_awakening

A Short Introduction to the Hebrew Bible.

If you are looking for a great introduction to the Hebrew Bible, John Collins' book, A Short Introduction to the Hebrew Bible, is one of the best around. Concise. Insightful. Easy to read. That about sums it up. The good news is that the book is on Google books, which means that they have posted a large portion of it online for your perusal. You can check it out here. [And I highly recommend that you do...] Enjoy.

You can read a review of the book here as well.

Weekend Readings.

A collection of updates, responses, postings, and the truly bizarre for your weekend reading pleasure. Enjoy.

Robert Cargill responds to his critics regarding why Christians should adopt the BCE/BC dating system.

Scot McKnight jumps into the discussion on Rob Bell and the corruption of the term "evangelical". I think he is measured and dead on right.

Christianity Today interviews Don Miller regarding his latest book and how to embrace life as a better narrative. I had the opportunity to hear Miller speak last weekend at Mariners Church. His thoughts on life as narrative are very insightful.

And finally, just when you thought "Christianity" couldn't get any stranger, or more disturbing, along comes this beauty from Sojourners. [Be sure you click through and watch the "Taking the Hill" video.]

Have a great rest of your weekend...

New to the Pile.

About a month ago I was meeting with my thesis adviser and good friend, Karen Winslow. I asked her if she knew about anything that had been written specifically focusing on the late Second Temple period history and the scrolls. At that point we rummaged through a few titles, but nothing grabbed my attention. Until now. Enter the recently released The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Hasmonean State by Hanan Eshel.

When I found out that it had just been released, I ordered a copy from the nice people at Amazon.com. Well, it arrived today... and it looks amazing. The book is a first of its kind, exploring the political history of the late Second Temple Period, including the latest scholarship from the Qumran scrolls. The book was originally published n Hebrew in 2004, but has been updated and expanded from that original work. For a better picture of the book, here's a listing of the chapter titles:

ONE: The Roots of the Hasmonean Revolt: The Reign of Antiochus IV
TWO: Questions of Identity: The “Teacher of Righteousness,” the “Man of Lies,” and Jonathan the Hasmonean
THREE: The Succession of High Priests: John Hyrcanus and his Sons in the Pesher to Joshua 6:26
FOUR: Alexander Jannaeus and His War against Ptolemy Lathyrus
FIVE: A Prayer for the Welfare of King Jonathan
SIX: The Pharisees’ Conflict with Alexander Jannaeus and Demetrius’ Invasion of Judaea
SEVEN: The Successors of Alexander Jannaeus and the Conquest of Judaea by Pompey
EIGHT: The Assassination of Pompey
NINE: The Changing Notion of the Enemy and Its Impact on the Pesharim

It looks so good... can't wait to dive in.

Foundations of the Just War [Chapter 1].

Brimlow begins his exploration of the issues of violence and nonviolence, but taking a look at the historical and philosophical foundations that gave rise to Augustine's thoughts on just war theory. He rightly notes at the very beginning of the book something that I think often goes unnoticed in the overall conversation; namely, that at least for the first two centuries CE, the early Christian church was exclusively pacifist. So much so that Brimlow notes "there is no record of any Christian writer approving of Christian participation in warfare until the time of emperor Constantine, circa 330, and no evidence of Christians serving in the army of the Roman Empire until 173." [p. 22]

So how did this consensus change? Brimlow points to Augustine as perhaps the first to begin to consciously formulate a justification for Christian involvement in warfare. Quoting Augustine's Contra Faustum:

"What is the evil in war? Is it the death of someone who will soon die in any case, that others may live in peaceful subjection? This is mere cowardly dislike, not any religious feeling. The real evils in war are love of violence, revengeful cruelty, fierce and implacable enmity, wild resistance and the lust of power and such like; and it is generally to punish these things, when force is required to inflict the punishment, that, in obedience to God or some lawful authority, good men undertake wars..." [Contra Faustum, 22, 74]

