Idaho vs. Virginia

Idaho vs. Virginia

Here are some compare and contrast thoughts on the differences I see so far between Idaho and Virginia:

(1) Racial composition. Idaho was almost totally homogenous and white. The Northern VA, DC suburbs are made up of all kinds of races. There are a lot of Indian and Pakistani folks here, a lot of African Americans and just plain Africans (lots of Ethiopians). I find this refreshing and I think it is good for my kids to learn that God’s creation contains more than white people.

(2) Traffic. I lived in Idaho for so long that I forgot what real traffic was like and even started to complain about it! Traffic here is nuts and makes Idaho look like a real provincial joke.

(3) Housing costs. We owned a starter home in Idaho that cost about 84k when we bought it. Here the same house would probably run about 400k. It is just insane. There are many factors causing this insanity, including the flight of capital from stocks to real estate, unchecked immigration leading to several immigrant families living in the same house where one normal family can’t afford to, the entrance of women into the work force causing 2 income families to be the norm in urban areas, the check on development which limits the space available to build on in some big areas, and the availability of easy credit. We are renting right now, and hoping that the bubble will burst.

(4) Lack of Mormons. Idaho was heavily Mormon, it seems like every other person there is LDS. Here they are few and far between, though there is a stake down the street from me and a huge, ugly Temple near DC.

(5) Things to do. For me, as a bookworm and history lover, this area is vastly superior to outdoorsy Idaho. There is an endless amount of things to see and do here.

(6) Climate. Boise was a hot, dry, high desert. Here it is lush, green, rainy, and lovely. I missed rain the whole time I was in Idaho. Here, I revel in the rain.

(to be continued…)

Byzantine Charismatics

The charismata died out with the Apostles right? Wrong. There is so much historical evidence to the contrary that it is embarrassing that people still advance that argument. Whether it be from the Reformers in Scotland, Spurgeon, Martin Luther, or many of the fathers, the evidence is there. Whenever I run across more incidents, they catch my eye. And so to The Alexiad written by Anna Comnena (1083-1153) about her father the Emperor Alexius I. First, a prophecy made to Alexius by a passing stranger when he was still a soldier:

…he reminded him of the prophecy made to him once by a man who appeared somewhere near Karpianos as the two brothers (Alexius and Isaac Comnenus) were on their way home from the palace. For at that place a man met them – or maybe he was a superior being; at all events, someone who really had exceptional clairvoyant powers. As he approached them bare-headed he had the appearance of a priest, white-haired, rough-bearded. He grasped Alexius by the leg and drew him down to his own level (he was on foot and Alexius on horseback) to whisper in his ear this verse from the Psalms of David: ‘Be earnest and prosper and govern with an eye to truth and mercy and justice,’ and then he added, ‘Emperor Alexius.’ Having said this in the manner of an oracle, he vanished. Alexius could not find him, although he looked everywhere in case he might catch sight of him, and galloped at full speed in pursuit of him in case he might lay hands on the man, to find out who he was and whence he came. But the apparition had completely vanished…when he recollected that priestly vision, he likened the old man to the Theologian, the son of Thunder. (St. John the Divine)

Second, she mentions the Patriarch Cosmas, and says:

Now the reigning patriarch was a saintly man, who in very truth had no possessions and had practiced every form of asceticism known to the early Fathers who dwelt in deserts and mountains. He was also endowed with the divine gift of prophecy and had made many predictions on several occasions which never proved to be wrong.

Denominations in the past

Ouch!

Denominations certainly had harder edges in the past. I recently bought a used copy of the Epitome of Rev Dr. Erick Pontoppidan’s Explanation of Martin Luther’s Small Catechism (what a title). Pontoppidan was a preacher of old who explained Luther’s Small Catechism. His explanation was vital in Norwegian Lutheran churches which is why I bought it. My great-grandfather taught a class at Luther College on Pontoppidan’s catechism. In the back of the edition I bought are “Questions on the Reformation” which were generated by the Norwegian Synod. Listen to what they say:

Q. With what other enemies did Luther have to contend besides the Papists?

A. The Reformed and the Anabaptists.

Q. Why could not Luther acknowledge these as Christians holding the true faith?

A. Because they would not on all subjects believe and obey the Word of God.

Q. How did this manifest itself?

A. In this, that they would not acknowledge that the Word is in itself a power of God, which worketh faith and thereby salvation.

They denied that Baptism is the washing of regeneration. Tit. 3:5-8

They denied that the Sacrament of the Altar is the true body and the true blood of our Lord Jesus Christ under bread and wine.

Q. Are there still such Reformed?

A. Yes; but they are split up into many sects and parties.

Q. Why are the Reformed divided into so many sects and parties?

A. Because they wanted to explain the Bible according to their own reason and would not subject their reason to the Bible; therefore they could not harmonize, for there were as many opinions as there were persons.

What a sad testimony to the failures of the Reformation. This kind of disunity amongst men who should have been fighting shoulder to shoulder is terrible. I suppose it is what happens when the assumption is that Christianity is the nations’ only religion and always will be. In our dark days it just sounds foolish.

