“How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born?”
Nicodemus famously raised this somewhat childish objection to Jesus’ declaration that he needed to be born a second time in order to see the kingdom of God. And often Nicodemus is written off as being a little slow on the uptake, that he didn’t realize Jesus was talking metaphorically. Come on, Nick. Jesus is not talking about real birth; he’s trying to use a picture to help you understand. Don’t you get it? Perhaps Jesus’ answer to his question is not “Whoa, where did that come from?” but rather “You’re thinking along the right lines, consider this: ‘unless one is born of water and the spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.’” The problem is not that Nicodemus is looking for a womb, but rather where he is looking for that womb. He thinks he should look for a womb found in a mother, when in reality he should look for the womb found in the Spirit.
And where is that womb found? Look for the water. Where the water is, there the Spirit hovers. Genesis records it nicely: “And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.” There in those first waters the Spirit brought forth the creation. This was the first great birth. And now we have Jesus declaring that man needs to be born a second time. And that includes the creation. That same creation in the beginning needs those waters of the Spirit again. The world needs a new womb of water.
Fittingly, the Lord created the world to be filled to the brim with His grace and so it reflects His creative work in very tangible ways. This includes wombs and births. The common signal that a birth is about to happen should come to mind: “My water broke” is what women say. Technically, this is Amniotic fluid, which is mostly water and surrounds the new creation from two weeks after conception to a short time before delivery. It is not an accident that water plays a hand in this birth. Nicodemus would have known about this and so he is right to be looking for a womb.
This brings us to Baptism; the event we have been circling around without naming, particularly, immersion Baptism. What an elegant way to tie these threads together. The answer to Nicodemus’s question: “Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb?” is not far from the truth. Yes, the man must enter the womb a second time. He must enter the womb of water so the Spirit can hover over him and bring forth a new creation. And this is visibly and tangibly shown in immersion Baptism. The man was out of the water; now he is in the water; now he is fully covered by the water.
“Look, Billy there’s the creation story. See the water? The Spirit hovers over the water because He is at work on a new creation. Watch the man as the Spirit brings forth the new creation. See, the man is being born a second time. That’s what Nicodemus was asking about. And this is what Jesus meant.”
And so Nicodemus might seem to be a little childish with his question, but is that really so bad? We must become as little children in order to enter the kingdom of God and the only way to do that is to be born a second time.
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Thursday, June 11, 2009
The Great Emergence
I just plowed through the first half of the newest book by Phyllis Tickle (What a name). In the first two chapters, she provides a simple scope of Christian history for the last two thousand years, hitting the key events that occurred every five hundred years: The Great Reformation (1517), The Great Schism (1054), and Gregory the Great/The Council of Chalcedon (540/451). (Notice they all have the word great in them; she notes this too) Her brief sketch makes more connections than I have seen in a while; her work here is worth the price of admission.
In this section, she briefly highlights three key developments in all three events. First, a more vital form of Christianity emerges. Second, the organized expression of Christianity is reconstituted into a more pure and less ossified expression of its former self. Third, Christianity spreads dramatically further.
For example, in the Great Schism the the East and the West divided and the East continued on its own path with out the Western church. The Eastern church has continued strong; the Western church reestablished itself and was strengthened also. Ultimately, Christianity spread. In the Reformation, the Church again divided and a more vital form of Christianity emerged: Protestantism. The Roman Catholic Church was changed and reconstituted itself in a better way with its Counter-Reformation. Christianity again spread: America.
It appears that this pattern holds well in these events. She walks through the Reformation in greater detail because of its proximity to our time. She highlights the influence of technology on the spread of the Reformation. She mentions the printing press and intrigingly the the fall of Constantinople in 1453 as two key events that pushed the Reformation. The Fall of Constantinople was important because it forced Eastern Christians into the West away from the Muslims coming in. This brought Greek and more of the classics to the West: Homor, Aristotle, Euclid, Ovid, Cicero, etc. This is another key pattern in each of these great events in history.
In this study, the question of Authority comes out of each movement: who is the authority? Tickle says that the same question is being asked in our time in two ways: What is human consciousness and what is the relation of all religions to one another.
In this section, she briefly highlights three key developments in all three events. First, a more vital form of Christianity emerges. Second, the organized expression of Christianity is reconstituted into a more pure and less ossified expression of its former self. Third, Christianity spreads dramatically further.
For example, in the Great Schism the the East and the West divided and the East continued on its own path with out the Western church. The Eastern church has continued strong; the Western church reestablished itself and was strengthened also. Ultimately, Christianity spread. In the Reformation, the Church again divided and a more vital form of Christianity emerged: Protestantism. The Roman Catholic Church was changed and reconstituted itself in a better way with its Counter-Reformation. Christianity again spread: America.