It is here that Brimlow proposes that Augustine makes what he calls a "fundamental mistake." For Augustine it is "the internal disposition of the soldier that makes warfare either right or wrong." In taking this position, according to Brimlow, Augustine "introduces a division in our conception of persons and what it means to be a disciple of Christ that plagues the church to the present." In the end "what matters, on Augustine's view, is the Christian's internal disposition: all is permissible if only we are disposed the right way." [p. 30]

Contrary to this position, Brimlow introduces Matthew 5.39 [also offering Augustine's interpretation, which at least according to Brimlow's rendering, is awkward at best]. While Augustine sees the words of Matthew 5.39 as not needing to be taken literally, but speaking to an internal disposition, Brimlow notes that what Jesus is doing is actually antithetical to Augustine's position. Jesus is rendering a new way of seeing retribution. "The internal disposition that the law recognized as making violence against the evildoer permissible is no longer valid. There is, therefore, no internal disposition that transforms violent responses to violence into permissible ones. Violence is not an option for Christians." [p. 31]

While I am not in complete agreement with Brimlow's understanding of the law and of Matthew 5.39, I do think he makes a pretty valid point. Augustine's thoughts on just war seem, at least on the surface, to be antithetically opposed to the teaching of Jesus. The thought I kept coming back to while reading was this: Augustine appears to be arguing for just war more from the position of a good Roman citizen, rather than on the basis of being a good disciple of Jesus. His argument is fundamentally based upon a philosophical standpoint, which sees the government as wholly good and just. If I'm reading Augustine correctly, when someone threatens what God has instituted as "good" or "just", then the Christian is required to act, even with violence. The question I had was this: Is the government always "just" in its motives?

Thoughts?

Wrestling Together.

So my copy of Robert Brimlow's book, What About Hitler?: Wrestling with Jesus's Call to Nonviolence in an Evil World, showed up yesterday and as promised, after checking out the book, here's the plan.

The book is divided into nine chapters, with each chapter beginning with a scriptural meditation followed by some of the author's thoughts. I thought that perhaps the easiest thing to do an initial post here on Sunday night exploring the scriptural meditation and thoughts, adding a few insights and questions, and then let it roll from there for the week. We'll look at a chapter a week, so the entire process will take us nine weeks. Make sense?

For those of you who do not have the book yet, or are still thinking about joining the conversation, here are the nine meditations/chapters which will guide our nine weeks together:

First Meditation - Luke 4.5-13
Foundations of Just War

Second Meditation - 1 Samuel 8.4-9
The Just War in Contemporary Thought

Third Meditation - Isaiah 6.1-10
The Good Wars

Fourth Meditation - 1 Corinthians 5.9-13
Terror

Fifth Meditation - Matthew 7.21-27
The Men Behind the Hitler Question

Sixth Meditation - 1 Corinthians 1.18-29
Success, Failure, and Hypocrisy

Seventh Meditation - Luke 12.22-32
The Christian Response

Eighth Meditation - Romans 7.14-25
Elaboration

Ninth Meditation - 2 Corinthians 4.7-12; 5.14-18
Elaboration Upon the Elaboration

Now for a few things to keep in mind for the discussion. Karen Winslow, one of my professors at APU, instilled in us the realization that the scriptures are filled with tension, meaning that the scriptures do not contain one monolithic voice, but do in fact present various perspectives that need to be held in tension with one another. This is perhaps no more true than with the issue of nonviolence in the text. That being said, be sure to show hospitality and grace to one another as there is bound to be opinions and thoughts expressed that not everyone agrees with.

Okay?

Alright. Our first post will be this Sunday. If you have the book already or it's on its way, great. If you just want to follow along and jump into the discussion on the blog, sweet. Let's see how this goes...

Latest Arrivals.

