partsofspeaking

My most recent thing to be over is Grantchester, a BBC/PBS series.  I am not entirely sure why I kept watching it this season because it was devolving more and more into soap opera, and it has hit rock bottom. The premise was intriguing: young, good-looking Anglican priest who has psychological wounds from WWII and whose long-time friend decides to marry wealth instead of the person she should; I assume she doesn't share his mission and wants to make her family happy.  His work in the parish leads him into helping the unbelieving police detective solve local crimes, mostly murders. It would have done better to say with the mystery-solving, but it became more about the sins of the characters.  The priest character is like the worst priest ever, and he gets away with things that never would have been tolerated in 1950s Anglicanism. Of course, there has to be a homosexual character, which ends up being the nerdy assistant priest, who is a better priest but who wants a relationship

While this portion is about judgment, I find it comforting. 1.      Jesus in judgment cares about the plight, the lives of the poor, imprisoned (for debt and unjustly; in that time serious criminals were usually executed), those in real need.   Our treatment of them comes into judgment as one of the standards.   We see this in Daniel 4; Nebuchadnezzar is judged with insanity because of his treatment of the poor.   2.      Jesus identifies with his brethren.   How wonderful.   3.      Jesus identifies with his brethren who are the least of these. 4.      We don’t have an option to ignore these people.   So, with the certainty of that foundation, the first of two remaining issues is this point is the how.   How can we best use our resources to free these folks from the chains of poverty, honor God in it, and avoid enslaving them in dependence on us?   I am a firm believer in stewardship with the biggest bang for the buck in terms of those three things.

We bought a totally unnecessary car this week.  A 1997 Camaro z28. Yeah. A moth.  What biodiversity in North Georgia. My dog and I cast long shadows.

She is interviewed by Christianity Today here:  A must read. 

I realize it seems that I have skipped five chapters.  The reality is that they are in longhand and I haven't found the time to transcribe them. It's a time-consuming process because I have to edit and my handwriting is horrendous, very small and cramped.  (Arthritis and laziness combined)So I am moving to Matthew 26, a very long chapter, and will return later to the others. Matthew 24 and 25 are an interlude of prophecy, brought on, perhaps, from the disciples’ question at the beginning of 24.   I have a feeling Jesus is deliberately opaque about some of the details—why should we know everything about the future?—but the message of preparedness is clear.   “Be ready.   Do not forget that ultimately I’m returning.   You will be held accountable.”   Is this a scary, depressing message?   No, it’s a real one.   Without accountability, where would we be?    The story of the talents is often preached but I think misunderstood.   Talents are money, so inter

I was appalled before.  I am still appalled. As Ben Shapiro says, this presidency is the result of the country's intersection of pop culture and celebrity and politics. At least a good SCOTUS judge came out of it, and perhaps another.  And my investments are on target to give me over 12% this year.  So, we should be happy, right? My husband just bought a vintage (well, 1997) Camaro from someone in Flowery Branch.  It is cool. I do not find myself learning less at my age (7th decade) than in the past.  I think it is a matter of perspective and desire, not brain power or ability.  I have taken five online courses already this summer.

I have decided to post all of my thoughts on Matthew 18 at once.  After this I will take a short break from posting about Matthew, not because I have no content but because the notes are in long-hand and I have to type them up.  Eventually the whole book of Matthew will be finished and then I plan to self-publish it as daily readings for a period of six months or more. This is a long post.  What strikes me is that these verses are about relationship and how we live in community, good or bad.   Part of the problem with discussing such things is that we have, without recognizing it, such a cultural bias against community in favor of individualism. So where does this start?   It starts by not even thinking in terms of status.   The disciples have the raw hutzpah to ask Jesus who would be the greatest among them.   This may be out of chronological order since there doesn’t seem to be a connection to the previous account (about the fish) .   Maybe it was something

For the past three summers TCM has offered Massive Open Online courses for viewers, free.  Two years ago was film noir, which I took and enjoyed immensely.  Last year I skipped the one on slapstick comedy because I despise slapstick.  This summer's theme is 50 Years of Hitchcock.  It is well done, although not as interesting to me as the film noir since it's only about one director, and Hitchcock made some great films but he is not my favorite (his world view is dark and he strikes me as creepy). I also don't see what was so great about his putting himself in his movies.  That ruins the whole illusion of the film for me and I don't see it as clever. However, the courses are well put together and very informative.  Kudos to TCM.

