Silly Questions

Dave Barry once wrote that "a woman is someone who, when asked what is wrong, says, 'Nothing.' A man is someone who, when he asks a woman what is wrong, and she says, "Nothing," believes her.

Really, I think that it is not so much that we believe her. I know that on more than one occasion, I have spent an inordinate amount of time trying to get a woman who was obviously troubled, to tell me what was wrong, only to come to the conclusion that she wasn't going to tell me until she was ready. So, after exhausting all known methods for extracting information, I decided that is was best to go along with the game and pretend that nothing was bothering her. Apparently, women find it considerably more satisfying to lower the boom on someone who appears not to realize that she is upset. I'm not sure why that is, but that understanding can be a real timesaver.

God sometimes doesn't answer right away, either. Maybe that's where women get it, I don't know. Oftentimes, we pray to God, expecting a yes-or-no response, and the answer we get is, "Wait." And we ask, "For how long?" and we get no response. And a lot of times, when the solution (finally) arrives, we realize that God set the answer in motion before we even asked. Is that because He knew that we would, or just that time is meaningless to God? I'm not sure.

You've probably heard the story about the man who had a conversation with God and was asking silly questions:

"God?"

"Yes, my son?"

"How long is a million years to you?"

"A million years to me is like a second to you."

"Oh. (long pause) God?"

"Yes, my son?"

"How much is a million dollars to you?"

"A million dollars to me is like a penny to you."

"Oh. (long pause) God?"

"Yes, my son?"

"Can I have a penny?"

"Certainly, my son. Just give me a second..."

Money is certainly meaningless to God, and I suspect that time is, too. We know that He knew the end from the beginning; some say that it is because He controls everything, but I believe that He has given us freedom of choice. I believe that God knows everything that will ever happen because He is not constrained by the flow of time the way that we mere mortals are. He can see what is going to happen, without guessing, and without manipulating. Oh, don't misunderstand me, God does manipulate things sometimes, but only for the greater good--and, usually, because one of His children has asked Him to.

Solomon's Temple

(Image from www.mishkanministries.org/architectural_modles_kst.htm )

I have heard a lot of discussion about King Solomon's Temple; King David wanted to build a temple for God, but God refused him. Later King David told Solomon that it would be Solomon's responsibility to build the temple. There are multiple theories about why God wouldn't allow David to build the temple, but most of them seem to be out in left field to me.

If you look at the text where David found out God didn't want him to build the temple, God starts out saying that He doesn't need a house (after all, why would a spiritual being need a physical house), and a lot of the rest of it actually sounds like Messianic prophesy. God certainly told David that after David's death, God would raise up one of David's sons and establish his kingdom; I have to wonder though, did God mean immediately after David's death? He says that He will establish that throne forever: Does that mean that Solomon's throne is established forever because we still remember King Solomon today? It seems to me that God is talking about Jesus, of the lineage of David, whose throne is established for evermore.

Now, if you look at the text where David assigns the task to Solomon, it reads very differently. David seems to think that it is because of the bloodshed during his reign that he was not allowed to build the temple. There was no mention of bloodshed before... Further, David says that God prophesied that Solomon, by name, would build the temple. There was no mention of Solomon's name before, and, quite frankly, it would have been meaningless if there had been; Solomon hadn't been born yet, David could have named any of his sons Solomon... God definitely told David that the temple would not be built until after David's death, but there's no mention of that when David spoke to Solomon. So what happened? Well, it's certainly possible that the writer of First Chronicles (Nathan?) simply left out some of what God told David. It's also possible (and more likely, IMHO) that David had thirty years to ponder what God had told him, and that he formed his own opinions about what God meant, and he paraphrased or embellished the instructions unintentionally. I have been asked if I thought David lied to Solomon: No, I don't think he lied, but I think what he said wasn't entirely true; lying implies intent to deceive, I don't believe that there was any such intent.