Yes, like an addict needing a fix, the brown smiley box has once again arrived at my doorstep bringing wondrous things inside. Here are the latest arrivals to the bookshelf:

What About Hitler?: Wrestling with Jesus's Call to Nonviolence in an Evil World
[Robert W. Brimlow]

Opening the Sealed Book: Interpretations of the Book of Isaiah in Late Antiquity
[Joseph Blenkinsopp]

Surprised by Hope: Rethinking Heaven, the Resurrection, and the Mission of the Church
[Tom Wright]

Christians at the Cross: Finding Hope in the Passion, Death, and Resurrection of Jesus
[Tom Wright]

The Passion: The True Story of an Event That Changed Human History
[Geza Vermes]

Resurrection, Immortality, and Eternal Life in Intertestamental Judaism and Early Christianity
[George W. E. Nickelsburg]

Jewish Messianism and the Cult of Christ
[William Horbury]

Apocalypticism, Prophecy, and Magic in Early Christianity
[David E. Aune]

Rewriting Scripture in Second Temple Times (Studies in the Dead Sea Scrolls and Related Literature)
[Sidnie White Crawford]

[So, outside of a couple of reads, can you tell that I'm still in thick of my thesis project?]

A Little Reading Together, Perhaps?

Judging by the amount of hits over the past few days, as well as the discussion that followed, the post The Cross Lost seemed to arouse a bit of interest in the issue of non-violence...

So here's an idea.

Clint Walker brought up the book What About Hitler?: Wrestling with Jesus's Call to Nonviolence in an Evil World as a possible interesting read on the subject. Anybody up for reading the book together and then opening it up for a discussion here on the blog? Here's the description of the book from Amazon:

Must Christians always turn the other cheek and resist violence? Is it ever justifiable for Christians to retaliate in the face of evil? Philosopher Robert Brimlow struggles with these questions in What about Hitler? The author skillfully integrates meditations on scriptural passages, personal reflections on his own challenges to live nonviolently, and a hard-hitting philosophical examination of pacifism and just-war doctrine. Both Christian pacifists and defenders of just-war theory will appreciate this book.

I just ordered my copy. Anybody with me?

2007 Reading List.

With 2007 in the waning hours, I thought I'd add to the "2007" posts. Here's a comprehensive listing of all that I read in the 2007 year. Enjoy. I'll write more later on the "best of" reads from this list, but until then... here it is.

Evil and the Justice of God [N. T. Wright]

The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream [Barack Obama]

Jesus and Non-Violence: A Third Way [Walter Wink]

The Powers That Be [Walter Wink]

Non-Violence: Twenty-Five Lessons from the History of a Dangerous Idea [Mark Kurlansky]

The Gospel According to Starbucks [Leonard Sweet]

Creation and the Persistence of Evil: The Jewish Drama of Divine Omnipotence [Jon D. Levenson]

Simplicity: The Freedom of Letting Go [Richard Rohr]

Binding the Strong Man: A Political Reading of Mark's Story of Jesus [Ched Myers]

A Hidden Wholeness: The Journey Toward An Undivided Life [Parker Palmer]

Sex God: Exploring the Endless Connections Between Sexuality and Spirituality [Rob Bell]

Everything Belongs: The Gift of Contemplative Prayer [Richard Rohr]

The Lost Message of Jesus [Steve Chalke and Alan Mann]

Room Full of Mirrors: A Biography of Jimi Hendrix [Charles R. Cross]

Rethinking "Gnosticism": An Argument for Dismantling a Dubious Category [Michael Allen Williams]

The Myth of a Christian Nation: How the Quest for Political Power is Destroying the Church [Gregory A. Boyd]

Eschatology, Messianism, and the Dead Sea Scrolls [Craig A. Evans and Peter W. Flint]

Soul Graffiti: Making a Life in the Way of Jesus [Mark Scandrette]

The Community of the Renewed Covenant [Eugene Ulrich and James VanderKam]

What is Gnosticism? [Karen L. King]