More visits to the doctors with specialties we haven't used before. More standing in the doorway trying to remember what we are doing in the room. More new drugs. More aches and pains in new places. New ways people are finding to try to take advantage of us. Others?

--> The account of the temple tax in the fish’s mouth sounds apocryphal, like one of those Gnostic gospel portions.   We’ll assume Peter actually paid the tax after finding the money.   Is this metaphorical—he sold the fish and had enough to pay the tax—or literal, there was really a coin there?   Well, I have no trouble with the raising of Lazarus, so I guess a coin isn’t a big deal, although it comes across like a magic trick.   But why?   Jesus is meeting Peter’s need.   Jesus paid taxes even though he was Creator!   He is paying the temple tax—not a Roman tax, but a religious one, so “as not to offend.” Not giving offense for the sake of offense or heedlessly, needlessly, has a priority in the Christian life, but that means   we don’t ever offend. The gospel itself is an offense, so let’s not offend in little things so that the major thing—the cross and humility before it—are not missed.   WE must be humble to match the cross message.   So pay your taxes, act right.  

If you are looking for one of these, look no further.  I doubt you will find a better one than this: http://libguides.daltonstate.edu/c.php?g=553845&p=3805340 Also at http://oer.galileo.usg.edu/communication-textbooks/1/ Yes, I wrote 80-85% of it.  

This verse is one of the many times that Matthew has us to understand that Jesus told them about he resurrection.   But how did they perceive this?   Did they even have a frame of reference?   For an ultimate resurrection yes (see Job), but for what Jesus was saying, I think not.   They probably could not get past his predictions of crucifixion.   Neil Simon wrote a play called God’s Favorite , based on Job.   The theme--If you are close to God, you get to go through horrible things.   He was trying to be funny (he doesn’t always succeed, but he still makes money at it).   Simon is a Jew.   Matthew is a Jew.   WE are immersed in the Jewishness of the gospel with Matthew.   It’s not that he has no recognition of the Gentiles, they just aren’t central to his argument.    We are told that pagans of this time had myths about resurrections and dying kings coming back to life and that was the source of the Christian story (nonsense, of course).   But the Jews did

Questions I don’t have answers for: Why did Peter want to put up three shelters?   Was it the time for the Feasts of Booths/ Tabernacles in their culture?   Moses represented the Law, Elijah the prophets. Jesus represented the completion to which they looked forward. Did the three apostles obey and not tell anyone until after the resurrection? What was it about Elijah and the Jews?   Why did he hold such a place?   This is an interesting study and I commend it, because it makes no sense to us as 21 st century Christians that Elijah would have pre-eminence over other prophets of the Old Testament period.   But he does.   In terms of “Elijah coming first” it was understood not as a reincarnation but as a prophet with the spirit of Elijah, which was John the Baptist.   The Transfiguration is one of the multiple times we are told, or someone is told, “Do not be afraid.”   Can we really be commanded to stop being afraid?   It’s not a command.   It is

--> --> Ah, the Transfiguration.   Peter never got over this one; perhaps it was right behind the resurrection, the cross, and Pentecost in his mind, although those events seemed to have transformed him even though he was privy to the transfiguration.    At the end of 16 Jesus states, “Assuredly, I say to you, there are some standing here who shall not taste death till they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.” Either this event, six days later, was the point of that prophecy, or the resurrection, about a year later.   Otherwise Jesus got his second coming all wrong. In the words of a (bad) old song, "I really don't think so." 17:1-11 is a testimony of his glory, power, uniqueness, and superiority.  