I also want to point out that a lot of people believe that when David talked about bloodshed, he was specifically referring to the death of Uriah the Hittite. I would tend to agree. All of the other blood that was shed during David's reign was the blood of enemies of God, or at least, enemies of Israel (if there was a difference). Uriah was one of David's mighty men: a hero of Israel. David had not yet met Bathsheba (Uriah's wife, for whom David had Uriah killed) at the time Nathan told David that God did not want David to build the temple. We know this because there are two places in the Bible where it talks about David sending Joab to besiege Rabbah at the time "...when Kings went forth/out to battle..." and both times, David tarried still at Jerusalem. The point, of course, being that David was not where he was supposed to be. The first time is in Second Samuel 11:1, the second being First Chronicles 20:1. Obviously, these are both references to the same battle, but in Second Samuel, the narrative goes on to spell out the whole story of David suffering from insomnia, and going up on the roof, and seeing Bathsheba (the original bathing beauty), and thinking that she could put him to sleep; not caring that her husband, Uriah was off at Rabbah, putting his life on the line for his nation, Israel. For some reason, First Chronicles doesn't mention Bathsheba or Uriah; perhaps an attempt to reduce redundancy. Amazingly, only two chapters later, David charges Solomon, his son by Bathsheba, to build the temple. That should make it clear that First Chronicles is somewhat abbreviated. In any case, there are also two places where it makes reference to God saying no to David when he was seeking to build a house for God: Second Samuel 7:5, and First Chronicles 17:4--both times, several chapters prior to his encounter with Bathsheba. So, even though David may have still felt guilty over the encounter when his son Solomon was old enough to assume the throne, it really had nothing to do with why God denied him the opportunity to build the temple.

The Ivory Soap Standard

Well, this will be my first post of the New Year. I really should have posted yesterday, but things got busy, and I'm not going to make excuses, but I do apologize.

On Sunday, December 23rd, the PK's (Preacher's Kids) at my church passed out 3X5 cards, and asked each of us to write down a prayer that had been answered in 2007. On December 31st (8 days later), they posted those responses, printed out on individual pieces of colored paper. They had entered all of this information into a computer, and loaded the printer with colored paper, and then printed these things out. Now, when I say PK's, I should explain, I'm not talking about the stereotypical teen-aged PK's that keep getting arrested for smoking dope or shoplifting, or maybe just always seem to be hanging with the wrong crowd. These are very responsible, twenty-something's who work full time, are active in the church, help plan events (sometimes are the driving force behind events). My point is, I don't know how they found time to even read all those 3X5 cards, much less enter all that into a computer, and then print them out. I teased them a little bit about some typo's that I found; in retrospect I don't think I should have. I found 4 typo's, I think that meets the Ivory Soap Standard: 99 44/100 %. Nobody's perfect. For them to have done what they did, to that degree of accuracy, in the amount of time that they did it, is pretty amazing.

I am also amazed at some of the needs that have been met in my church family in the past year. We don't have many people that grumble and complain (at least not to me), but there are things posted that I had no idea anyone in the church was facing, much less had gotten past. These were all posted anonymously, so I don't know who was healed of cancer this past year, but I know someone was, I read the sign. Someone else had many healings this past year; I don't know how many, nor do I know the nature of the healings, but I am impressed. Someone walked away from a head-on collision. Someone's cousin had successful brain surgery.

That may confuse some people: I talked about healings, and then I talked about surgery. I believe in healings, but I also believe in doctors. I believe that sometimes God gives an individual a talent for medicine. I don't even think that the surgeon has to acknowledge God as the source of his talent in order to perform well in the operating room; I do think that eventually he will have to answer for that if he doesn't.

David and Goliath

I have touched on this before, but it occurs to me to weigh in on one of the most well-known stories in the Bible: David and Goliath. It is interesting to me that out of all of the army of Israel, there was not one man that had faith enough to stand against the giant. Of course, part of that was because it was God's plan. He wanted to show Israel that He intended to use David, but still... Also, part of it was that David had faith as a little child. None of the men in the army had that. The Bible tells us that David's father, Jesse, had eight sons, and the three eldest were in the army, but David was the youngest. It was understood, in those times, that if you were old enough to serve, then you did. Now, if David was the youngest, and only the three eldest were old enough to serve (which was thirteen, by the way), then how old was David? And how desperate was King Saul to let this youngster fight the giant?