It appears that this pattern holds well in these events. She walks through the Reformation in greater detail because of its proximity to our time. She highlights the influence of technology on the spread of the Reformation. She mentions the printing press and intrigingly the the fall of Constantinople in 1453 as two key events that pushed the Reformation. The Fall of Constantinople was important because it forced Eastern Christians into the West away from the Muslims coming in. This brought Greek and more of the classics to the West: Homor, Aristotle, Euclid, Ovid, Cicero, etc. This is another key pattern in each of these great events in history.
In this study, the question of Authority comes out of each movement: who is the authority? Tickle says that the same question is being asked in our time in two ways: What is human consciousness and what is the relation of all religions to one another.
Thursday, June 04, 2009
The Voice of a Character
When creating a character, choosing the right words is important because words show and reveal the character of the person. Words do this in two ways: first, which words the character uses and second, how those words are put together.
For example:
Know-it-all, Smart person: “It is a well known fact that birds congregate in the early autumnal light for the purpose of exploration pertaining to insects of a nutritional value.
Down-to-earth, Farmer: “Those birds like to get up early so they can catch some big, juicy worms for themselves.”
Urgent, emphatic, short choppy sentences: “The birds are eating the worms. They got to them early this morning.”
Pleasant, humorous, witty, comic tone: “That birds rise early in the morning to eat worms is a phenomenon beyond my expertise. It sounds about as delightful as getting up in the morning to give an elephant a bath. Not that I have ever experienced this thing called early morning. And, come to think of it, nor have I ever left my pillow during this thing called morning. I leave that sort of thing to the birds, as the saying goes.”
Notice the use of commas in the last one. Pauses reveal character too.
For example:
Know-it-all, Smart person: “It is a well known fact that birds congregate in the early autumnal light for the purpose of exploration pertaining to insects of a nutritional value.
Down-to-earth, Farmer: “Those birds like to get up early so they can catch some big, juicy worms for themselves.”
Urgent, emphatic, short choppy sentences: “The birds are eating the worms. They got to them early this morning.”
Pleasant, humorous, witty, comic tone: “That birds rise early in the morning to eat worms is a phenomenon beyond my expertise. It sounds about as delightful as getting up in the morning to give an elephant a bath. Not that I have ever experienced this thing called early morning. And, come to think of it, nor have I ever left my pillow during this thing called morning. I leave that sort of thing to the birds, as the saying goes.”
Notice the use of commas in the last one. Pauses reveal character too.
Friday, May 29, 2009
Tree of Tales: Mythopoeia
Mythopoeia: "Story out of which ever varying meanings will grow." -Tolkien.
Kristin Johnson in "Tolkien's Mythopoesis" found in Tree of Tales, recounts Tolkien's view of story (mythopoeia) and how it shapes those who study and read them. How the old stories teach their readers to view the world as a story, leading their readers to understand the story they are in with a more keen vision. She sets forth that the wise and good characters in Tolkien's great work are the ones who read the stories and remember them so that they can understand what the Ring is and what to do with it and ultimately, how to defeat the Enemy. It is those characters who study and love the old stories who can resist the Ring's power and can perceive the world a right.
"The book begins with a Middle-earth from which story is rapidly being lost. One of Bilbo's distinguishing features is that he is both a story collector and a storyteller: a story lover. The reason Frodo, Sam, Pippin, and Merry are able to journey (Tolkien repeatedly reminds us) is because they have benefited from Bilbo's love of stories and likewise love those stories. Although they, like all hobbits, also love stories about themselves, there is something more in many of Bilbo's tales. Knowing and believing the elves, for instance, not only makes these hobbits somehow different from other hobbits but also causes them to look about with different eyes." -pg. 34
"Celeborn, "the wisest of the elves," propounds: "Do not despise the lore that has come down from the distant years: for oft it may chance that old wives keep in memory word of things that once were needful for the wise to know." And thus a fragment of a rhyme, "repeated without understanding" by an "old wife" in Gondor, teaches Gandalf of the healing powers of the wild herb kingsfoil--thus saving the lives of Faramir, Eowyn, and Merry." -pg. 35
"Tolkien goes to some length to make clear that Boromir, brave and good as his initial intent might be, severly handicaps the Fellowship because he "care[d] little for lore, save the tales of old battles." Faramir was "otherwise in mind...a lover of lore and of music, and therefore by many in those days his courage was judged less than his brother's. But it was not so...He welcomed Gandalf at such time as he came to the City, and he learned what he could from his wisdom." -pg. 35
Kristin Johnson in "Tolkien's Mythopoesis" found in Tree of Tales, recounts Tolkien's view of story (mythopoeia) and how it shapes those who study and read them. How the old stories teach their readers to view the world as a story, leading their readers to understand the story they are in with a more keen vision. She sets forth that the wise and good characters in Tolkien's great work are the ones who read the stories and remember them so that they can understand what the Ring is and what to do with it and ultimately, how to defeat the Enemy. It is those characters who study and love the old stories who can resist the Ring's power and can perceive the world a right.