--> In the gospels, Jesus does not express doubt about who he is.   Everything he says and does comes from the presupposition, the foundation that he is the Son of God, on a mission, and therefore unique and powerful.   He’s here to present the gospel, not really to argue for his right to express it.   He does present an argument, but it’s not a full defense or apologetic.   The miracles are a part of this argument. You can’t read the gospels with the idea that Jesus is dialoguing.   He gives a choice, not a buffet.   My way or the broad way.   One can like it or lump it, but he’s not wimpy and he’s not changing the options.   At the same time, he does give some choice.   “If anyone desires to come after me, it’s going to be rough, so know that now. "  The rewards are here, but mostly at the end.   We have to take the long haul view, which is why patience is so important. In reading these passages, I wonder how we got to the Christianity of Joel Osteen?

I think I could title this blog post, “You Don’t Get to Contradict Jesus.”   I mean, it is a bit much on Peter’s part to have just said Jesus is the Messiah and Son of God, therefore authoritative, and then say, “You don’t know what you are talking about, Jesus!”   Was Satan really telling Peter to say that?   Probably.   Let’s remember that the end of the account of the temptation in chapter 4 says Satan left for a more opportune time to tempt Jesus away from the mission.   Satan was not trying to get Jesus to do something naughty; Satan was trying to prevent the cross.   Stupid, yes, but that was the point.   And now Jesus makes it clear that is what is going to happen, so someone close to him, someone who seems to believe in him, tries to pull that mission down.   Still, Jesus saying, “ Get behind Me, Satan! You are an offense to Me, for you are not mindful of the things of God, but the things of men” seems intemperate to our oversensitive modern ears, wh

For a man needs only to be turned round once with his eyes shut in this world to be lost — do we appreciate the vastness and strangeness of nature. Every man has to learn the points of compass again as often as he awakes, whether from sleep or any abstraction. Not till we are lost, in other words not till we have lost the world, do we begin to find ourselves, and realize where we are and the infinite extent of our relations.

Matthew 16:13-28 would probably be one of the most preached passages from the gospels.   It is triumphant, prophetic, and a little confusing.   The place is relevant   They are near a pagan site, the Gates of Hell where Pan was worshiped.   Why such a pagan site in Israel?   To study the Bible is to study geography, and this particular area in the north was more Gentile than in the South.   The ESV makes a difference between the first time Jesus asks the question about what people are saying about him, and the second time, targeting Peter.   “The son of man” vs. “I, the son of man?”    Peter responds correctly, in this case, and we learn that conversion to the Christian faith is an act of God, not a human one. It’s what follows that drives Protestants crazy. Volumes have been written, but I don’t see that Jesus is establishing the papacy here, especially since he never brings it up again!   I would think he would be more direct about it.   And hence

Why does Jesus go after the religious leaders?   Were they really leaders or just bureaucrats?   Were the people following them or just afraid of the consequences these “leaders” could mete out for nonconformity?   The better question is, why are they asking for a sign from heaven?   Is this an allusion to Elijah?   He was meeting human need, but they wanted a sign from heaven, which would prove what?   They wanted a religious miracle when all around them are the miracles he is doing as Messiah.   They were ignoring the reality.   Jesus doesn’t take it without a response here.   They won’t get a sign but the sign of Jonah.   What was that sign? Three days of “death” and then resurrection; a mass of believers in response.   Anything else?   He has already made a reference to the sign in 12:39-40. Jesus is forceful in these encounters, but considering they were planning to kill him, calling them out as hypocrites seems pretty kind.  

This is one of those accounts that we might want to ask Jesus about when we get to heaven.   “Jesus, what are you saying?   You are calling her a little dog?” which is still, despite our love of dogs in this culture, a base insult, especially for a woman.   And maybe he is calling her that, despite all the commentaries that want to explain it away.   Maybe it’s a test to see how much faith she has.   Maybe.   What is odd is that he says he was sent to the lost sheep of Israel, and elsewhere he says differently.   It would seem the whole thing is a rhetorical exercise to elicit a response from here, rather than a real expression of who he is.   But that makes no sense either if we present Jesus as a truth teller.   Can he mislead people to get deeper into their souls and then say truth? Of course, we say, no.   Bible Gateway says it’s a test to be sure this Gentile doesn’t think he’s another magician, and that rabbis did such tests.   She is a Canaanite and t

The person who wanted to be the president of this country is advertising t-shirts for Planned Parenthood ($25.00) that say "Nasty Woman" on them. Thank you, God, for deliverance. And the left is appalled by Donald Trump's comments?  I am not a fan of Trump's, at all, and roll my eyes at him a lot.  Someone needs to destroy his smart phone.  While the dems are frothing at the mouth over Russia "stuff," he is getting things done and Mosul is out of ISIS hands.  They are so obsessed with getting him impeached that they are ignoring what is really going on. I like to follow the Biblical mandate to pray for our country's leaders, but I don't even know where to start. 

