Shabbat in Jerusalem
Shabbat (Sabbath) means "to cease from one's labor." We have just experienced our first Shabbat since arriving in Jerusalem on Tuesday. In keeping with a very long Jewish tradition, which can already be seen in the days of Genesis One (where each day begins with evening), Shabbat begins at sundown Friday evening and concludes at sundown Saturday evening. It is now Saturday evening and the sun just sank below the western ridge opposite JUC as I write this line. The entire day has been notable in terms of quietness. Traffic was minimal and the hubbub of a modern city almost completely absent. Okay, just as I wrote this last line, I heard an automobile honking because Shabbat is now over and activity will soon pick up on what is called motzaei Shabbat ("the going out of Sabbath). Tomorrow (Sunday), once again, the din of city noises will be constant background noise.
There is something to be said for practicing Shabbat. Most evangelical Christians no longer observe Sabbath (on Sunday, of course!) like previous generations of evangelicals did. We have adapted to the neck break pace of modern American society and work hard and play hard. That leaves little room for contemplating God's being and his expressed will for us in Scripture. The Psalmist says, "Be still, and know that I am God" (Ps 46:10). We "do church" and assume we have fulfilled our obligation and honored God by doing so. But even doing church has to be programed into our crammed schedules.
Perhaps we can learn from the Jewish tradition of Sabbath keeping, not in a legalistic or mystical approach, but in a fresh realization that ceasing from our normal work schedule and setting aside time to listen to and contemplate the Master of the Universe is essential for our overall well-being . Transposed into a Christian context this means attuning ourselves to the Triune God. Such an exercise is a powerful means of becoming more like Christ. And when we become more like Christ, we relate to others in a more Christ-like manner and more effectively advance the kingdom of God, a rather counterintuitive idea by North American standards.
The prophet Amos had some trenchant remarks for his generation concerning their "religious performances." In a piece of biting sarcasm the prophet tells the people of Israel (the northern kingdom) that their sacrifices, tithes and offerings, which they "love to do," only multiplies their transgressions (Amos 4:4-5). In short, what God desires is not solemn assemblies, burnt offerings, the noise of songs and melody of harps (Amos 5:21-23), but living in obedience to his will.
Living in obedience to God's will is not something that happens simply because I schedule an appointment with God on my iPod Touch for one hour once a week. It will almost certainly require setting aside more time to listen to the Master of the Universe. In short, our evangelical ancestors would almost certainly chide us for our lax Sabbath observance. And , you know- "what ? They would have a good point. We should seriously reconsider our whole attitude towards the Christian Sabbath. I intend to do so.
May your Christian Sabbath be an enriching experience tomorrow!
Larry Helyer's Blog
Saturday, August 28, 2010
Thursday, August 12, 2010
National Self-interest and the Middle East
The new Prime Minister of the UK, David Cameron, has recently been highly critical of the Israeli policy with regard to Gaza, especially its naval blockade. But it's refreshing to see someone from the UK chide Mr. Cameron for so obviously playing to the gallery (in this case the Turkish government and people) based on national self-interest and economic concerns. The person in question is Dr. Calvin L. Smith, Principal of King’s Evangelical Divinity School in Wolverhampton, UK and his comments may be read on his website at www.calvinlsmith.com. Dr. Smith goes even further and laments some of Great Britain's mistakes in its past Middle East foreign policy, mistakes that have played a leading role, unfortunately, in creating the current Middle East crisis. As an American I have to be very careful here because it's easy to be self-righteous and judgmental. I need to say upfront that the US has committed enough sins in fo
reign policy to go around for everyone.
His comments lead me to offer some further thoughts. It should not be forgotten that it was a distinguished British evangelical, Lord Arthur James Balfour, seen here in this photograph, who played a key role in the rebirth of the modern State of Israel. He was instrumental in drafting the Balfour Declaration of 1917 which states: “His majesty’s government views with favor the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.” This declaration was an incredible shot in the arm for the Zionist Movement which had been struggling for several decades to reestablish a Jewish state in the ancestral homeland.
Prior to the Balfour Declaration, Zionism’s most visible spokesperson had been the Austrian born Jew, Theodor Herzl, seen here in this photograph. Herzl, hat in hand, even made a junket to Istanbul requesting permission from the Turkish Sultan to purchase land for a
Jewish state in Palestine. He was of course curtly denied and dismissed. Meanwhile, Baron Edmond Benjamin James de Rothschild (a Frenchman of the Rothschild banking family) underwrote pioneering Jewish settlements in Palestine and bought up any available land from Arab landholders (many of them absentee), however desolate and unproductive, at greatly inflated prices. Herzl spoke widely at public rallies on behalf of Zionism and presided over the first World Jewish Congress in 1897 devoted to the establishment of a Jewish state in the Land of Israel. These fledgling efforts, however, were more inspirational than substantive.
The Balfour Declaration, on the other hand, was a huge breakthrough. The World Zionist Organization–London Bureau sent out a manifesto addressed to the Jewish People. In this document the Zionist leadership declared that the Balfour Declaration “marks the end of an epoch, and it opens up the beginning of a new era. . . the period which now begins is fulfillment.”
But the buoyancy and optimism of 1917 was soon followed by anti-Jewish riots in May, 1921. Arabs, incited by the anti-Semitic rabble-rouser, Haj Amin el-Husseini, carried out deadly attacks on Jewish communities. Husseini, seen here with a Nazi soldier in Germany, was enthusiatic about the Nazi program to make Germany Judenrein and hoped to do the same in Palestine. In 1929 Arabs nearly wiped out the entire Jewish community of Hebron. The Jews form
ed self-defense units called the Haganah, trained in large part by the British officer, Major Charles Orde Wingate shown here. On the whole, however, the British Mandatory government in Palestine was not sympathetic to the Jewish cause and favored the Arabs. In fact, in May of 1939, the British Secretary of State presented a statement of policy on Palestine, a “white paper,” in which immigration and land purchases by Jews were curtailed. This of course came at the very time when Jews desperately needed a safe haven from the Nazis.