We don't have to look too deep into this story to see that God intended for this to be an unconventional battle. First of all, David didn't carry a sword or a spear: he took a sling and five stones. Why five? I don't know; if the first one had missed, he probably wasn't going to get a chance to sling a second one. Some have suggested that it's because there are five letters in the name, "Jesus," but that wouldn't be true in Hebrew. David also refused armor; to be honest, though, the armor would have been ridiculous: I don't think that they made armor in David's size. King Saul tried to give David his own armor, which was just that much worse: Saul stood taller than the rest of Israel, David would have had a hard time just walking in Saul's armor.

It has been suggested that Goliath was probably a victim of gigantism, a disorder of the pituitary gland that, in addition to causing abnormal growth, also frequently causes the bones of the skull to come together--usually leaving a "soft spot" in the front of the head. This would certainly explain how one stone from David was able to sink into the giant's head and kill him. Some would have you to believe that somehow makes David killing Goliath less than miraculous. I would have to disagree. If Goliath had such a soft spot (and I will admit that it seems likely that he did) such a thing must not have been common knowledge: Surely Goliath could have had a helmet crafted that would have protected his vulnerability. Further, I suspect that David was really just aiming for Goliath, not some alleged soft spot, and trusting that God would guide the stone. David didn't know about the soft spot, wouldn't have known where it was if he had known about it, and probably couldn't have hit it on purpose if he had known where it was. Tell me that's not a miracle.

The lesson, of course, is that sometimes things loom large in our lives, but God has a simple solution. Sometimes His solution makes about as much sense as sending a boy into battle against a giant, armed with a toy (let's face it, a sling was not considered a weapon--ever know anybody else in the Bible to carry a sling into battle?--no, it was a kid's toy). Is God telling you to do something that just doesn't make sense? Do you trust God? Don't misunderstand me--make sure it's God, but be ready to step out in faith.

Just Some Stuff

I almost thought I wasn't going to be able to post today, because I am visiting my parents, and their DSL went out. It just recently came back on. Unfortunately, having had all this time to think about what I would like to blog about today, I have no idea. What a conundrum.

One thing that I should point out: I am aware that sometimes when I post I use the first person plural ("we" or "us"), and sometimes the second person plural ("you"--which, unfortunately, is pretty indistinguishable from the second person singular). I hope I'm not fooling anyone. I learn a lot from these blogs--some of them seem to me to be directed right at me. If there are other people out there who benefit from my ramblings, I am glad of it. I'm certainly not going to tell you to butt out just because these entries are for me. I really do hope that these help other people, too.

By the way, some time ago, I mentioned in one of my blog postings that I had gotten frustrated with the situation regarding Christian radio stations in my area: Yesterday someone was kind enough to respond to that post with URL's for online Christian radio stations. I appreciate that, even though my point was really more about the way people responded to the radio stations that we did have. It is nice to have alternatives, though.

I lifted the above illustration from gravestmor.com. Specifically, from here.

Nathan and Mary

There are some common names in the Bible (at least, names that were common then), and sometimes it gets confusing trying to keep all of the people straight.

For example, there are at least two Nathans in the Old Testament (I think there are three): There was a prophet named Nathan, and then David had a son named Nathan. Some people think (and, I must admit, I believed for a long time myself) that Nathan the prophet was David's son. They are not. Adding to the confusion is perhaps the fact that David's son Nathan is mentioned first, and then the prophet later, and then the son later still. But the lineage of the prophet lists his father as Attai, and the lineage of Nathen, the son of David, lists his mother as Bathsheba (well, technically, it says Bathshua, but it also lists Solomon as the son of Bathshua, and we know that Solomon's mother was Bathsheba, so, apparently Bathshua is an alternate spelling--this also makes it difficult to keep people straight), whom David didn't marry until after Nathan had started advising him; apparently David named one of his sons after the prophet.

