John 5

And we're back!

Again, sorry for the delay.

Life. It is not always conducive to the things we want to do.

Also, crap, it is 12:30 in the morning. Again.

I should offer that that last post, when I said I was going to bed? Turns out I was wrong. The book came out at 12:30 that morning. So when I checked Hawkeye, out of habit, there it was. And what is any good addict to do but start reading? I finished at about 1 am yesterday morning.

I am sleep deprived and super caffeinated. Clearly I make bad life choices on occasion.

This is what adult hood looks like.

Knowing something is a bad idea and doing it anyway. Because you can.

Possibly I am not the best adult. :D

Right. Actual content of post!

Chapter 5 opens with another well known story, that of the paralytic at the pool.

5 After this there was a feast of the Jews, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. ² Now there is in Jerusalem by the Sheep Gate a pool, which is called in Hebrew, Bethesda, having five porches. ³ In these lay a great multitude of sick people, blind, lame, paralyzed, waiting for the moving of the water. ⁴ For an angel went down at a certain time into the pool and stirred up the water; then whoever stepped in first, after the stirring of the water, was made well of whatever disease he had. ⁵ Now a certain man was there who had an infirmity thirty-eight years.

I should say that I find the details of this man's case slightly odd. We don't know how old he is, but we know that he is at least 38 - since he could have had the infirmity since childhood. The average life expectancy for a man in that time was about (I believe) the late thirties, early forties. So this man is either at the twilight of his life or he has greatly exceeded expectations in spite of his infirmity. 

This implies, to me at least, that he had people to help take care of him. Family or friends, someone. He did not live alone in this condition his entire life.

 

  ⁶ When Jesus saw him lying there, and knew that he already had been in that condition a long time, He said to him, “Do you want to be made well?”

⁷ The sick man answered Him, “Sir, I have no man to put me into the pool when the water is stirred up; but while I am coming, another steps down before me.”

And yet here he is, so close to the possibility of healing but alone. With no one to help him into the pool. How did this happen? How did it come to pass that someone who was obviously assisted and looked after for a large portion of his life comes to be so close to healing and abandoned?

If he is extremely old, perhaps he outlived everyone? Or perhaps he was a bad person and he drove away any family that would have been there to help him?

⁸ Jesus said to him, “Rise, take up your bed and walk.” ⁹ And immediately the man was made well, took up his bed, and walked.
And that day was the Sabbath. 

Here is another miracle, whether by Jesus' power or God's (with Jesus relaying the message?) Only this one seems to be with purpose different from the first two discussed in John.

I'm not entirely certain why Jesus decided to turn the water into wine, except perhaps that his mother asked him and maybe he was just having a good time at the wedding or the groom was a friend of him. 

The officers son who was healed was done due to the faith of the father, I believe. 

But this man, the paralytic, so far as we can see, makes no plea nor declaration of faith prior to Jesus declaring him healed. Certainly the man desired healing or he wouldn't be at the pool, but Jesus seems to decide to heal him almost at random.

Though if we follow the tack that Jesus has extra knowledge (things we should not know through ordinary means) then the choice of this man could have been extremely deliberate. If you are going to attract the attention of the powers that be, without seeming to *want* to attract their attention, how better than to heal a man who will immediately run to the temple after his healing?

We assume, from the fact that this man went to the temple after being healed that he is either a very religious man from the start or that he went there, perhaps to be declared clean? We're not given the exact nature of his illness, but perhaps it was something that also made him ritually impure and therefore unable to take part in the worship at the temple?

¹⁴ Afterward Jesus found him in the temple, and said to him, “See, you have been made well. Sin no more, lest a worse thing come upon you.” ¹⁵ The man departed and told the Jews that it was Jesus who had made him well.

This is problematic for me. Verse 14 seems to be saying that the man's illness, his infirmity, was caused by his sin. But this doesn't bear out in real life at all. Plenty of truly terrible people are walking around this earth without having to bear the physical wounds of their sins. And good, innocent people suffer illness and bad fortune in life all the time. 