After WWII, in the aftermath of the Holocaust, world Jewry thought surely the British would reopen the gates to Palestine. Instead, the British restricted Jewish immigration even more. The British Foreign Office, with a view to strategic national interests (read here especially OIL), continued a determined policy of currying the favor of the emerging Arab states (hence Dr. Calvin Smith’s comparison to Mr. Cameron). Tragically, the US had also refused to open its doors to Jewish refugees fleeing the Nazi regime in Germany. The US Congress had already passed an immigration law in 1922 that had choked off the influx of Jews to a mere trickle and the national sentiment was overwhelmingly isolationist and strongly opposed to immigration (Hmm. Does this sound vaguely familiar?)
In short, the British government both radically reinterpreted and quietly ignored the Balfour Declaration. If one is guided only by national self-interest, this is perfectly understandable. After all, who would have predicted that a Jewish state could survive anyway in a sea of Islam? Many of
the actions and policies of British officials and military leaders in Palestine during the troubled days following WWII clearly favored the Arab cause. This has been vividly depicted in the book O Jerusalem! by Dominque LaPierre and Larry Collins. I highly recommend this for all who want to understand some of the historical background to the present impasse.
During this period of the Mandate, the British government increasingly found itself caught between a rock and a hard place. Promises made earlier to both Jews and Arabs simply could not be kept which in turn led to bitter recrimination and even terrorism directed at British soldiers and officials in Palestine. In hindsight, the Balfour Declaration contains aspirations that now seem naive. How precisely can one have a Jewish home in Palestine without prejudicing the civil and religious rights of non-Jewish communities in Palestine? It would appear that even Solomon in all his wisdom would be hard-pressed to pull this one off!
On November 29, 1947, the UN General Assembly voted to partition Palestine into two states, one Jewish and the other Arab. On May 14, 1948 Israel declared herself an independent nation and the very next day was invaded by the armies of six neighboring Arab states. Remarkably, some would even say, miraculously, Israel not only survived but increased its territory initially allotted by the UN Partition Plan. Now here we are, some 62 years and 5 wars later, and there is still no independent Palestinian state. The reasons for this are various and highly disputed. But that is the subject of a future blog.
I leave off with this sad observation: nationalistic self-interest and indifference, whether on the part of the UK or the US, has resulted in great human tragedy for both Arabs and Jews. I fervently hope that in the not too distant future a comprehensive settlement can be implemented with Israel and a Palestinian state living side by side in peace. Surely all evangelicals of whatever nationality and political persuasion can join together and respond to the Psalmist's urgent request: "Pray for the peace of Jerusalem."(Ps 122:6). May it happen speedily and in our day!
The new Prime Minister of the UK, David Cameron, has recently been highly critical of the Israeli policy with regard to Gaza, especially its naval blockade. But it's refreshing to see someone from the UK chide Mr. Cameron for so obviously playing to the gallery (in this case the Turkish government and people) based on national self-interest and economic concerns. The person in question is Dr. Calvin L. Smith, Principal of King’s Evangelical Divinity School in Wolverhampton, UK and his comments may be read on his website at www.calvinlsmith.com. Dr. Smith goes even further and laments some of Great Britain's mistakes in its past Middle East foreign policy, mistakes that have played a leading role, unfortunately, in creating the current Middle East crisis. As an American I have to be very careful here because it's easy to be self-righteous and judgmental. I need to say upfront that the US has committed enough sins in fo
reign policy to go around for everyone.His comments lead me to offer some further thoughts. It should not be forgotten that it was a distinguished British evangelical, Lord Arthur James Balfour, seen here in this photograph, who played a key role in the rebirth of the modern State of Israel. He was instrumental in drafting the Balfour Declaration of 1917 which states: “His majesty’s government views with favor the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.” This declaration was an incredible shot in the arm for the Zionist Movement which had been struggling for several decades to reestablish a Jewish state in the ancestral homeland.
Prior to the Balfour Declaration, Zionism’s most visible spokesperson had been the Austrian born Jew, Theodor Herzl, seen here in this photograph. Herzl, hat in hand, even made a junket to Istanbul requesting permission from the Turkish Sultan to purchase land for a
Jewish state in Palestine. He was of course curtly denied and dismissed. Meanwhile, Baron Edmond Benjamin James de Rothschild (a Frenchman of the Rothschild banking family) underwrote pioneering Jewish settlements in Palestine and bought up any available land from Arab landholders (many of them absentee), however desolate and unproductive, at greatly inflated prices. Herzl spoke widely at public rallies on behalf of Zionism and presided over the first World Jewish Congress in 1897 devoted to the establishment of a Jewish state in the Land of Israel. These fledgling efforts, however, were more inspirational than substantive.The Balfour Declaration, on the other hand, was a huge breakthrough. The World Zionist Organization–London Bureau sent out a manifesto addressed to the Jewish People. In this document the Zionist leadership declared that the Balfour Declaration “marks the end of an epoch, and it opens up the beginning of a new era. . . the period which now begins is fulfillment.”
