Landmark decision


The Grand Palabre of the Baptist Union of a small and insignificant island nation (that most readers of Sansblogue will think is a merely a province of Gondwanaland) took a landmark decision recently. Their exhaustive and exhausting process involved a working party meeting over a two year period to listen to anyone with an axe to grind. After some time of seclusion and retreat, the working party formuated a careful report with several carefully worded recommendations. However since the topic, gluttony, was one that affected so many of the denomination directly the governing committee decided to decline the careful recommendations and replace them with three resolutions that will end the gluttony problem for ever.

These wise resolutions (that declare clearly and unequivocally the denomination’s hatred of gluttony while nevertheless somehow maintaining “fellowship” with churches who encourage gluttons as members) were as follows (after some hard-fought ammendments were passed or failed):

  1. We affirm the clear teaching of the Bible that gluttony is a serious sin.
  2. We covenant togrether to remove glottony from our midst.
  3. Any Baptist Senior Pastor (or Junior or Subaltern pastor left momentarily in charge) who allows anyone who is overweight at or above the 10th centile to atend a church lunch will in the first instance be removed from the Union mailing list.1

As you can see the governing comittee were well advised to ignore the working party recommendartions, which might have allowed promiscuous gluttony at Baptist Church meetings, and to replace them with such a clear statement.

  1. It is understood that what follows “the first instance” does not need to be defined, since the punishment in the first instance is sufficient on its own to act as a deterrent and end the scourge of gluttony. []

Writing the essay


People hate to write

writersblockMost people hate writing. Even professional writers suffer from “writers’ block”, a combination of symptoms that lead to them doing anything else except actually write. Students with assignments do not have the luxury of years to prepare their masterpieces – they work with tight deadlines. The good news is that if you follow the advice in the earlier post “researching an essay” then you are already past the first barrier, you have begun to write!

Let me explain: As part of the research process, indeed as the goal of that process you have a title and a summary paragraph. I described the summary paragraph like this:

The first sentence should define the areas or issue. The last should present a conclusion. In between the sentences should each address one thing, and together they should present the arguments and sorts of evidence that lead to the conclusion.

If you have actually done this, instead of skipping over it as an unnecessary extra asd many of us (sadly) do, you have a framework that you will now expand into your essay.

From summary to essay

target-970640_1920You are basically going to turn each sentence into a paragraph or two of your essay. So, how many sentences do you have. (Remember they need to be short and focused, if they are long and complex edit them!)  If each sentence was a paragraph (of the average length of paragraph you write) how close would you be to the word target? If this estimate is over you may need to begin thinking of what to cut, or trying to write shorter paragraphs – often shorter simpler sentences will help you do this ;)  If the estimate is under you may need to make each sentence of the summary (or some of them) into two paragraphs. Ideally at this stage youi are aiming for an essay that will be 10-20% over the word target.

These paragraphs should be easy to write – you have already done the research. They will be focused – each expands on one simple sentence. They will lead your reader sensibly through the arguments and evidence to your conclusion. Congratulations. You are one ofd the few students to write a coherent essay!

Already you are on track for better marks – you would be horrified how many incoherent essays teachers have to mark – if you doubt this befriend some (ex)teachers on Facebook ;)

The final steps

According to the Daily Telegraph: Mark Smithers, from Kent, recently revealed that he lost 11 stone in one year

According to the Daily Telegraph:
Mark Smithers, from Kent, recently revealed that he lost 11 stone in one year

You have two tasks left:

Edit, then edit again. Cut the waffle. In speech we need time to think so we use words and phrases that mean nothing or which add little to the meaning to give us time to think. Cut them out! We think descriptive words, especially superlatives, make our writing and ideas stronger, usually they don’t – cut them. A slimmed down, taut and powerful essay will come out of this painful process!

Write a conclusion. What it will look like depends on the subject and type of essay. BUT it should say nothing new. It should merely repeat in compressed form what you have already said. It serves to remind your reader what you said, and draws attention to how cleverly and in what a focused way you arrived there.

Jesus Christ Lust for Glory


Eleven years ago today my feed reader led me to to a magnificent post on Paleojudaica. it explores alternate histories of the Python movie Life of Brian as well as biblical studies related themes, like the nature of canon, memory and history…

Eleven years on it is still worth a read! Palaeojudaica is still going strong too, and those are things to celebrate.

My title? Well apparently that was a possible title for The Life of Brian but:

it did not take the troupe long to conclude that Jesus was the wrong target entirely. They couldn’t really fault his teachings and failed to see what was funny about them. The less relaxed followers of Jesus, on the other hand, were another matter entirely.

Eminently sensible, not silly at all!

Sex is dynamite!


I hope (yesterday) we established that God likes sex. Now we need to also recognise that sex is dynamite, and marriage is an unstable cocktail of explosive emotions. Yet God designed sex to be fun and to be fulfilling. God designed it to be making love too. That means that as a couple who are united in a faithful marriage relationship relate sexually (as well as in every other way) they “make love”. Love grows in a good marriage. The two become one, and depend on one another more and more.

Sex is dynamite, and – just like dynamite – when it’s misused, the results are a horrible disaster. But when it’s used right it’s powerful stuff.

The trouble is, we’ve got so hung up on warning people not to light the fuse at the wrong time or in the wrong place, that we’ve forgotten to explain how to do it right.

People need to hear of the delight of being able to depend on someone else. In this dog-eat-dog world, we need to say to them there’s immense strength to be drawn from the power of two. That someone who knows me (often better than I know myself) is looking over my shoulder, even putting my interests before her own – just like God! – is a source of immense strength.

