'll keep blasting out one-offs. August is the month of dog-days, anyway, right? Of course, tomorrow is September, so I better get my brain in gear.
At any rate, I hope to increase the frequency of posts once again to several times a week rather than the one or two I seemed to have found myself in.
I'll be looking for more extended topics (e.g. Lord's Prayer, Job, etc.) that I can spend a few days wrapping my head around, but until then I'll keep blasting out one-offs. August is the month of dog-days, anyway, right? Of course, tomorrow is September, so I better get my brain in gear.
At any rate, I hope to increase the frequency of posts once again to several times a week rather than the one or two I seemed to have found myself in.
Wednesday's Big Idea: Psalm 42
This is one of those psalms made famous in song - "As the deer panteth for the water, so my soul longeth after thee" and "Why so downcast, oh my soul? Put your hope in God". The title says it is of the Sons of Korah, but it sounds very similar to David's voice in many of the psalms previous.
It starts out with the cry of the author's soul - it thirsts and hungers for God. The author relays a longing to go and be with God. This is truly a lament as the writer looks back on his past, feels the oppression of the present and searches for hope in the future. Yet, we are able to pray through this psalm which pairs so nicely with Job and see how the eternal overshadows the temporal even in the midst of persecution.
All around the writer people are speaking doubt "Where is your God?". He himself feels forgotten by God and mourns his current circumstances. Still, in all this he responds to poison with the antidote "Put your hope in God, for I will yet praise him, my Savior and my God." Nowhere else is there a place to turn, and I can't help but think the author knows that he is not forgotten by God, but only feels that way.
Psalm 43 continues the dialogue (and is often considered part of 42) and is worth exploring. In some ways, it seems like he is asking a rhetorical question " Why must I go about mourning, oppressed by the enemy?" The proper response is "I mustn't" as he lifts up God as his refuge, stronghold and vindicator. Do the circumstances of life really indicate a rejection from God? Isn't this Job's complaint? Why have you rejected me? God, of course, hadn't rejected Job. Quite the contrary - God had chosen Job. Both Job and the author of these psalms throw a pity party, and not without justification, but their choice was either to wallow in their pity or recognize it for what it is and move beyond the temporal. "Put your hope in God, for I will yet praise him, my Savior and my God."
It starts out with the cry of the author's soul - it thirsts and hungers for God. The author relays a longing to go and be with God. This is truly a lament as the writer looks back on his past, feels the oppression of the present and searches for hope in the future. Yet, we are able to pray through this psalm which pairs so nicely with Job and see how the eternal overshadows the temporal even in the midst of persecution.
All around the writer people are speaking doubt "Where is your God?". He himself feels forgotten by God and mourns his current circumstances. Still, in all this he responds to poison with the antidote "Put your hope in God, for I will yet praise him, my Savior and my God." Nowhere else is there a place to turn, and I can't help but think the author knows that he is not forgotten by God, but only feels that way.
Psalm 43 continues the dialogue (and is often considered part of 42) and is worth exploring. In some ways, it seems like he is asking a rhetorical question " Why must I go about mourning, oppressed by the enemy?" The proper response is "I mustn't" as he lifts up God as his refuge, stronghold and vindicator. Do the circumstances of life really indicate a rejection from God? Isn't this Job's complaint? Why have you rejected me? God, of course, hadn't rejected Job. Quite the contrary - God had chosen Job. Both Job and the author of these psalms throw a pity party, and not without justification, but their choice was either to wallow in their pity or recognize it for what it is and move beyond the temporal. "Put your hope in God, for I will yet praise him, my Savior and my God."
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)