Yes, Jesus sounds a little peaved in this chapter, even brutal with the Gentile woman.   That comes from a superficial reading.   The disciples are sort of funny themselves, asking “Don’t you know that the Pharisees are offended by what you said about defilement coming from within rather than from food?” We snarky moderns might say, “Well, duh,” but we forget that these folks were in danger of severe social ostracism from their community.   Of course, Jesus is not saying anything they shouldn’t have known already.   Proverbs 4:23:   Keep your heart with all diligence, for out of it comes the issues of life.”   Don’t be so concerned with food, they will soon learn after the resurrection, whether it’s kosher or eaten with hands ceremonially washed or gluten-free or vegan.   All that is not going to make you walk with God any closer, satisfy your life deeply, or make you happier; it appeals to religious and cultural pride.   Nothing wrong with food restrictions, bu

--> Sometimes in reading Matthew it seems that Jesus’ responses are impromptu, arising from the moment rather than planned from the foundation of the world, as we Calvinists are taught.   The Pharisees attack him for not teaching or “making” the disciples ceremonially wash their hands before eating, therefore “the food is defiled.”   No, says Jesus, you have it backward and therefore very wrong.   What comes out of your heart and mouth defiles you, not what goes into your gut and then the toilet.   The Bible is very clear that there is no “unintentional speech” or at least no sourceless speech.   It comes from somewhere.   Sometimes my subconscious seem to be speaking and writing more than my conscious mind, but it’s coming from the deep storehouse of the heart and soul, and it got into there somehow.   Or it stays there, nurtured in the damp festering environment and getting stronger and bigger, rather then uprooted.   Jesus seems to cajole Peter for asking what the parable

Brene Brown's video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Evwgu369Jw[ describes empathy  in a fresh way. I use this a lot in communication teaching. 

--> This chapter ends with a statement that would lead the reader to believe that the numbers of those healed by Jesus was very high.   I don’t think we can know this, but it would seem he would have more followers at the end before the cross.   However, since thousands came to Christ after the resurrection, these miracles were probably the seed.   Then again, the world was not as populated then as now, and this is one region, so there’s no way to tell.   The point I’d like to make is where did the healing fit into his ministry and mission?   Why heal? Centrally, no matter how many were actually healed.   Luke if anyone would be a skeptic about spontaneous healings, and he writes about them as enthusiastically as anyone.   God’s power is great enough to change viral and bacterial structures, DNA even if needed, although it seems most of these healings in the gospels were for diseases of external origin (like leprosy) or congenital (like blindness) causes and deformities.

My husband wanted me to watch TV with him last night and had found a recommended movie on Amazon Prime called Broken.  There are a number of movies by that title; this is the 2012 version with Tim Roth (whom I always think of us a bad guy, the villain in that Liam Neeson movie about Scotlant) and Cillian Murphy (whom I always think of as a psycho from a Batman movie). It took me a bit to get into the movie.  The narrative is linear, sort of, very impressionistic and a little disjointed, with very short scenes and a lot of cuts.  The acting is very good; the language and how people speak to each other is vulgar (and I would say here that that is my problem with bad language--it is emblematic of bad relationships, and truly is in this film).  After I decided to stick it out, there was a pretty good payoff in the last 15 minutes or so, and that sort of redeemed the rough going of the previous hour or more.  So I recommend it, with a caveat that it is depressing. It concerns three fami

What matters in the news?  I challenge you to go to the major news sources and see what is on the top, what you would see before scrolling.  CNN is still trying to make something of Trump, Kushner and Russia.  Fox has a story about Trump standing up to Putin because Obama would not.  But thanks toNPR this morning, I caught the end of the story that I think is the one that matters, and one The New York Times does have fairly prominently displayed:  The defeat of ISIS in Mosul and Iraq. Winning the city back incurred enormous cost, and the city looks decimated.  But this is important news. Please, please, please dig deeper.  Do not take the news outlets at face value.  Read for the facts, and sift out the snark.  