But the buoyancy and optimism of 1917 was soon followed by anti-Jewish riots in May, 1921. Arabs, incited by the anti-Semitic rabble-rouser, Haj Amin el-Husseini, carried out deadly attacks on Jewish communities. Husseini, seen here with a Nazi soldier in Germany, was enthusiatic about the Nazi program to make Germany Judenrein and hoped to do the same in Palestine. In 1929 Arabs nearly wiped out the entire Jewish community of Hebron. The Jews form
ed self-defense units called the Haganah, trained in large part by the British officer, Major Charles Orde Wingate shown here. On the whole, however, the British Mandatory government in Palestine was not sympathetic to the Jewish cause and favored the Arabs. In fact, in May of 1939, the British Secretary of State presented a statement of policy on Palestine, a “white paper,” in which immigration and land purchases by Jews were curtailed. This of course came at the very time when Jews desperately needed a safe haven from the Nazis.After WWII, in the aftermath of the Holocaust, world Jewry thought surely the British would reopen the gates to Palestine. Instead, the British restricted Jewish immigration even more. The British Foreign Office, with a view to strategic national interests (read here especially OIL), continued a determined policy of currying the favor of the emerging Arab states (hence Dr. Calvin Smith’s comparison to Mr. Cameron). Tragically, the US had also refused to open its doors to Jewish refugees fleeing the Nazi regime in Germany. The US Congress had already passed an immigration law in 1922 that had choked off the influx of Jews to a mere trickle and the national sentiment was overwhelmingly isolationist and strongly opposed to immigration (Hmm. Does this sound vaguely familiar?)
In short, the British government both radically reinterpreted and quietly ignored the Balfour Declaration. If one is guided only by national self-interest, this is perfectly understandable. After all, who would have predicted that a Jewish state could survive anyway in a sea of Islam? Many of
the actions and policies of British officials and military leaders in Palestine during the troubled days following WWII clearly favored the Arab cause. This has been vividly depicted in the book O Jerusalem! by Dominque LaPierre and Larry Collins. I highly recommend this for all who want to understand some of the historical background to the present impasse.During this period of the Mandate, the British government increasingly found itself caught between a rock and a hard place. Promises made earlier to both Jews and Arabs simply could not be kept which in turn led to bitter recrimination and even terrorism directed at British soldiers and officials in Palestine. In hindsight, the Balfour Declaration contains aspirations that now seem naive. How precisely can one have a Jewish home in Palestine without prejudicing the civil and religious rights of non-Jewish communities in Palestine? It would appear that even Solomon in all his wisdom would be hard-pressed to pull this one off!
On November 29, 1947, the UN General Assembly voted to partition Palestine into two states, one Jewish and the other Arab. On May 14, 1948 Israel declared herself an independent nation and the very next day was invaded by the armies of six neighboring Arab states. Remarkably, some would even say, miraculously, Israel not only survived but increased its territory initially allotted by the UN Partition Plan. Now here we are, some 62 years and 5 wars later, and there is still no independent Palestinian state. The reasons for this are various and highly disputed. But that is the subject of a future blog.
I leave off with this sad observation: nationalistic self-interest and indifference, whether on the part of the UK or the US, has resulted in great human tragedy for both Arabs and Jews. I fervently hope that in the not too distant future a comprehensive settlement can be implemented with Israel and a Palestinian state living side by side in peace. Surely all evangelicals of whatever nationality and political persuasion can join together and respond to the Psalmist's urgent request: "Pray for the peace of Jerusalem."(Ps 122:6). May it happen speedily and in our day!
Monday, July 12, 2010
Bishop Gobat School
Readers may wonder about the campus of Jerusalem University College as they see the photograph of it on the masthead of our website. Clearly, the buildings are not of recent construction.
Pictured here is a photograph taken around 1936 looking east toward the Dead Sea and ancient Moab. The main buildings in the center of the picture were formerly called the Bishop Gobat School for Boys. Gobat, an Anglican clergyman,
built the school in 1853. His intention was to provide poor Arab boys with a rudimentary education and teach them a trade. Bishop Gobat was a very influential voice for the Anglican Church in Palestine in the mid-nineteenth century. In fact, he succeeded in gaining a place for Anglicans at the religious table in Jerusalem, alongside the long-established and powerful Latin and Greek Christian communities, as well as the less well-known communions like the Armenians, Copts, Ethiopians, Jacobite Syrians, Marionite Catholic, and others.
At any rate, the school itself had a checkered history and there were those in the Anglican Church who were scandalized by alleged immorality among the Arab boys and were critical of the leadership of Gobat, claiming the boys were scarcely literate. But being a powerful and persuasive personality, Gobat weathered the storms and challenges and the school continued for many years.
In 1948, the Bishop Gobat School found itself smack dab in the middle of a desperate struggle by the Jewish community to maintain a foothold in the Old City. This was shortly after Israel proclaimed herself a sovereign state in May of 1948. In response, six surrounding Arab nations invaded and sought to obliterate the fledgling state before it could even spread its wings. The Jordanian Legion had cut off the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem from the new city, the predominantly Jewish sector. The situation for the small Jewish garrison in the Jewish Quarter was critical. Short of ammunition, bodies, food and medicine, they appealed for help to the Jewish Haganah (defense force).
