Archive for September, 2006
Whoa, this is huge for me
Just found Molly talking about an article by F.F. Bruce.
This thing is HUGE for me.
One major concern of the scribes and Pharisees of our Lord's day was to apply their contemporaries a code of laws originally given in quite another way of life. The sabbath law, for example, was formulated in relation to a simple pastoral or agrarian economy, in which 'work' was a clearly understood term. But what kinds of activity came within the prohibition of 'work' in the more complex situation at the dawn of the Christian era? The scribes saw that detailed definition was necessary if people were to have clear guidance in this matter: in one their schools thirty-nine categories of 'work' were specified, all of which were banned on the sabbath.
That was one way to tackle the problem of cultural relativity; the way of Jesus was different. He preferred to go back to first principles: any kind of action which promoted the original purpose of the commandment fulfilled it; any kind of action which hindered that original purpose violated it. But it was for people to decide for themselves which actions promoted the original purpose and which actions hindered it he would not lay down precise regulations.
The gospels exhibit the contrast between the scribal way and the way of Jesus in the handling of the Old Testament. Subsequent church history, down to our own generation, exhibits the same contrast in the handling of the New Testament and the varying attempts to apply its principles to changing situations. Canon law, whether it is explicitly so called or not, exemplifies the scribal way-the tradition of the elders.
Cultural relativity is certainly to be reckoned with when the permanent message of the New Testament receives our practical attention today. The local and temporary situation in which that message was first delivered must be appreciated if we are to discern what its permanent essence really is and learn to re-apply it in the local and temporary circumstances of our own culture.
I'd never thought of it before, but he is exactly right. I can think of TONS of rules that we conservative Christians set forth because "that's what the New Testament says to do."
More:
Exegesis seeks to determine the meaning of the text in its primary setting. But when exegesis has done its work, our application of the text should avoid treating the New Testament as a book of rules. In applying the New Testament text to our situation, we need not treat it as the scribes of our Lord's day treated the Old Testament. We should not turn what were meant as guiding lines for worshippers in one situation into laws binding for all time. (It is commonly recognised that the regulations regarding widows, later in 1 Tim., need not be carried out literally today, although their essential principles should continue to be observed.) It is an ironical paradox when Paul, who was so concerned to free his converts from bondage of law, is treated as a law-giver for later generations. The freedom of the Spirit, which can be safeguarded by one set of guiding lines in a particular situation, may call for a different procedure in a new situation.
It is very naturally asked what criteria can be safely used to distinguish between those elements in the apostolic letters which are of local and temporary application and those which are of universal and permanent validity. The question is too big for a detailed discussion here. Where the writings of Paul are concerned, however, a reliable rule of thumb is suggested by his passionate emphasis on freedom-true freedom by contrast with spiritual bondage on the one hand and moral licence on the other. Here it is: whatever in Paul's teaching promotes true freedom is of universal and permanent validity; whatever seems to impose restrictions on true freedom has regard to local and temporary conditions. (For example, to go to another area, restrictions on Christian's freedom in the matter of food are conditioned by the company in which he or she is at the time; and even those restrictions are manifestations of the overriding principle of always considering the well-being of others.)
Read the entire article here. It is dealing primarily with the role of women, but the paragraphs I shared just jumped out at me due to where I am and where I've been in my conservative Christianity.
God is still in the business of answering prayer :-)
This evening we were at the toy store, which is also a huge hunting/camping store (we could spend soooooo much money in that place LOLOL!!!). L (age 6) had taken her billfold with a $20 to buy a toy for herself. She wore these really goofy pants with no pockets, so she had to carry her billfold. She picked out 2 toys and carried the billfold between them.
When she went to pay for them, her billfold was gone.
We looked EVERYWHERE. The sweet guys at the store combed all the aisles as well. Finally I stopped L and said, "You know what, L? Let's pray." So we said a quick prayer along the lines of, "Dear God, please help us find L's billfold." Nothing fancy.
Not one minute later I hear G yell, "They found it!!!" Sure enough, one of the men looking had found it. This is his story:
I walked past the Barbies, and stopped and thought, "What was that again?" I turned around and looked back, and it was just right there.
Some would call that coincidence. But I know better.
Psalm 17:6a I call upon you, for you will answer me, O God;
Prunes
G wanted a prune. L asked him what it was like.
"It's kind of like a rotten apple except it tastes good."
An update on my missing Netflix DVD
Remember how I lost our first Netflix DVD?
I FOUND IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It got thrown in a huge bin of toys, evidently one day when dh was having the kids do a Giant Toy Pickup in the living room.
Watched it (Beyond the Gates of Splendor...possibly one of THE BEST movies I have EVER EVER EVER seen!!!!) and then sent it back and got a refund from where I had to buy the missing DVD.
Note to self
When you have a dentist appointment 30 min. away and it really takes you 50 min. because of construction...
Make sure to check your calendar and the reminder card BEFORE you leave to make sure that your appointment really is today rather than NEXT THURSDAY.
You know you do NOT live on a farm when…
Today we went to the fair. Saw lots of cool stuff.
We went into the beef barn, and there were some very, um, WELL-ENDOWED bulls in it. Both of my boys, at different times, came up to me and said,"I can tell those are mommy cows for sure, by the things hanging down."
(This of course led to an impromptu discussion on just what those "things" were, how they have some too LOL, and how STEERS do NOT have them anymore. When my 9yo wanted to know just HOW bulls are castrated, I told him to ask his dad, since he used to do it for a living LOLOL.)
Ah...my cattle farmer fil would be horrified!
Moms for Modesty
I know that I'm not the only mom who is tired of digging through all the "hoochie-wear" to find something acceptable for her daughter to wear. It is even worse now that my oldest is wearing size 7 dresses and is officially in "big girl" sizes. In most stores (even Sears!), the big girls department is the "Hoochie Mama" department. I loathe shopping for her because it just disgusts me.
Unfortunately even "Christian" clothing manufacturers don't get it. Exhibit A:
I've seen girls wearing these (and they ain't LOOSE T-shirts either), and I think, "OK, y'all just DON'T GET IT."
So I hereby join with the other Moms for Modesty mommies and agree wholeheartedly with their Mission Statement!
Some funnies from C
The other day we were at the store, and we were buying everyone a drink. C orginally wanted root beer, but there wasn't any, so he chose water. G asked him if he wanted Pepsi instead, and C said, "No thanks, I'll just have refreshing water."
Just now dh called G and C upstairs to tell them something. It was essentially a one-sentence instruction, and when he was done, he said, "OK, that's it." As they were leaving, C said, "That was a short counsel."
