Thursday, June 25, 2009

My Favorite Farrah Fawcett Movie

My list of favorite Farrah Fawcett movies is not very long. In fact, I think there's only one. Nonetheless, I did enjoy her acting in The Apostle (starring Robert Duvall in the title role). The movie is hard to characterize. It's really funny in parts, and it's also pretty dark in parts. It's also touching in parts.

As long as I'm talking movies, I had a chance to watch John Hancock, starring Will Smith. I did not expect much, but the film surprised me, and I really enjoyed it. It's now at the top of my "superhero" list of favorites (which, like favorite Farrah Fawcett movies, is not a particularly long list).

Monday, June 01, 2009

4 a.m. conference call

So I got up this morning for a 4 a.m. conference call with a person in London and another person in Australia. Our meeting lasted for about 40 minutes, then I went back to bed.

We were on the phone, as well as using a web plateform that allowed us to all view the same computer screen as we talked.

I suppose I shouldn't be amazed by stuff like this any more. But I still find the ease with which this is all done to be amazing.

Thursday, May 28, 2009

A Striking Juxtaposition in Luke 21

This juxtaposition of Jesus' remarks in Luke 21.16 and 21.18 struck me last weekend: "They will put some of you to death . . . Yet not a hair of your head will perish."

Friday, May 15, 2009

Gallup Survey Reports Pro-Life Majority

This Gallup poll reports a majority of Americans are pro-life. A good thing, if correct. I'd like to see the result replicated before I believe it entirely, however. It's significant jump from previous numbers, and I don't really see what factors could account for that much movement in the anti-abortion direction. So I wonder whether the sample was in the tails (i.e., was not representative of the underlying population).

Nonetheless, it's possible good news. I hope it's confirmed.

Wednesday, April 15, 2009

Three Things I Never Dreamt I'd Hear Coming Out of My Mouth

[1] "I've been in prisons all across the state of Texas."

[2] "Where is the immigration line for non-citizens?"

[3] "The falling pound has really hurt the royalties from my London publisher."

Monday, April 06, 2009

Jesus' Prayer in Gethsemane

With Good Friday coming up, here's a repeat of a post from last year.

I’ve blogged about this before -- that the traditional take on Jesus’ prayer in Gethsemane seems to be that Jesus asked God the Father to spare him from the Cross, and that God the Father said “no.”

The traditional view requires what seems to me to be two problematic assumptions: first, that God the Father would reject one of his Son’s prayers, and, secondly, that Jesus would actually ask his Father to be spared the Cross.

Neither of these assumptions seems consistent with what the Scriptures teach.

My argument is two-fold: Jesus’ prayer in Gethsemane was not a prayer to be spared from the Cross, but rather was a prayer to be resurrected from the dead after his death and judgment on the Cross. And so, secondly, God the Father answered Jesus’ prayer in Gethsemane in the affirmative.

Let’s start with the second point first. It seems to me that Heb 5.7 pretty much states that God answered "yes" to Jesus’ Gethsemane prayer (while the traditional view requires that God answers "no" to Jesus' prayer in Gethsemane):

“In the days of his flesh, he offered up both prayers and supplications with loud crying and tears to the one able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his piety” (Heb 5.7).

How could this be, particularly since Jesus did in fact die? If the traditional view is correct, then Heb 5.7 must be wrong, because the Father did not save Jesus from death on the cross; he did not "hear" his prayer to be spared the cross.

But that’s not the point of Heb 5.7. The point is that God the Father "heard" Jesus’ prayer and so Jesus was saved from death by resurrection from the dead.

The author of Hebrews has Jesus asking God the Father not to be spared from the Cross, but to be resurrected after dying on the Cross. And that prayer God the Father dramatically answers in the affirmative. This answers the first problem with the traditional view – whether God the Father said “no” to Jesus in Gethsemane. Heb 5.7 says that the Father answered “yes" to his Son's prayer in Gethsemane.