The Haganah came up with a bold plan. Sitting on the bedrock scarp of Mt Zion, overlooking the Hinnom Valley and upon which the Second Temple wall once stood, the Bishop Gobat School afforded a place to transfer supplies across the deep Hinnom Valley, separating the Jewish Quarter from the Jewish sector of the new city. Inside one of the rooms of the school, the Haganah fastened a cable and strung the cable across the valley to the opposite side as seen in this photograph I took in 1968. Under cover of darkness, the Jews ferried munitions, food and medicine across the valley in baskets. There is a story that circulates about the famous one-eyed Israeli general, Moshe Dayan. They say he crossed over the Hinnom to the Jewish Quarter one dark night in a basket suspended by the cable. Perhaps it's an urban legend, but it's certainly in character for this dashing military hero. At any rate, although the resupply strategem succeeded in buying time for the beleagured Jewish defenders, in the end, they were unable to hold the Jewish Quarter. Under a truce, the defenders evacuated and the Jordanians occupied the quarter. The Jordanian Legion immediately destroyed all remnants of a Jewish presence, including the Hurva and Rambam Synagogues, dating to the medieval period. The synagogues were even used as latrines. The Jewish Quarter languished until the Six Day War, during which the Israelis seized control of the Old City and shortly afterward set about reconstructing the old Jewish Quarter. Today, you will be amazed
at its remarkable transformation. The Israelis restored the destroyed synagogues with the exception of the Hurva. Until just recently,they left it pretty much as they found it, seen here with only one arch standing, in order to remind the viewers of its desecration. But today they have restored the synagogue to all its glory.
Dr. G. Douglas Young now enters the story. He was an Old Testament Professor at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School in Deerfield, Illinois. For several years he led student tours to Israel. In his visits, he often observed the choice location of the Bishop Gobat School. This was before the Six Day War. Since 1948 the building sat isolated and neglected in no man's land. Jordanian legionnaires, posted on the Old City walls, made sure there was no Jewish presence on the premises.
Then came the Six Day War. Dr. Young realized he had a golden opportunity and he seized the moment. He approached the Anglican leadership in Jerusalem about the building. He wanted to fix it up and use it as a school primarily for North American students. His initial aim was to establish a graduate level institution that would enable students to study the Bible in the land of the Bible. To make a long story short, he was able to negotiate a long-term lease on the building with the understanding that he would renovate and rehabilitate the structure. Today, some 43 years later, you may judge for yourself how successful he and his successors have been. Just go the the JUC website and click on the slide tours of the campus. Dr. Young's dream has been fulfilled many times over and several generations of students have reaped the benefits of studying at JUC.
Joyce and I were among the very first students to spend a full year at the campus on Mount Zion. When we first came in the summer of 1968, only a few of the many r
ooms had been cleared of debris and rehabed. We often wandered through the rubble-filled rooms and tried to imagine what it would look like when finished. This semester we get to go back and enjoy the fruits of many years hard labor and sacrificial giving that has made this place what it is today. Here is a picture of the building and our group of students enjoying a Shabbat barbecue at JUC. It's come a long way!
Pictured here is a photograph taken around 1936 looking east toward the Dead Sea and ancient Moab. The main buildings in the center of the picture were formerly called the Bishop Gobat School for Boys. Gobat, an Anglican clergyman,
built the school in 1853. His intention was to provide poor Arab boys with a rudimentary education and teach them a trade. Bishop Gobat was a very influential voice for the Anglican Church in Palestine in the mid-nineteenth century. In fact, he succeeded in gaining a place for Anglicans at the religious table in Jerusalem, alongside the long-established and powerful Latin and Greek Christian communities, as well as the less well-known communions like the Armenians, Copts, Ethiopians, Jacobite Syrians, Marionite Catholic, and others.At any rate, the school itself had a checkered history and there were those in the Anglican Church who were scandalized by alleged immorality among the Arab boys and were critical of the leadership of Gobat, claiming the boys were scarcely literate. But being a powerful and persuasive personality, Gobat weathered the storms and challenges and the school continued for many years.
In 1948, the Bishop Gobat School found itself smack dab in the middle of a desperate struggle by the Jewish community to maintain a foothold in the Old City. This was shortly after Israel proclaimed herself a sovereign state in May of 1948. In response, six surrounding Arab nations invaded and sought to obliterate the fledgling state before it could even spread its wings. The Jordanian Legion had cut off the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem from the new city, the predominantly Jewish sector. The situation for the small Jewish garrison in the Jewish Quarter was critical. Short of ammunition, bodies, food and medicine, they appealed for help to the Jewish Haganah (defense force).
The Haganah came up with a bold plan. Sitting on the bedrock scarp of Mt Zion, overlooking the Hinnom Valley and upon which the Second Temple wall once stood, the Bishop Gobat School afforded a place to transfer supplies across the deep Hinnom Valley, separating the Jewish Quarter from the Jewish sector of the new city. Inside one of the rooms of the school, the Haganah fastened a cable and strung the cable across the valley to the opposite side as seen in this photograph I took in 1968. Under cover of darkness, the Jews ferried munitions, food and medicine across the valley in baskets. There is a story that circulates about the famous one-eyed Israeli general, Moshe Dayan. They say he crossed over the Hinnom to the Jewish Quarter one dark night in a basket suspended by the cable. Perhaps it's an urban legend, but it's certainly in character for this dashing military hero. At any rate, although the resupply strategem succeeded in buying time for the beleagured Jewish defenders, in the end, they were unable to hold the Jewish Quarter. Under a truce, the defenders evacuated and the Jordanians occupied the quarter. The Jordanian Legion immediately destroyed all remnants of a Jewish presence, including the Hurva and Rambam Synagogues, dating to the medieval period. The synagogues were even used as latrines. The Jewish Quarter languished until the Six Day War, during which the Israelis seized control of the Old City and shortly afterward set about reconstructing the old Jewish Quarter. Today, you will be amazed
at its remarkable transformation. The Israelis restored the destroyed synagogues with the exception of the Hurva. Until just recently,they left it pretty much as they found it, seen here with only one arch standing, in order to remind the viewers of its desecration. But today they have restored the synagogue to all its glory.Dr. G. Douglas Young now enters the story. He was an Old Testament Professor at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School in Deerfield, Illinois. For several years he led student tours to Israel. In his visits, he often observed the choice location of the Bishop Gobat School. This was before the Six Day War. Since 1948 the building sat isolated and neglected in no man's land. Jordanian legionnaires, posted on the Old City walls, made sure there was no Jewish presence on the premises.