"The book begins with a Middle-earth from which story is rapidly being lost. One of Bilbo's distinguishing features is that he is both a story collector and a storyteller: a story lover. The reason Frodo, Sam, Pippin, and Merry are able to journey (Tolkien repeatedly reminds us) is because they have benefited from Bilbo's love of stories and likewise love those stories. Although they, like all hobbits, also love stories about themselves, there is something more in many of Bilbo's tales. Knowing and believing the elves, for instance, not only makes these hobbits somehow different from other hobbits but also causes them to look about with different eyes." -pg. 34
"Celeborn, "the wisest of the elves," propounds: "Do not despise the lore that has come down from the distant years: for oft it may chance that old wives keep in memory word of things that once were needful for the wise to know." And thus a fragment of a rhyme, "repeated without understanding" by an "old wife" in Gondor, teaches Gandalf of the healing powers of the wild herb kingsfoil--thus saving the lives of Faramir, Eowyn, and Merry." -pg. 35
"Tolkien goes to some length to make clear that Boromir, brave and good as his initial intent might be, severly handicaps the Fellowship because he "care[d] little for lore, save the tales of old battles." Faramir was "otherwise in mind...a lover of lore and of music, and therefore by many in those days his courage was judged less than his brother's. But it was not so...He welcomed Gandalf at such time as he came to the City, and he learned what he could from his wisdom." -pg. 35
Thursday, May 28, 2009
Thoughts on Economics in One Lesson
Hazlitt’s book sets forth capitalistic economics in a very simple format. He starts with a very basic illustration and then walks through several more complicated examples from various parts of the economy, anything from Public projects to Minimum Wage Laws. He wrote the book in 1946 and republished it in 1979, adding one chapter about the economy at that time. Even though it is dated by a few decades, his thoughts are very applicable to today’s economy, especially the economic problems facing the nation right now. Overall, it is a good introduction into basic practical problems an economist faces when considering how wealth moves around in society. A few helpful examples from his book.
First, his lesson: when looking at the economy two important factors need to be considered before trying to solve any problem. First, the economist needs to indentify all the ramifications of any economic action. Second, the economist needs to identify every group involved in the situation and not just focus on the special interests of one group. These two principles can be summarized by saying: every economist needs to understand the whole picture and recognize the implications of any action not only on this little area directly in front of him, but also on other groups today and in the future. This principle may be simple to understand, but as Hazlitt begins to apply it, he makes it clear that economics is not about quick and simple solutions. Rather, it is a long and hard process which requires wisdom, skill, and time; something most people do not want to work at or wait for.
Second, one of Hazlitt’s applications: Federal loans. He starts the discussion, showing how these violate the lesson of his book. These loans focus on one particular group’s needs and issues while at the same time forgetting the effects this has on the other groups in the economy. Simply put: Where does the loan come from? Any loan supplied by the government is a loan coming not from the government, but from the people whom the government taxes, which means the people really making the loan are the taxpayers.
This action Hazlitt says hurts the economy in two ways: first, it pulls money from the person who has a good business and is helping the economy, and second, it gives money to a person who has a bad business and who is not helping the economy. This means that the government is taking money away from the good business, which could be using the money to buy more products and encourage more business in the economy. Instead, the money is being redistributed by the government to another business which is hurting the economy. And the important thing to realize is that this bad business is a risky investment and may not be able to repay the loan back, which means that the taxpayers’ money probably will not come back to the taxpayers. This means the good business just lost money it could have used in the economy. Instead of the good business using the money, the government took it and buried it in the bad business. Not the smartest may to handle money. Hazlitt makes the point: “This is only another way of saying that the government lenders will take risks with other people’s money (the taxpayers’) that private lenders will not take with their own money” (42). A good private investor would realize the risks involved in loaning to a poor business, but the government doesn’t see that because the government does not have a limited income; if it loses money it can get more money by taxing. There are no consequences for the government’s actions.
This issue is very applicable to today’s situation. This morning on the radio I heard about GM’s possible bankruptcy and the $20 Billion that the government had lent to them to keep their business going. The news reporter explained that the company was making more cars than people were buying: they sold only 2 Million cars in 2008, 1 Million less than 2007. What is interesting, as the reporter noted, is the government is handling the situation by giving money to this company in order to keep it afloat and that money is coming from taxpayers. Essentially, the taxpayers are being forced to buy cars which they will not have or use. The alternative is to let the company do its thing and hope the public begins to buy more cars. This tactic is long term looking and means that the company will probably fail. The government can “solve” the problem now and so everyone is gung-ho for it. But this violates Hazlitt’s principle of looking at all who are affected and looking long term before trying to fix the situation.