If sin = physical illness, shouldn't we see some real life correlation? Or is this just a kind of wishful thinking, that a persons villainy should be evident in their body, an easy way to tell.

¹⁶ For this reason the Jews persecuted Jesus, and sought to kill Him, because He had done these things on the Sabbath. ¹⁷ But Jesus answered them, “My Father has been working until now, and I have been working.”

I...can entirely see the Jewish priests and others being upset at the Law being broken, but I have a hard time imagining that *this* is the reason they sought to kill Jesus. Far more likely the rebellion that he was fomenting, with the turning over of the money changers' tables and such was the problem. Rome was not exactly known for their kind and loving method of enforcing the peace. 

Though the next verse says that they were extra incensed because Jesus here claimed that God was his father, I'm not seeing it. Perhaps there is something in the original wording used that makes it clear he was referring to God and not to an actual human father? 

¹⁸ Therefore the Jews sought all the more to kill Him, because He not only broke the Sabbath, but also said that God was His Father, making Himself equal with God.

It does not, either, follow that claiming God as his father would make Jesus equal with God. This was a time of gods and demi-gods after all. Certainly the Jewish people had become monotheistic over time, but they were surrounded by polytheistic cultures. Someone claiming to be a son of god (or God) was hardly an unknown quantity. There remains, also, the fact that many people throughout the Bible are referred to as the 'son' of God. These men were not claiming divinity, or at least they were never treated as such. 

 ¹⁹ Then Jesus answered and said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, but what He sees the Father do; for whatever He does, the Son also does in like manner. ²⁰ For the Father loves the Son, and shows Him all things that He Himself does; and He will show Him greater works than these, that you may marvel.

Why, if the Son is equally as divine and a part of the Godhead, does the Father need to show him anything? I would never argue that Jesus, incarnate, has access to the divine omniscience, but it remains that if he was truly equal in substance and being with the Father then he would know what the Father knows. And if you are a part of an omniscient being, can you actually set aside your own power? Once Jesus (assuming divinity and incarnation) became a man, did he cease to be God in some way? He limited himself in ways that God certainly never is.

²¹ For as the Father raises the dead and gives life to them, even so the Son gives life to whom He will. ²² For the Father judges no one, but has committed all judgment to the Son, ²³ that all should honor the Son just as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him.

Does any of this read to anyone else like a father passing on a mantle or a responsibility to their son?  If the Son is part of God which is the Father (as the unbegotten, uncreated 'part' of God) how are these jobs differentiated? How does the Trinity keep one part of itself out of the judging, etc.?

 ²⁶ For as the Father has life in Himself, so He has granted the Son to have life in Himself, ²⁷ and has given Him authority to execute judgment also, because He is the Son of Man.

Again, if the Trinity is equal, how can one part grant the other part life or power? It seems that there is a very fine line between Triunity and being three separate entities. If one, the Father, has the ultimate control over what the other two are capable of doing, then they cannot be equal in any sense.

²⁸ Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice ²⁹ and come forth—those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation. 

Does this not sound as though works are important in the deciding of the destination of a persons soul? That there are things that one can do, laws that one can follow, that enable you to enter heaven?

  ³⁰ I can of Myself do nothing. As I hear, I judge; and My judgment is righteous, because I do not seek My own will but the will of the Father who sent Me.

If Jesus is God, it would seem from verse like this that he is a lesser one, wouldn't it? That he cannot claim the equal power of his other thirds? That the Father is a superior being in some way? 

³⁷ And the Father Himself, who sent Me, has testified of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time, nor seen His form. 

While it is true that none have seen God's form (I would question that He even had one, being a transcendent being) several people in the Old Testament are reported to have spoken to God in person, as it were. 

   ³⁸ But you do not have His word abiding in you, because whom He sent, Him you do not believe. ³⁹ You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me. ⁴⁰ But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life.