Then came the Six Day War. Dr. Young realized he had a golden opportunity and he seized the moment. He approached the Anglican leadership in Jerusalem about the building. He wanted to fix it up and use it as a school primarily for North American students. His initial aim was to establish a graduate level institution that would enable students to study the Bible in the land of the Bible. To make a long story short, he was able to negotiate a long-term lease on the building with the understanding that he would renovate and rehabilitate the structure. Today, some 43 years later, you may judge for yourself how successful he and his successors have been. Just go the the JUC website and click on the slide tours of the campus. Dr. Young's dream has been fulfilled many times over and several generations of students have reaped the benefits of studying at JUC.
Joyce and I were among the very first students to spend a full year at the campus on Mount Zion. When we first came in the summer of 1968, only a few of the many r
ooms had been cleared of debris and rehabed. We often wandered through the rubble-filled rooms and tried to imagine what it would look like when finished. This semester we get to go back and enjoy the fruits of many years hard labor and sacrificial giving that has made this place what it is today. Here is a picture of the building and our group of students enjoying a Shabbat barbecue at JUC. It's come a long way!Sunday, June 27, 2010
Reflections on the Recent Gaza Flotilla Episode
I have followed the Mideast Crisis regularly since 1968. I continue to be amazed by the conflicting versions of violent episodes that, tragically, regularly occur. One might think the Israelis and the Arabs (to simplify a rather complex situation) live in different universes.
The rhetoric employed and conclusions drawn often defy rational discourse. Why is it that the Arab press and diplomatic spokespersons typically resort to "over the top" language when reporting on or responding to these tragedies. Can one take seriously the Turkish prime ministers' accusations of "state terrorism" perpetrated by Israel? What is perplexing to me is that this pattern is endemic in the Arab world. I can list example after example of this kind of distortion. We all laughed at the nonsense of the Iraqi minister of information during the most recent Gulf War. He maintained with a straight face that U.S. troops were being beaten back from Baghdad when in fact they were virtually right outside his office. The psychology of this is mystifying.
On the other side, the Israeli military sometimes prevents the media from having immediate access to information or events. This creates in the minds of many the impression that they are not trustworthy and are hiding something. In some instances, they have indeed hid things.
Bystanders must make a choice: they can accept uncritically either the Arab version or the Israeli version; they can dismiss both as completely self-serving and disingenuous; or they can sift through the conflicting versions and assess which version corresponds more closely with what actually happened. In my opinion, the Israeli version has proven more reliable than its Arab counterpart over the years.
In the flotilla episode we now have competing videos of the affair! The evidence is quite clear that this was a premeditated, staged event for media consumption. Tragically, the consequences were worse than probably both sides anticipated. It will, however, serve as fodder for the Arab media's unrelenting attack against the "Zionist Nazis."
American sympathies tend to favor the underdog. Those without any biblical or theological commitment to a future for Israel in God's plan tend to identify with the plight of the Palestinians. I personally lament the deep suffering and oppression of the Palestinians. I have personally known Palestinian families and have grieved over the harassment and penalties they have had to endure. But I also resent the way their leadership and the Arab leaders of Israel's neighbors have so poorly served them. A peace agreement and a two-state solution could have been achieved years ago had moderate voices prevailed. Alas, such has not been the case.
Though it is politically incorrect to say it, Islamic ideology lies at the taproot of this ongoing crisis. Palestine lies within the Islamic domain. The notion of a Jewish state within their midst is abhorrent. This then colors everything and influences the rhetoric of this conflict.
At Taylor University, Daoud Kuttab (a Palestinian Christian) paid a visit and shared his apparent optimism for a Palestinian state in 2011. After listening to him, I must sadly declare that nothing he said leads me to share his optimism. As an example of what I view as totally unrealistic, he listed the several items that he felt must be realized for a Palestinian state. The very first condition he laid down was the following: Israel must take full and complete responsibility for the refugee problem. This is a deal-breaker! And it is so obviously unbalanced and distorted that I come back to my starting point. How can we account for such distorted explanations of the situation? Perhaps we fallen human beings simply cannot be objective when we find ourselves in such emotional distress. So now I conclude with a question: Can the Holy Spirit enable individuals deeply committed to a deeply held political cause to transcend biases and seek the truth and nothing but the truth? I want to believe he can.
I have followed the Mideast Crisis regularly since 1968. I continue to be amazed by the conflicting versions of violent episodes that, tragically, regularly occur. One might think the Israelis and the Arabs (to simplify a rather complex situation) live in different universes.
The rhetoric employed and conclusions drawn often defy rational discourse. Why is it that the Arab press and diplomatic spokespersons typically resort to "over the top" language when reporting on or responding to these tragedies. Can one take seriously the Turkish prime ministers' accusations of "state terrorism" perpetrated by Israel? What is perplexing to me is that this pattern is endemic in the Arab world. I can list example after example of this kind of distortion. We all laughed at the nonsense of the Iraqi minister of information during the most recent Gulf War. He maintained with a straight face that U.S. troops were being beaten back from Baghdad when in fact they were virtually right outside his office. The psychology of this is mystifying.
On the other side, the Israeli military sometimes prevents the media from having immediate access to information or events. This creates in the minds of many the impression that they are not trustworthy and are hiding something. In some instances, they have indeed hid things.