A key question that Christians need to be asking themselves is how much of Hazlitt’s principle is good and what needs to be tossed? Should we really allow a company to sink if it is having financial problems? What about all those people who are losing their jobs? Often Hazlitt comes off sounding like an economic evolutionist: survival of the fittest is the only the way the economy succeeds. Even though he wants to look at every aspect of the economy when a problem arises, he is very individualistic and autonomous when talking about businesses failing. There is more at play than just a company going down: there are real people who are losing jobs and money. What should the Church do in such a situation? How does the Body of Christ help in this hard circumstance?
Hazlitt, Henry. Economics in One Lesson. New York: Three Rivers Press, 1979.
First, his lesson: when looking at the economy two important factors need to be considered before trying to solve any problem. First, the economist needs to indentify all the ramifications of any economic action. Second, the economist needs to identify every group involved in the situation and not just focus on the special interests of one group. These two principles can be summarized by saying: every economist needs to understand the whole picture and recognize the implications of any action not only on this little area directly in front of him, but also on other groups today and in the future. This principle may be simple to understand, but as Hazlitt begins to apply it, he makes it clear that economics is not about quick and simple solutions. Rather, it is a long and hard process which requires wisdom, skill, and time; something most people do not want to work at or wait for.
Second, one of Hazlitt’s applications: Federal loans. He starts the discussion, showing how these violate the lesson of his book. These loans focus on one particular group’s needs and issues while at the same time forgetting the effects this has on the other groups in the economy. Simply put: Where does the loan come from? Any loan supplied by the government is a loan coming not from the government, but from the people whom the government taxes, which means the people really making the loan are the taxpayers.
This action Hazlitt says hurts the economy in two ways: first, it pulls money from the person who has a good business and is helping the economy, and second, it gives money to a person who has a bad business and who is not helping the economy. This means that the government is taking money away from the good business, which could be using the money to buy more products and encourage more business in the economy. Instead, the money is being redistributed by the government to another business which is hurting the economy. And the important thing to realize is that this bad business is a risky investment and may not be able to repay the loan back, which means that the taxpayers’ money probably will not come back to the taxpayers. This means the good business just lost money it could have used in the economy. Instead of the good business using the money, the government took it and buried it in the bad business. Not the smartest may to handle money. Hazlitt makes the point: “This is only another way of saying that the government lenders will take risks with other people’s money (the taxpayers’) that private lenders will not take with their own money” (42). A good private investor would realize the risks involved in loaning to a poor business, but the government doesn’t see that because the government does not have a limited income; if it loses money it can get more money by taxing. There are no consequences for the government’s actions.
This issue is very applicable to today’s situation. This morning on the radio I heard about GM’s possible bankruptcy and the $20 Billion that the government had lent to them to keep their business going. The news reporter explained that the company was making more cars than people were buying: they sold only 2 Million cars in 2008, 1 Million less than 2007. What is interesting, as the reporter noted, is the government is handling the situation by giving money to this company in order to keep it afloat and that money is coming from taxpayers. Essentially, the taxpayers are being forced to buy cars which they will not have or use. The alternative is to let the company do its thing and hope the public begins to buy more cars. This tactic is long term looking and means that the company will probably fail. The government can “solve” the problem now and so everyone is gung-ho for it. But this violates Hazlitt’s principle of looking at all who are affected and looking long term before trying to fix the situation.
A key question that Christians need to be asking themselves is how much of Hazlitt’s principle is good and what needs to be tossed? Should we really allow a company to sink if it is having financial problems? What about all those people who are losing their jobs? Often Hazlitt comes off sounding like an economic evolutionist: survival of the fittest is the only the way the economy succeeds. Even though he wants to look at every aspect of the economy when a problem arises, he is very individualistic and autonomous when talking about businesses failing. There is more at play than just a company going down: there are real people who are losing jobs and money. What should the Church do in such a situation? How does the Body of Christ help in this hard circumstance?
Hazlitt, Henry. Economics in One Lesson. New York: Three Rivers Press, 1979.
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Thoughts on School
At recess, I feel a little like Gandalf, walking among the Hobbits of the Shire. Everyone is intent on playing and having fun, but I can’t join in because I am suppose to be busy, puffing smoke rings and looking wise.
Sunday, May 24, 2009
Dreams of Flying
Here are some pictures by an artist named Jan Von Holleben. Check out his website some time for more pictures like these: http://www.janvonholleben.com/index.php.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