Again, prophecy. I am not a big fan of prophecy in general, to be perfectly honest. Prophecies are things that are never clear prior to an event, but seem to become clear when big events happen. We've seen this happen with the 9/11 attacks. People were suddenly shouting at anyone who would listen that the attacks had been predicated by Nostradamus and every other prophetic medium since time immemorial. 

You can see almost anything in prophecy if you're willing to believe in it.

I would also point out that they searched the scriptures because the scriptures were given to them as a guide to God's good graces and eternal life. We know that some prophecies referenced in the New Testament as pointing to Christ have been fulfilled by force, as it were. The New Testament authors wrote pieces of the gospels to match Old Testament prophecy of the messiah in order to make Christ the messiah.

Fangirling is hard work but at least it's distracting

I apologise for the delay in posts of actual content.

We had to put one of our dogs down on Saturday so that kind of killed the mood for thinking about anything except for why pets can't be immortal.

I am a grown woman. I have had to put multiple pets down due to illness and old age. I have had pets just not wake up one day because of old age. I have had...well the rooster wasn't really a pet but I liked him...animals eaten by other animals.

I still don't see why they can't just be freaking immortal so I don't have to do this.

Alternatively, why we can put animals out of their suffering but it's immoral to allow terminally ill people the choice.

Additionally, I hope deeply that animals are exempt from the zombie apocalypse. Because if not, there's a small army buried in the back of the property and I am screwed.

And now I am going to go get a couple of hours (or maybe an hour, I keep typing) sleep before I attempt to read an 850 page novel in one day.

Because reasons, that's why.

Regular posting will resume after I have collapsed from this feat of insanity and woken up again two days from now.

The Library Mid-2014

Heather mentioned that she wanted to see pics of the library so, after a neatening up, here they are.

First, a shelfie.

Heather insists that the person isn't supposed to be in the pic, but I disagree. So there I am, next to one of my favorite shelves.

You'll notice that a hard copy of Skin Game (the newest book in the Dresden Feels Files series) is missing. This is because I'm waiting for my drug book drug dealer to ship a special copy of it to me. But we're holding off to see if she has something else super special for my collection. :D So I'm pretending to be patient.

Can you see the patience in my face? Yeah.

I thought I'd try two pics for the Wall of Books to give people a better chance to see what's actually on the shelves.

And part two.

Manga...manga everywhere! Also the books under the tv are destined for Goodwill. There's some dvd's in there too. I'm purging the dvd collection. This involves watching a lot of really bad movies.

DVDs I am keeping. Mine. ALL MINE.

A mix of DVDs I will keep and ones I haven't watched yet. So many movies.

Also, 'alphabetical' is a loose term when applied here. I group things how I want them. Like all the Lord of the Rings movies are with The Hobbit movies. Because reasons. Yes, I do own at least two copies of all of the LotR movies. Again, reasons.

COMICS! so many comics...and a little Darth Vader.

Manga in the corner by the bed. Always a hard shelf to get a pic of.

Manga...

Movies! Again, 'alphabetical'. All the MCU movies are together over here because Marvel Cinematic Universe. Otherwise they're all spread out and that's annoying. I know. I'm a special soul.

Bet you can't guess what these are!

Most of the 'Star-' fandoms represented right here. Also the good parts of Supernatural. Though the season finale this year gave me hope.

Torchwood. Let me tell you about Torchwood one day. When you have time to listen to me cursing the writers for Children of Earth. And some X-Men stuff. Which I mostly just watch for the Erik/Charles of it all. And Wolverine. Everyone loves Wolverine.

And the last of the shelves! Manga and the three video games I own! But look at that empty space there at the end of the shelf! I could buy more books!

Bonus: The books I am currently reading. It doesn't show up well on Hawkeye's screen thanks to the glare, but I'm reading 'Death By Black Hole' by Neil deGrasse Tyson. And a prize of your choice to anyone who can correctly guess what movie I'm watching. >:D

Also, to anyone who came here for serious posts and such, sorry! Yesterday was my birthday (I am an old, old woman now) and today I spent cleaning and enjoying my last vacation day. I promise to return to posts about the Gospel of John tomorrow, and to answer the comments I have. But I am tired tonight.