This, in turn, raises the question of what Jesus asked of the Father in the Garden. If Jesus asked to be spared the Cross, then the Father must have said “no” (since Jesus in fact went to the cross). So the passage in Hebrews requires that we look again at what Jesus asks in the Garden.

Before going there, though, consider first a couple of other passages.

For example, in the Book of John, Jesus expressly rejects the idea that he would ask God the Father to be spared from the cross:

"Now my soul has become troubled; and what shall I say, 'Father, save me from this hour'? But for this purpose I came to this hour” (Jn 12.27-28).

It's a reductio. Jesus basically says, "How can I pray to be saved from this hour, since this hour is the purpose for which I came."

The traditional view requires Jesus several hours later to pray what he says in John that he would not pray.

So, too, later in John, Jesus reaffirms his mission:

"Then Simon Peter, having a sword, drew it and struck the high priest's servant and cut off his right ear. (The servant's name was Malchus.) So Jesus said to Peter, 'Put your sword into its sheath; shall I not drink the cup that the Father has given me?'" (Jn 18.10-11).

Also, recall in the Gospel of Matthew, that Jesus rebukes Peter with a “get thee behind me Satan” when Peter wishes Jesus to avoid the Cross (Mt 16.21-23). Yet the traditional reading of Jesus’ prayer in Gethsemane would have Jesus asking God the Father for the same thing that he rebuked Peter for wishing.

But given the passages above, is there a reasonable way to understand Jesus’ petitions in the Garden that is consistent with those other passages?

Jesus’ prayer that the cup pass away is not necessarily a prayer that he not drink of the cup at all, but that he not drink of the cup of judgment eternally – i.e., that he would be resurrected after the cross.

The cup is the cup of judgment (compare Rev 14.10). Consistent with Heb 5.7, that Jesus was not asking to avoid the cup altogether seems obvious from Mt 26.42, when Jesus prays, “My father, if this cannot pass away until I drink it, your will be done.”

Note here that Jesus contemplates that the cup “pass away” after he drinks it. Nonetheless, the “if” makes it sound as though Jesus is requesting that the cup pass away without his drinking it. But the Greek word “if” can also be translated as “since.” More consistently with Heb 5.7, perhaps Jesus is praying, “My father, since this cannot pass away until I drink it, your will be done.” That is, Jesus is willing to endure eternal judgment if it is the Father’s will. (This is consistent with the fact that Jesus went to the cross “for the joy set before him” in redeeming humanity, Heb 12.2).

Jesus’ first prayer in the Gospel of Matthew can be similarly translated, “My Father, since it is possible, let this cup pass from me; yet not as I will, but as you will” (Mat 26.39).

This is Jesus praying not to avoid the Cross, but to be resurrected after the cross – that the cup of judgment pass away after Jesus drinks it, rather than that Jesus suffer death and the curse eternally (i.e., that Jesus drinks the cup of judgment forever).

Thursday, March 19, 2009

Sort of Interesting -- Nm 21

The OT reading for the upcoming Sunday is Numbers 21.4-9 (naturally linked with John 3.14-21).

I just noticed the difference between what the people asked for, and what God provided. To wit, the people asked:

"We sinned when we spoke against the LORD and against you. Pray that the LORD will take the snakes away from us" (Nm 21.7, emphasis added).

Here's how God responded: "Make a snake and put it up on a pole; anyone who is bitten can look at it and live" (v. 8, emphasis added).

So the peopled asked God to take the snakes away from them, God responded by continuing to allow the snakes to bite the people, but preserving those bitten from death.

I would guess that the serpents would be most likely to strike at the heel of Israel, as God told the serpent in Gen 3.15. I presume that a snake bite would bruise a person's heel. Nonetheless, the bite of the serpents in Numbers 21 would no longer kill.

So, too, today, we are all bruised by sin. In this life, at least, we experience the pain of the serpent's bite. We do live, however. And in the Age to Come, "He will wipe every tear from their eyes" (Rev 21.4).