This narrative is just plain weird, from our standpoint.   I don’t think it’s meant to be normative in any way, since there are no other walking on water stories in the early church but there were healings and other miracles.   It happened, it is recorded by in three of the gospels (not Luke, interestingly), so someone would have called them on it if it were untrue.   Matthew doesn’t write this as “oh, there’s Jesus walking on water” and as if it was expected.   However, if we accept that 10,000 or more (probably many more) were fed that day, we find ourselves in the situation where we must accept this story, weird and physically impossible as it is.   But a virgin birth and a resurrection are weird and impossible, too.     The Christian faith does not exist without faith in miracles, without God intruding in the natural order of things at times, and in an unmistakable way (and that is perhaps what makes the difference.) Does Peter bring this up elsewhere?   No

My son just posted a series of tweets about having car trouble, using gifs from Star Wars. Who of us in 1977 thought that our children 40 years later would still be obsessed with that movie!?

--> After Jesus is rejected in Nazareth, the next episode is the sordid story of Herod and Salome, a pretty disgusting but common account of tyrannical behavior.   Afterward Jesus wanted to be alone, but the crowds wouldn’t allow it.   Consequently he did the stand-out miracle of the five loaves and two fish.   Now, despite their invading his privacy and grief, he bestowed compassion on them.   He did not berate them or feel sorry for himself for being bothered—not sure that was possible, anyway, since feeling sorry for oneself comes from feeling not in control and he always was. He did what needed to be done. Here we must turn the pages to John 6, where he follows the miracle with seeking to separate the real followers from those just looking for a handout.   Things were going to get tough for the real believers (as John’s beheading showed), so they might as well know what they were in for—all or nothing.

H. L. Mencken (not exactly the world's optimist) said, "The older I grow the more I distrust the familiar doctrine that age brings wisdom." Age bring perspective, which is not always the same as wisdom. 

I have been thinking about this concept a lot. There is a delicate balance between conformity and nonconformity. Conformity keeps the world going as it is. Nonconformity moves the world forward.  Nonconformity is necessary.  It should perhaps be a careful choice, but it's needed.  Since most of our lives are conforming, perhaps we should err on the side of considering nonconformity.  In what, you say?  Ah, that is up to each. 

--> The verse states, “Now he did not do many mighty works there because of their unbelief.”   That’s a reason to think about.   We say belief comes from seeing mighty works, but it operates the other way, too.   Belief leads to seeing mighty works.   I take that at the face value, but at a deeper sense.   A person who sees the world with belief will see mighty works that others take for granted as nothing, because they do not slow down to see their mightiness and they do not attribute the works and their mightiness, their miraculous nature, to God.   Seeing miracles makes us more grateful, too. “Mighty” is interesting.   Healing crowds is mighty—where else are they going to see healings like this? Jesus bluntly states, “A prophet is not appreciated by those closest to him.”   This may not be “original” with Jesus but he sanctifies it.   Those closest to us may think they know us better, but they also, as here, have reason to dismiss us and to be jealous of us.   That se

Y esterday the TV was on and after a movie my husband had watched another came on.   Something about it caught my eye so I decided to keep watching while working on something else, and eventually the film caught my whole mind and heart.   It was Wadjda , the first film ever from Saudi Arabia.   It is a miracle, since it is a film from S.A. about women and their world, and it is so honest about their lives but at the same time wholesome and heartfelt.   I thoroughly recommend it.   I started because I thought it might give me insight into the lives of the English as Second Language students I work with, half of whom are Muslim women from Iraq or Sudan. It did, but it also gave me an insight into humanity in general and my own womanhood. Wadjda is a ten-year old girl who lives with her mother in a very nice home.   I wasn’t sure at the beginning what country it was (other than Arabic speaking) but it was clear they were affluent.   As the movie opens, they are at home, where they are