Behind the Essenes: History and Ideology in the Dead Sea Scrolls [Philip R. Davies]

Jim and Casper Go to Church [Jim Henderson and Matt Casper]

Eddie Would Go: The Story of Eddie Aikau, Hawaiian Hero and Pioneer of Big Wave Surfing [Stuart Holmes Coleman]

They Like Jesus But Not the Church: Insights from Emerging Generations [Dan Kimball]

Moneyball [Michael Lewis]

The Gift of the Jews: How a Tribe of Nomads Changed the Way Everyone Thinks and Feels [Thomas Cahill]

What Are the Dead Sea Scrolls and Why Do They Matter? [David Noel Freedman and Pam Fox Kuhlken]

The Copper Scroll and the Search for the Temple Treasure [Hershel Shanks]

The People of the Dead Sea Scrolls: Their Writings, Beliefs and Practices [Florentino Garcia Martinez and Julio Trebolle Barrera]

Into the Wild [Jon Krakauer]

The First Christmas: What the Gospels Really Teach About Jesus' Birth [Marcus J. Borg and John Dominic Crossan]

Jesus as Fulfillment.

So, is Jesus prophecy fulfilled? Yes. And in a much richer and fuller sense than imagined by those of us who grew up with the prediction-fulfillment formula and paradigm.

Jesus is not the fulfillment of miraculous specific predictions. Rather, he is the fulfillment of the Law and the Prophets in a much more comprehensive sense. He is not their replacement, as has too often been thought by Christians, as if he superceded, and thus made irrelevant, the Law and the Prophets (and thus Judaism).

Instead, he is, according to Matthew and Luke (and the rest of the New Testament) the completion of the Law and the Prophets. He is their crystallization, their expression in an embodied life. He decisively reveals and incarnates the passion of God as disclosed in the Law and the Prophets - the promise and hope for a very different kind of world from the world of Pharaoh and Caesar, the world of domination and empire.

That Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, is not a fact to be proved, as if it could be the logical conclusion of a syllogism based upon an argument from prophecy. Rather, to call Jesus the Messiah, the Son of God, Lord, and Savior, as the Christmas stories do, is a confession of commitment, allegiance, and loyalty. To do so means: I see in this person the anointed one of God, the decisive disclosure of God - of what can be seen of God in human life, the fulfillment of Israel's deepest yearnings, the one who reveals God's dream for this world. This is what it means to call him Emmanuel and to affirm that Emmanuel has come. [pp. 224-225]

Peace on Earth.

All this raises one very clear question. In Matthew's Christmas story, Jesus is the Davidic Messiah who is the God-appointed King of the Jews. But Herod is the Rome-appointed King of the Jews. How exactly do those alternative kingdoms compare to one another? What is the essential difference between them - granted, of course, that any final answer must not come from this overture, but only from the entire life story to follow?

The same question arises in Luke's Christmas story. Caesar Augustus brought "the whole world," as he claimed, under the peace of the Roman Empire - the Pax Romana, which was also the Pax Augustana. What, then is this new peace announced as the good news of Jesus' birth as Savior, Messiah, and Lord?

The Roman vision incarnated in the divine Augustus was peace through victory. The Christian vision incarnated in the divine Jesus was peace through justice. It is those alternatives that are at stake behind all the titles and countertitles, the claims and counterclaims.

The terrible truth is that our world has never established peace through victory. Victory establishes not peace, but lull. Thereafter, violence returns once again, and always worse than before. And it is that escalator violence that then endangers our world.

We face a similar choice each Christmas, and so each Advent is a time of repentance for the past and change for the future. Do we think that peace on earth comes from Caesar or Christ? Do we think that it comes through violent victory or nonviolent justice? Advent, like Lent, is about a choice of how to live personally and individually, nationally and internationally.

Christmas is not about tinsel and mistletoe or even ornaments and presents, but about what means will we use toward the end of a peace from heaven upon earth. [pp. 164-167]