People change. Because old friends change at a distance from us, often those friendships weaken. Husbands and wives change too, but if all goes well the answer to the Beatles question: “When I grow older… will you still need me?” is “More than ever. To know you is to love you!

Now of course, you can’t escape the statistics, marriage is on the rocks. Marriages are breaking all the time. Many people are better off out of relationships that – far from mirroring those in the Godhead – become pure hell. Of course we should be putting more work into helping people in this pressure cooker world. Yes it’s great that youngsters are not rushing into marriage, but thinking twice. But it is still true that there are few things better in this world than a good marriage. And it’s time we said so.

For too long we’ve kept quiet about the joys and delights of a faithful relationship that depends utterly and trusts completely. It’s time to speak. To join the godhead and declare “it’s good, it’s very good!

PS on “covering your feet”

These men in the Ha'aretz report were NOT "covering their feet"!

The men illustrating the Ha’aretz report (above) were NOT “covering their feet”. 

In conversation on Bob’s blog, related to my post below about foot as a possible euphemism for male genitals in the Bible, he points out that there are cases where the phrase “cover his feet” is clearly euphemistic for “going to the bathroom” – to use a more contemporary American euphemism. I entirely agree. It is. Clearly when Saul in 1 Samuel 24:3 goes into the cave to “cover his feet” להסך את־רגליו he is as the Living Bible said going “to the bathroom” (cf. Judges 3:24).

I am left with two problems, do two case make sufficient precedent for seeing euphemisms everywhere, and more importantly, how does this euphemism: “cover … feet” = “go to the bathroom” work? The way it seems to me to make sense is that when one needed to relieve oneself in the fields or on a journey one squatted, thus “covering one’s feet” with ones robe, and hiding the action from passers by. Thus it seems to me the clear euphemism is “cover the feet” = “relieve oneself” and not “foot” = “male organ”.

Mark Driscoll at Thrive and a sharp double-edged sword!


Mark Driscoll spoke at a leadership conference recently. He began with the sad story of his family’s experience during and after the events that led to his ministry at Mars Hill ending in shame and the closure of the church. This story is sad and my heart goes out to him and especially his children. No one should be treated that way!

His topic was forgiveness, and he focused on the need for “struck shepherds” to forgive those who have hurt them. So the introduction telling of his family’s experience was strong. The talk is a powerful reminder of the centrality and importance of forgiving to Christian living. It is made more real by Driscoll’s desire to forgive those who hurt his children.

Several people have already commented on the strange fact that Driscoll never asks for forgiveness or acknowledges his fault in all this experience (apart from  a rather trite aside about “struck shepherds” sometimes hitting themselves in the head). That despite his experiences and his desire to forgive Driscoll’s talk is still self-centered is sad, but sadly not untypical of Western Christians in the early 21st century.

What I have not seen commented on is Driscoll’s use of Scripture. The phrase “struck shepherds” runs like a refrain through the talk. The refers to a verse from the Old Testament that Jesus quotes in which he reads “Strike thou the shepherd and the sheep scatter.” The passages are Zechariah 13:7 and Mark 14:27 || Matt 26:31. I am not sure which passage Driscoll read nor which translation, because he seems to misquote. For the original verse in Zechariah all the translations I looked at had something like:

“Strike the shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered;
I will turn my hand against the little ones.

While the gospels read something like:

 Mark 14:27 “You will all fall away,” Jesus told them, “for it is written: ‘I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered.'”

Matthew 26:31 Then Jesus told them, “This very night you will all fall away on account of me, for it is written: “`I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock will be scattered.’

Far from offering comfort to a “struck shepherd”, as Driscoll seems to think,  what I notice in both the prophet and in Jesus quoting of the prophet is that the agency of the striking is God.

In these Bible passages the shepherd is struck by God.

And, unless Driscoll thinks he is Jesus struck by God and crucified he presumably ought to identify himself with the struck human shepherd/leader(s) of Zech 13. This is not at all comforting for Driscoll, for this chapter proclaims God’s action against the false leaders who led his people into idolatry!

Beware lest your misuse of Scripture cause the weapon to turn in your hand and bite you. For the words of the Word of God as like a sharp double-edged sword!

Revelation 1:16 In his right hand he held seven stars, and out of his mouth came a sharp double-edged sword. His face was like the sun shining in all its brilliance.

Visiting “Israel” today

From Sacraparental illustrating Chris's post

Chris Chamberlain is an interesting guy (see the neat short description at the top of the post I’m linking to). He was taken to Israel and the “Occupied Territories” recently with WorldVision.1  His reflections on Facebook were so good that Thalia and others of us persuaded him to write them up for a wider audience. In the first one (published today) he acknowledges his biases, but the writing is an interesting balance between anger at injustice and a gentle human concern for (all) others.

Having twice (1986 and 2000) made brief visits (focused on archaeological sites of Old Testament interest, not on justice) to Israel and having an Israeli friend as house guest at present, I recommend Chris’s reflections to everyone whatever political knees they are inclined to jerk when “Israel” is mentioned. This is a hard, hurtful and dangerous conflict and it is bound to be more complex than you or I think. Please read ‘We Refuse to be Enemies’: A Christchurch Minister visits Palestine and Israel if nothing else your understanding of life today in the land where the Bible stories happened will be enriched, and your humanity should get some exercise too!

  1. Original text error corrected 18 April 2015. []