Geoff's Miscellany

Pro 24:27 Prepare your work outside; get everything ready for yourself in the field, and after that build your house.

I suppose you could shorten this Proverb to “put first things first.”

Of course, to do that we’ve got to think things through.

In the case of buying property in the ancient world, you’d want to make sure it could produce wealth before building a house on it.

Similarly, one might want to find a good source or several sources of income before buying a house.

Text

Translation

Reflections

1. Eye for an eye was an Old Testament legal precedent applicable to situations in which an unborn baby or neighbor is injured by violence. The law was also a precedent for cases concerning false witnesses.
2. Jesus does not seem to be claiming that courtroom judgments should be abrogated. He uses court circumstances and assumes their enduring relevance in two previous triads. Instead, he seems to be correcting the use of these passages as justifications for using evils suffered as justification for evils done.
3. The way out of the cycle of returning evil for evil is illustrated in four ways, but I think it’s important not to limit the process to these specifics and indeed, Jesus himself does not treat these commands as absolute rules for all times but as wise ways to avoid resisting evil with evil. So turn the cheek, go the mile, give the garment, and so-on are illustrations.
4. For instance, Jesus tells people, “No” when they ask him for a sign (Matthew 16). He also criticizes a man for striking him (John 18:23).
5. So, if there are exceptions, it is perhaps best to think of this teaching as recommending that one do the shocking or disarming thing to create peace in the face of institutional oppression and personal honor challenges.
6. Jerome Neyrey sees this particular passage as a way out of the tit for tat honor/shame game played in the ancient world. I think that is part of the idea, though probably not the whole idea as Jesus and the apostles in Acts participate in that game verbally.

References

“The world is nothing but change. Our life is only perception. (bk IV ch 3)”

A great deal of our life is based on fiction which we mistake for reality.

We worry about this disaster in the future or we bother over this memory of the past.

The fact is that our memory of the event is transfigured by its repeatedly being brought before our minds with all of the negative feelings we associate with it.

One of my students told me that this song would be sure to get me pumped up for morning visits to the gym.

Results may vary, but I listened to it when I dead lifted 325 Friday. But I often turn my music off for heavy lifts to make sure my focus is on form.

Also, here’s a version for nerds who like cartoons with a lot of yelling:

I’ve slowly been writing summaries of my reasons for being a Christian using the three phases of persuasion: ethos, pathos, and logos. This is the third post under pathos (emotions).

When it comes to emotional reasons for being a Christian, this one might seem the most unusual, but here it is: The idea of a cosmos teeming with purpose imbued upon it by an infinite intelligence within which a conflict of temporal and everlasting significance takes place is just damned interesting. Worldviews with cosmic level conflicts this sort can be found in most ancient cultures.[1] That the Bible contains a worldview like those of the ancient shouldn’t astonish us, as it was written and compiled when the majority of people thought this way.

A challenging book in the tradition of Christian devotional manuals is The Imitation of the Christ by Thomas A’Kempis. While some of the advice he gives is geared especially or even exclusively toward monks, a great deal of what is said is quite useful advice for appropriating a godly mindset. Here is an excerpt from the first chapter:

What good does it do to speak learnedly about the Trinity if, lacking humility, you displease the Trinity? Indeed it is not learning that makes a man holy and just, but a virtuous life makes him pleasing to God. I would rather feel contrition than know how to define it. For what would it profit us to know the whole Bible by heart and the principles of all the philosophers if we live without grace and the love of God? Vanity of vanities and all is vanity, except to love God and serve Him alone.

Thomas à Kempis, The Imitation of Christ (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, 1996), 1–2.

Luk 6:39-49  He also told them a parable: "Can a blind man lead a blind man? Will they not both fall into a pit? (40)  A disciple is not above his teacher, but everyone when he is fully trained will be like his teacher. (41)  Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? (42)  How can you say to your brother, 'Brother, let me take out the speck that is in your eye,' when you yourself do not see the log that is in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take out the speck that is in your brother's eye. (43)  "For no good tree bears bad fruit, nor again does a bad tree bear good fruit, (44)  for each tree is known by its own fruit. For figs are not gathered from thornbushes, nor are grapes picked from a bramble bush. (45)  The good person out of the good treasure of his heart produces good, and the evil person out of his evil treasure produces evil, for out of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaks. (46)  "Why do you call me 'Lord, Lord,' and not do what I tell you? (47)  Everyone who comes to me and hears my words and does them, I will show you what he is like: (48)  he is like a man building a house, who dug deep and laid the foundation on the rock. And when a flood arose, the stream broke against that house and could not shake it, because it had been well built. (49)  But the one who hears and does not do them is like a man who built a house on the ground without a foundation. When the stream broke against it, immediately it fell, and the ruin of that house was great."

The soul of the sluggard craves and gets nothing, while the soul of the diligent is richly supplied. (Pro 13:4)

“You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his male servant, or his female servant, or his ox, or his donkey, or anything that is your neighbor’s."(Exo 20:17)

In our Bibles coveting is an interesting concept, but itself it simply sounds like desire. But in the contexts the word appears, it clearly means desire out of proportion and intention to have/take what one cannot have.

Translation Matthew 5:33-37

Reflections:

1. One of our main tendencies when seeing the words of Christ in places like this is to try to find ways out or exceptions to the rule.
2. This instinct can be dangerous as it can be simply a way of getting out of what Jesus said.
3. This instinct can be very wise because it is important to fully understand a command before obeying it or to understand an ideal prior to pursuing it. “Jump.” “How high, on what, when?”
4. In this case, there are good reasons to ask, “Are there times Christians can take vows?” For instance, Paul takes a vow in Acts (it’s why he cuts his hair in Acts 18:18). The ancient Christians had baptismal/confirmation vows. Similarly, Jesus speaks highly of marriage and never proscribes it, but marriage is a covenant with vows/oaths.
5. So, what vows is Jesus prohibiting? I think that Jesus is prohibiting vows which endear the speaker to the hearers as a sign of honor. “I swear by the temple that I’ll do thus and such…” Jesus is essentially telling his disciples that while the ancients rightly said, “don’t break oaths, I’m telling you just don’t take them. Instead let your word (yes/no) be enough because it’s based on goodness.”
6. The reason I feel comfortable interpreting things that way is that I think that Glen Stassen’s triadic structure of the Sermon on the Mount makes the most sense. Each teaching is a three-part block with the emphasis on the third part which is a transforming initiative:
   1. Traditional piety
   2. Cycle of judgment
   3. Transforming initiative
7. The instruction about the futility of oaths and the reasons for avoiding them is not the actual imperative in the passage, but rather a description of the way things are. The command is “let your word be yes and no.”
8. The point here is very similar to the point made in chapter six. We’re supposed to do things because we see them as God’s will/the right thing to do, not as a way of advertising our piety to others. Our relationship with God is public insofar as it leads us to do good works. But it is to be hidden insofar as public displays of piety tend to be a part of the world of attention seeking rather than the world of virtue and interior transformation.
9. So ultimately, the point is simple: let what you say reflect what you're going to do and then do it or not. Don't embellish what you say to gain religious honor (which is a silly kind of honor, anyhow).

References

The recent Chili Peppers album is very very good. This song is one of many catchy experiments.

But this line caused me to reflect on other issues:

“I want to thank you and spank you on your silver skin, robots don’t care where I’ve been.”

Now, when Anthony Kiedis writes lyrics, it’s nearly impossible to pin down an objective meaning. But the connotation is sexual.