Bystanders must make a choice: they can accept uncritically either the Arab version or the Israeli version; they can dismiss both as completely self-serving and disingenuous; or they can sift through the conflicting versions and assess which version corresponds more closely with what actually happened. In my opinion, the Israeli version has proven more reliable than its Arab counterpart over the years.
In the flotilla episode we now have competing videos of the affair! The evidence is quite clear that this was a premeditated, staged event for media consumption. Tragically, the consequences were worse than probably both sides anticipated. It will, however, serve as fodder for the Arab media's unrelenting attack against the "Zionist Nazis."
American sympathies tend to favor the underdog. Those without any biblical or theological commitment to a future for Israel in God's plan tend to identify with the plight of the Palestinians. I personally lament the deep suffering and oppression of the Palestinians. I have personally known Palestinian families and have grieved over the harassment and penalties they have had to endure. But I also resent the way their leadership and the Arab leaders of Israel's neighbors have so poorly served them. A peace agreement and a two-state solution could have been achieved years ago had moderate voices prevailed. Alas, such has not been the case.
Though it is politically incorrect to say it, Islamic ideology lies at the taproot of this ongoing crisis. Palestine lies within the Islamic domain. The notion of a Jewish state within their midst is abhorrent. This then colors everything and influences the rhetoric of this conflict.
At Taylor University, Daoud Kuttab (a Palestinian Christian) paid a visit and shared his apparent optimism for a Palestinian state in 2011. After listening to him, I must sadly declare that nothing he said leads me to share his optimism. As an example of what I view as totally unrealistic, he listed the several items that he felt must be realized for a Palestinian state. The very first condition he laid down was the following: Israel must take full and complete responsibility for the refugee problem. This is a deal-breaker! And it is so obviously unbalanced and distorted that I come back to my starting point. How can we account for such distorted explanations of the situation? Perhaps we fallen human beings simply cannot be objective when we find ourselves in such emotional distress. So now I conclude with a question: Can the Holy Spirit enable individuals deeply committed to a deeply held political cause to transcend biases and seek the truth and nothing but the truth? I want to believe he can.
Thursday, June 10, 2010
Reflections on a Reunion
I finally made a high school class reunion. Glad I did and it's about time; I showed up for the 50th reunion of the Sherman County High School class of '60 (Oregon). The reunion was held at Skamania Lodge in Stevenson, WA, a lovely place with a wonderful view of the Columbia River. We also lucked out and had a glorious Saturday with no rain--a rarity of late in Washington and Oregon! It turned out to be a very special time reconnecting with classmates, most of whom I had not seen since graduation.
First, a little trivia. Officially, there were 34 graduates of SCHS in 1960; unofficially, there were 35. The difference is, something most of us were unaware of at the time, one member of our class was told shortly before graduation she was short a few credits for her diploma. So, she appears in the class picture, but didn't walk the night of graduation. Also, there were only 33 graduates who actually received their diplomas on graduation night. One of them, John Capaci, was in the hospital having his appendix taken out!
First, a little trivia. Officially, there were 34 graduates of SCHS in 1960; unofficially, there were 35. The difference is, something most of us were unaware of at the time, one member of our class was told shortly before graduation she was short a few credits for her diploma. So, she appears in the class picture, but didn't walk the night of graduation. Also, there were only 33 graduates who actually received their diplomas on graduation night. One of them, John Capaci, was in the hospital having his appendix taken out!
I almost wasn't there either. I was the class Salutatorian and gave an address, but was in considerable pain. My back was killing me. I had been in the hospital before graduation for severe back pain but the doctor was unable to determine why. I had suffered an injury in a track meet a couple of weeks earlier and they were treating me for a muscle pull. Turns out I had something more substantial going on--a congenital defect on the right kidney. The ureter exited from the top of the kidney rather than the middle. When I was high jumping, the ureter got twisted and nearly closed off completely. As a consequence, my kidney did not adequately drain and blew up like a balloon. The pain was really intense. After graduation, I was readmitted to the hospital and the doctor finally took an X-ray. He then realized what the problem was and referred me to specialists in Portland, OR. Shortly thereafter I had plastic surgery and the kidney has functioned correctly ever since.
Sorry for the detour into my personal medical history;back to my classmates. Only one, my cousin, Betty Bothwell (maiden name), has passed away and that within the last year. She died of cancer. Since we are all between 67-69 years of age, I'd say that as a class we have a very low mortality rate.
What was fascinating about this experience was the odd sensation of reconnecting with people whom I knew as 17-18 year olds, 50 years ago. In most cases, it was as if we hadn't missed a beat. Even though we had changed considerably with regard to our physical appearance, there was something continuous and recognizable about each person; we just picked up where we left off. Talk about a time warp! I wonder if this an inkling of what the New Jerusalem will be like? Perhaps this is how it will be for those who die very young; they will appear in glory as mature adults. Hmm?
We had a fun time updating our classmates on our lives since graduation and we howled as the class prophecy and last will and testament was read. A few prophecies were indeed prescient! The experience was so rewarding, we decided it would be great to have another reunion in two years when we all turn 70. I look forward to it.
I am reminded of what the Psalmist says: "The length of our days is seventy years--or eighty, if we have the strength; yet their span is but trouble and sorrow, for they quickly pass, and we fly away" (Ps 90:10). How true this is (though I expect several of our class will reach the century mark). For every one of us, mixed with the good times and joys of life, have been the inevitable troubles and sorrows. We live east of Eden and deep within our souls long to return to the Garden. Through Christ we have a robust hope of doing precisely that. Revelation 21-22 is a preview of good things to come for those who trust in Christ as Savior and Lord.