Now, in the New Testament, there is quite an assortment of Marys, and a lot of people try to simplify those: I suspect that a lot of people know about the mother Mary, and Mary Magdalene, but don't know about the others, like Lazarus's sister Mary, of Mary the mother of James and Joses (although, it is possible that Jesus had brothers named James and Joses, but it seems unlikely that the Bible would refer to Jesus' mother as 'the mother of James and Joses' even if that were the case). There is also a reference to Mary the wife of Cleophas, but that is probably the same Mary that is the mother of James and Joses. Also, Mark's mother's name was Mary (but she may be Mary Magdalene or Lazarus' sister or the wife of Cleophas; we really don't know).

Part of the reason that there were so many Marys in the New Testament is that Mary is actually derived from Miriam (in Hebrew it is the same name--only when translated from Greek does it become Mary), so these Marys were probably named after Moses' sister Miriam. In any case, the gospel writers did try to make it clear which Mary they were talking about, each time they used the name. Occasionally, one of the gospels will begin talking about Mary, the sister of Lazarus, but you have to read for several verses before it mentions Lazarus. Still, with a little bit of research, you can generally tell the main Marys apart. Now, as far as Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary the mother of James and Joses, or Mark's mother Mary, I don't really think it's important to know whether that is three different women, two different women, or all the same woman (if it was, it would be clear which one was which). I do think that it's important to keep Mother Mary, Mary Magdalene, and Lazarus' sister Mary separate.

Repentance

I think that I have posted on this subject before, but I was just thinking about somebody I heard on the radio awhile back: He described a hypothetical situation (one that actually could happen) where a family is driving to a camp site, and the husband/father drives past a turn-off that the wife/mother thinks is the right road. He insists that it is not, and continues driving. 45 minutes later, without seeing another road even remotely resembling the road that they need to take, he admits his mistake, and turns the car around. The radio announcer pointed out that they still weren't on the right road, but at least they weren't going the wrong direction anymore.
Sometimes in life, we have to make a change. Sometimes we come to the realization that we have been headed the wrong way for quite some time, and didn't even know. Sometimes it's a humbling experience. Nobody wants to be wrong, but sometimes we resist the idea that we are wrong so much that we end up staying wrong. God doesn't want us to be wrong; He gave His only begotten Son so that we could be right. We still make mistakes, no matter how committed to the Lord we are. That's where grace comes in.

Of course, we shouldn't live the way we want to, and expect grace to pick up our slack. The Bible also tells us that the righteous scarcely be saved. I don't know about you, but I don't want to just barely make it in--although I think that's exactly what's going to happen. When we make mistakes, we have to repent, ask forgiveness, do our best to make things right, and then move on. Try to learn from your mistakes, don't beat yourself up over them, or wallow in them.

It occurs to me that in the parable of the prodigal son, the son wasn't forgiven when he 'came to himself' in the pig sty in that far country, not until he returned home. But the Father had been watching for him to return, and was anxious to forgive him, because He loved him so. Something else I heard on the radio once (I'm not sure if it's true, but it sure is a good illustration): There was a Brazilian farm boy who decided that he had had enough of farm life, and he took off to seek his fortune in Rio de Janeiro. He left home breathing his desire to become rich and successful in the big city. After several years of not hearing anything from him, the parents became worried, and hoped that he would be willing to return to the farm. So, father packed up an overnight bag, and took all the money he could, and went to the city. He checked into a hotel, and took out an ad in the newspaper: "José, all is forgiven. Please come home." and included the hotel and the room number (and check out time). More than a hundred José's showed up--none of them his son. He tried to spend time with each of these young men, talking to them as a father, how much he knew that their fathers would want them to return home. Each of the young men insisted that he didn't understand, and wouldn't even consider it. But, you see, God wants us to come home, and He has a much better plan for us.