SO OLD. SO. OLD.

Book: Deep & Wide - Andy Stanley

In my last position my desk was behind the customer service department in our office. I was kind of sort of but not really considered a part of that department because otherwise it was just me, myself and I in my own little department. So I spent most of my employee to employee interaction time with them.

Some of them are friends, some not so much.

For a while there was a woman in the front row who was very very Super Christian. But in an obnoxious way that grated on everyone around her. Because I am a terrible person I would occasionally bait her - not to start a fight but to try and draw out specifics of her beliefs. Partially because (like I said) I'm a terrible person. But also because it was completely obvious that this was a woman who had faith but little knowledge about history or theology or any of the things that I think are actually slightly important in any religion.

Here's the thing: it's apparently perfectly acceptable to just go, 'I have faith in Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior' without having any freaking clue what that *actually* means. I have a friend who, until a couple of months ago when I told her, had NO IDEA that Jesus was God in Christian theology. She didn't believe that Jesus was God's son in the say, Zeus/Hercules manner but she also didn't know that Jesus is believed (in Trinitarian theology which is the branch that she theoretically belongs to) to be a part of a Trinitarian God. And this isn't just an isolated case - I know that there are more people out there who claim to be Christian that know mostly bupkiss about the history of the church (including Jewish history since that's what Christianity came out of - my God, how many people are *shocked* when they hear someone say 'Jesus was Jewish' or that he wasn't a blonde haired blue eyed Caucasian!) or the basics of theology.

They parrot 'Jesus died for my sins' or 'I am covered in the blood of the Lamb' and that they have a 'close personal relationship' with Jesus. But they don't know anything else. They follow their pastors because the pastors have personality or they preach a message that offers these people wealth and happiness.

And this hurts me and I can't stop poking at it when I see it.

It makes my head hurt. Seriously.

*looks at these people* HOOOOWWWWWW?????

Which is a really round about way of getting to this book. It was when this woman was trying to explain to me how her church was not a denomination but also not non-denominational and failing and also how her 'pastor' never went to a seminary but just 'felt the call of God' and started this church. She was reading this book and told me how this was their church model and this would explain it all. So I threw it on my wish list and figured I would get around to it eventually. And then I got it as a present for Christmas! :D

So it is, essentially, an exploration of how Stanley's church, North Point, works and the author/pastor trying to show other pastors how to apply their methods so that these other churches can have the success that North Point apparently enjoys. It's one of those megachurches and therefore I have automatic disdain for them I'm prejudiced, okay?

Since I'm not a pastor or interested in being one there was a lot of the book that while interesting was not really relevant for me. Which is not the fault of the book I'm just not the target audience but I went in knowing that. Still, it's very interesting to see the mentality of these people laid out.

"God responds to our private acts of righteousness. Jesus uses the term reward to describe his response. Ever had an answer to your prayer? What happened to your faith?...That person's faith got bigger, didn't it?

"The same thing transpires when individuals begin giving for the first time. Percentage giving is an invitation for God to get involved in our personal finances. The percentage isn't the issue. I tell new believers to pick a percentage and start there. The point is to learn to trust God financially. When people experience God's faithfulness in the realm of their personal finances, their faith expands. Money loses its grip. They are no longer possessed by their possessions."

"On the giving side of things, we are very upfront with the importance of what I refer to as priority, progressive, percentage giving. Priority as in: give first, save second, and live on the rest. Percentage as in: choose a percentage and give it consistently. Progressive is a challenge to up the amount by a percentage every year. While I'm a big believer in tithing, people who have never given away a percentage of their incomes are not going to begin with 10 percent. Sure, some will. But if you are going to teach people to tithe, you may have to start with some baby steps."