Finally, there was a consensus that going to high school in Sherman County was a very positive experience. Probably most people who travel through our small, depopulated county imagine that people who live there are socially and culturally deprived. They would be quite mistaken. Even though we may have lacked certain advantages of large urban schools, the values and virtues of growing up in a farming and ranching community more than compensated for any supposed shortcomings. One of the spouses of a classmate commented on how envious he was of our class. He was very impressed with the strong sense of community and solidarity. He was right and for that I thank the Lord.
Sunday, May 30, 2010
Why was the tomb of Jesus empty?
The following blog is indirectly related to our upcoming adventure in Jerusalem. The specific topic was triggered by reflecting on the empty tomb during our Easter service in the Upland Community Church back on April 4.
As the Gospel accounts either affirm or imply (in the case of the shorter ending of Mark's Gospel), the tomb of Jesus was empty on Sunday morning. What explanations have been advanced to account for this fact? Here is a list of seven suggested answers.
1. A very early and persistent answer is that the disciples stole the body and concocted the myth of Jesus' bodily resurrection. Already in Matthew's Gospel, we learn that the Jerusalem religious leaders feared something like this might happen and took steps to prevent it by posting a guard and sealing the tomb (Mt 27:62-66).
2. The religious authorities themselves removed the body in order to forestall the disciples' attempt to carry off the above named option. One might then speculate that they disposed of the body in an unmarked pauper's grave and thus its location was lost to memory.
3. Dominic Crossan, well-known "historical Jesus" scholar and member of the well-publicized Jesus Seminar, suggests that Jesus' body was not even buried; it was eaten by scavenger dogs after being taken down from the cross.
4. Jesus did not actually die but lost consciousness on the cross. Thinking he was dead, the soldiers released his body to the disciples who then placed it in a tomb, as per the Gospel accounts. However, the cool and quiet of the tomb revived him and he left the tomb under his own power.
5. The Roman execution squad took Jesus' body down from the cross and buried it in an undisclosed location. The women in the Gospel stories went to the wrong tomb, one that was empty and hence was born "resurrection faith."
6. The women and other disciples, in their grief and anxiety, forgot the location of the true tomb and it remains unknown to this day. The disciples, as in option one, simply invented the story of Jesus' resurrection, or, more likely, experienced intense, visionary experiences involving Jesus. This led them to speak of his actual appearance and then, eventually, to the story of his bodily resurrection, adapting the Pharisaic doctrine of bodily resurrection at the last day, so that Jesus' resurrection became the first of a series of resurrections (1 Cor 15:20-24).
A quick perusal of each of the above "explanations" reveals a common assumption: a casual dismissal of the Gospel accounts as reliable history. One must assume that the Gospels are almost pure literary invention in order to champion any of the above options. On the contrary, there is substantial evidence for assuming that the Gospels are based on eyewitness testimony.Scholars such as Richard Bauckham have argued this point convincingly.
A second observation is that several of these explanations pose insurmountable psychological problems. How does one account for the incredible commitment and growth of the early Christian movement if the very heart of the message was predicated on a deliberate lie, known to the earliest leaders of the movement. The transformation of lives requires something more dynamic and lasting than falsehood or self- delusion.
Thirdly, if option #2 were true, why didn't the authorities produce the body. This would have totally discredited the gospel message. The fact is, they never did and this strongly implies they never had it.
Crossan's theory has the least credibility. While a few instances may be cited in which Roman officials prevented family members from reclaiming a body and burying it, these occurred not in Palestine but in Rome itself. The Roman occupation forces in Palestine generally respected the importance Jews attached to proper burial for their dead. If there is a shred of truth to the Gospel accounts, the notion that dogs ate the body of Jesus simply cannot have been the case.
The mistaken tomb hypotheses strain credibility to the breaking point. Can one produce another example of a famous martyr's tomb being forgotten? If one can, was this a public execution carried out by an experienced execution squad? I'd be interested in hearing if even one example could be produced.
7. The best explanation is the same one proclaimed in the Gospels and celebrated in the other New Testament writings: God raised Jesus from the dead, an angel of the Lord opened the sealed tomb and Jesus walked out with a glorified body. The Apostles gave their lives for the truth of this message. The earliest believers lived transformed lives based on the power and hope of this message. If one believes in a God who created all things by his word (Gen 1) sustains all things, and occasionally intervenes into the flow of history to accomplish his purposes, the bodily resurrection of Jesus is no big deal. Of course, for believers, the resurrection of Jesus simply has "the ring of truth" to it. Soli Deo gloria!
As the Gospel accounts either affirm or imply (in the case of the shorter ending of Mark's Gospel), the tomb of Jesus was empty on Sunday morning. What explanations have been advanced to account for this fact? Here is a list of seven suggested answers.
1. A very early and persistent answer is that the disciples stole the body and concocted the myth of Jesus' bodily resurrection. Already in Matthew's Gospel, we learn that the Jerusalem religious leaders feared something like this might happen and took steps to prevent it by posting a guard and sealing the tomb (Mt 27:62-66).
2. The religious authorities themselves removed the body in order to forestall the disciples' attempt to carry off the above named option. One might then speculate that they disposed of the body in an unmarked pauper's grave and thus its location was lost to memory.
3. Dominic Crossan, well-known "historical Jesus" scholar and member of the well-publicized Jesus Seminar, suggests that Jesus' body was not even buried; it was eaten by scavenger dogs after being taken down from the cross.
4. Jesus did not actually die but lost consciousness on the cross. Thinking he was dead, the soldiers released his body to the disciples who then placed it in a tomb, as per the Gospel accounts. However, the cool and quiet of the tomb revived him and he left the tomb under his own power.
5. The Roman execution squad took Jesus' body down from the cross and buried it in an undisclosed location. The women in the Gospel stories went to the wrong tomb, one that was empty and hence was born "resurrection faith."
6. The women and other disciples, in their grief and anxiety, forgot the location of the true tomb and it remains unknown to this day. The disciples, as in option one, simply invented the story of Jesus' resurrection, or, more likely, experienced intense, visionary experiences involving Jesus. This led them to speak of his actual appearance and then, eventually, to the story of his bodily resurrection, adapting the Pharisaic doctrine of bodily resurrection at the last day, so that Jesus' resurrection became the first of a series of resurrections (1 Cor 15:20-24).
A quick perusal of each of the above "explanations" reveals a common assumption: a casual dismissal of the Gospel accounts as reliable history. One must assume that the Gospels are almost pure literary invention in order to champion any of the above options. On the contrary, there is substantial evidence for assuming that the Gospels are based on eyewitness testimony.Scholars such as Richard Bauckham have argued this point convincingly.
A second observation is that several of these explanations pose insurmountable psychological problems. How does one account for the incredible commitment and growth of the early Christian movement if the very heart of the message was predicated on a deliberate lie, known to the earliest leaders of the movement. The transformation of lives requires something more dynamic and lasting than falsehood or self- delusion.
Thirdly, if option #2 were true, why didn't the authorities produce the body. This would have totally discredited the gospel message. The fact is, they never did and this strongly implies they never had it.
Crossan's theory has the least credibility. While a few instances may be cited in which Roman officials prevented family members from reclaiming a body and burying it, these occurred not in Palestine but in Rome itself. The Roman occupation forces in Palestine generally respected the importance Jews attached to proper burial for their dead. If there is a shred of truth to the Gospel accounts, the notion that dogs ate the body of Jesus simply cannot have been the case.
The mistaken tomb hypotheses strain credibility to the breaking point. Can one produce another example of a famous martyr's tomb being forgotten? If one can, was this a public execution carried out by an experienced execution squad? I'd be interested in hearing if even one example could be produced.
7. The best explanation is the same one proclaimed in the Gospels and celebrated in the other New Testament writings: God raised Jesus from the dead, an angel of the Lord opened the sealed tomb and Jesus walked out with a glorified body. The Apostles gave their lives for the truth of this message. The earliest believers lived transformed lives based on the power and hope of this message. If one believes in a God who created all things by his word (Gen 1) sustains all things, and occasionally intervenes into the flow of history to accomplish his purposes, the bodily resurrection of Jesus is no big deal. Of course, for believers, the resurrection of Jesus simply has "the ring of truth" to it. Soli Deo gloria!
Sunday, May 16, 2010
Dear reader of this blog,
Baruch haba (welcome) to Musings from Mount Zion! Joyce and I hope you will enjoy our observations coming to you from the campus of Jerusalem University College located on historic Mount Zion, Jerusalem, Israel. We lived in Israel for a year back in 1968-69, when we were students at what was then called The American Institute of Holy Land Studies, but now JUC. I have since led tour groups and made short visits to Israel, but the last time was back in 1995. Much has changed, I'm sure, and some of these changes will probably be part of my "musings."
I will be a visiting professor at JUC during the fall semester and will teach a course called "Prophetic Landscapes in Ancient Israel." This course consists of a selection of passages taken from several OT prophets such as Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel. These texts will be examined in their historical contexts, one of the important dimensions being the geographical and cultural setting. Living in the Land of the Bible is a wonderful opportunity to help students appreciate how much the topography and terrain of the land, its flora and fauna, its climate and crops, have necessarily influenced both the prophet and his prophecy. Of course, the literary and theological dimensions of this Spirit-inspired preaching will not be ignored.
As the semester progresses, I suspect you will "overhear" many conversations prompted by inquiring students listening to these ancient voices from the past. The prophets' messages, to be sure, have aspects and features that reflect a quite different time and place than our own frenetic 21st century. They contain passages that, like Simeon Peter said about Paul's letters, have "some things in them hard to understand" (2 Pet 3:16). But readers with an "ear to hear" will also most assuredly discern a word from the living God, a word transcending time and place.
Once again, welcome to our website. Shalom!
Baruch haba (welcome) to Musings from Mount Zion! Joyce and I hope you will enjoy our observations coming to you from the campus of Jerusalem University College located on historic Mount Zion, Jerusalem, Israel. We lived in Israel for a year back in 1968-69, when we were students at what was then called The American Institute of Holy Land Studies, but now JUC. I have since led tour groups and made short visits to Israel, but the last time was back in 1995. Much has changed, I'm sure, and some of these changes will probably be part of my "musings."
I will be a visiting professor at JUC during the fall semester and will teach a course called "Prophetic Landscapes in Ancient Israel." This course consists of a selection of passages taken from several OT prophets such as Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel. These texts will be examined in their historical contexts, one of the important dimensions being the geographical and cultural setting. Living in the Land of the Bible is a wonderful opportunity to help students appreciate how much the topography and terrain of the land, its flora and fauna, its climate and crops, have necessarily influenced both the prophet and his prophecy. Of course, the literary and theological dimensions of this Spirit-inspired preaching will not be ignored.
As the semester progresses, I suspect you will "overhear" many conversations prompted by inquiring students listening to these ancient voices from the past. The prophets' messages, to be sure, have aspects and features that reflect a quite different time and place than our own frenetic 21st century. They contain passages that, like Simeon Peter said about Paul's letters, have "some things in them hard to understand" (2 Pet 3:16). But readers with an "ear to hear" will also most assuredly discern a word from the living God, a word transcending time and place.
Once again, welcome to our website. Shalom!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)