While Mr. Stanley purports to be against the prosperity gospel that so many of his megachurch/evangelical tv personality peers preach (and I don't know enough about him to gainsay this so we'll take him at his word) I find these passages trouble me.

On the one hand, the emphasis on giving before making sure that you have enough money to cover your bills or emergencies is just...not smart. It's not. I don't care that that makes me seem like I have less faith than those who just throw their money at a church or a Christian charity or whatever and trust that God will take care of them.

I'm a big believer in that old cliche, 'Trust God but tie up your camel.' There are so many people who have incredible amounts of faith but haven't got a pot to piss in. Because, in part, they haven't used the brains and the resources that God gave them to make their lives liveable. Meanwhile megachurch pastors and televangelists have million dollar homes and are asking their congregations for more and more and more. The disparity between the religious leaders of our day (and leaders of the past as well) and Jesus should be impossible to ignore. He did everything that he did with nothing.

'Well, but he's God!'

Maybe. But the people of his time didn't know or believe that. They followed him because of his message and because of how he lived out what he taught. Not because he had the nicest ass in Jerusalem or his robes were the best or his sandals blinged out.

And on the other hand, these passages and other parts of this book have just driven home how much of a business religion is. It's all about getting people into your building so that they can give you money so you can keep doing fancy programs and nicer surroundings and this that and the other thing so you can attract more people so they can...and the only people getting anything consistently out of this are the pastors at the top who seem to get rich in these set ups.

I mentioned something about this last night to Heather and she pointed out that this is why so many people are people of faith but no religion. But that's only a temporary solution in my mind. It's *hard* to have faith and no people around you who share in and support you. Humans are herd animals at heart. We want to be with others like us. We need human contact. How long do you think people last without a community to support them?

Faith leads to religion and religion in modern times is a business.

And oh, hey, remember that rant at the beginning that I was like 90% sure had nothing to actually do with the content of the book? Heh. I totally forgot this line:

"I'm partial to hungry, ignorant Christians myself. The kind who are content to love Jesus and the people he died for."

Love is awesome. Whoo! I would much rather have Christians running around showing love to everyone rather than judging them by standards that they themselves don't even live up to. Which seems to be what a large portion of Christians do these days. But it's the 'ignorant' part that kills me. Ignorant Christians will swallow anything that a charismatic pastor tells them and assume that because he can find a verse in the Bible that seems to back him up that it's all good.

I can't stand ignorance.

Also, if you love someone, don't you want to know more (everything) about them? How can someone love Jesus and be content with ignorant?

One of the things that really grates on me that has less to do with theology is the fact that his church makes people make a three minute video before they're allowed to be baptised. This video chronicles this persons journey to the point of baptism and I guess hearing the convert story is uplifting but I'm just putting myself in that place and knowing that I would not do it. I would leave and find a different church rather than do that because my story is mine and there's a level of forced soul barring involved here that I don't like.

There's also the tie in that they do the baptisms directly before they start asking the congregation for money. Emotional manipulation right before an appeal. 'Look at this trick I performed! Give me more money so I can keep doing it!'

I do think that some things could be learned by churches from the care that this church takes in making sure that they're always ready and aware of their guests. From the descriptions that are given the staff goes out of their way to pay attention to first time visitors, to bring them into the congregation with that first visit.

Most churches (all the ones I've ever visited) don't do this. They may ask if they have any first time visitors (not all of them even do that) but that's about it. I can't tell you how many churches I have walked into and out of without anyone even saying hello to me.

Actually, funnily, the only place I've ever been acknowledged or asked if I was new was at the local mosque. To be fair it's a small community so I think I stood out but the simple fact of that one man stopping and asking me if I needed help or direction *did* make a good impression.

So, all in all. Well written book and I believe that people who followed this model would have successful modern churches. They're just not churches that I would attend or have any interest in. And it's kind of made me sad, reminding me of how impossible it is to have a faith community free of the business-model kind of religion we have today.