Generic Christianity

Confirming what we already know, Gene Veith writes:Part of the problem is what sociologist and megachurch pastor Leith Anderson calls “generic Christianity.” He points out that today, one can go into a church (especially a megachurch) of nearly any denomination—Baptist, Presbyterian, Pentecostal, Wesleyan, Lutheran—and be unable to notice any difference among them. They all are likely to use the same praise songs and contemporary worship style. The sermons will tend to be about practical biblical tips for successful living, and go light on doctrine and sin. Also, all of these different denominations tend to use Sunday-school curriculum and other material from the same nondenominational publishers. These companies purposefully avoid all controversial issues and doctrinal distinctives, which would limit their market share.

 

 

As a result, “generic Christianity” is erasing denominational differences and giving churches a brand-new theological framework. Mr. Anderson thinks this is a good thing. Whereas the ecumenical movement among liberal mainline churches tried but largely failed to unify churches from the top down, the church-growth movement has succeeded, unifying the different denominations on a grassroots level.

 

 

And yet, this unity comes at a cost. Both liberal theologians and church-growth theologians downplay historic doctrines, seeing them as divisive and irrelevant. Both value what is new over what is old. And so both cut themselves off from the spiritual heritage of historic Christianity. Since some Christians today make up their own theology and practices as they go along, oblivious to the time-tested, battle-tested experiences of the church through the ages, their spirituality can seem shallow or “empty.”

Camille Paglia

A fantastic interview with Camille Paglia here; some snippets:

Sweep out all this stuff, this post-modernist, structuralism stuff which hasn’t led to anything but a lot of very successful, tenure and promotion and salaries. This naivete of the alternative press about the academy. The idea that people who are mouthing leftist platitudes are leftists. Some of these people I knew in grad school. These people are crass materialists, OK?


So I am very concerned about the cultural future of the United States in this kind of environment. Most people who are secular humanists having the idea that they are doing fine. We are doing fine and our only enemy is the Bible-based far right. The reason why the real threat is the far right is that they have the Bible. And the Bible is a masterpiece. The Bible is one of the greatest works produced in the world. The people who all they have is the Bible actually are set up for life. Not only do they have a spiritual vision given to them but artistic fulfillment. They don’t even recognize just the pleasure of dealing with this epic poetry and drama. Everything is in the Bible. What does the left have? The left has a lot of attitude.

RB:
[laughs]

CP: They boast about having two houses and they mouth leftist platitudes. There was a financial reward to mouthing leftism in this period. The alternative press which should have been the watch dogs—

RB: The alternative press is the same way.

CP: What I am saying is they think that’s leftism and “I don’t want to join the chorus of people on the right who are decrying what’s going on in academe,” so the entire two generations of embezzlers and crooks, as far as I am concerned, took over the universities and forced out interesting grad students and faculty and they took up other careers. And destroyed the humanities.

WW III?

WW III?

Gentle reader, do you realize the danger of having a president so disconnected from reality that he plots to attack Iran—a country three times the size of Iraq—when he lacks sufficient forces to occupy Baghdad and to protect the road from Baghdad to the airport?

Despite all the high profile “sweeps” of U.S. forces through insurgent strongholds, U.S. commanders report a doubling of insurgent attacks.

The Bush administration is insane. If the American people do not decapitate it by demanding Bush’s impeachment, the Bush administration will bring about Armageddon. This may please some Christian evangelicals conned by Rapture predictions, but World War III will please no one else.

Anna Comnena on Islam

Writing in The Alexiad, Anna Comnena uses the occasion of the Crusaders led by Peter the Hermit to describe what she thinks of the character of Muslims in that age. She refers to Muslims as Turks or Ishmaelites:

The arrival of this mighty host was preceded by locusts, which abstained from the wheat but made frightful inroads on the vines. The prophets of those days interpreted this as a sign that the Keltic army would refrain from interfering in the affairs of Christians but bring dreadful affliction on the barbarian Ishmaelites, who were the slaves of drunkenness and wine and Dionysos. The Ishmaelites are indeed dominated by Dionysos and Eros; they indulge readily in every kind of sexual licence, and if they are circumcised in the flesh they are certainly not so in their passions. In fact, the Ishamelites are nothing more than slaves – trebly slaves – of the vices of Aphrodite. Hence they reverence and worship Astarte and Ashtaroth, and in their land the figure of the moon and the golden image of Chobar are considered of major importance.

It is almost absurd to think of how wrong she was about the enemies of Byzantium.

Eschatology and Sacred Space in LDS and Islam IV

Eschatology and Sacred Space in LDS and Islam, part IV

Sacred space consists of the places deemed holy by a faith, where god is worshipped and is thought to be present in a more intense way than in the world at large. The sacred spaces of Islam are the mosque and the Ka’ba; for Mormonism it is the meeting house and the Temple. Common feelings of reverence for these spaces exist. A Muslim that I interviewed for this paper emphasized a feeling of peace and community at the mosque; a Mormon said that when in the Temple he has “a feeling of being loved and greater love for my family and others.” So going to the sacred spaces of the religion increases communal feelings on the part of the believer. Attendance at the sacred place gives support to the feeling of being part of a larger whole that is greater than the individual.

The LDS Temple functions as the pinnacle of the spiritual life for the believer. Only those who have been approved by the proper authorities can enter it and receive its blessings. Its rituals are shrouded in secrecy and it is believed that contact with God occurs in a more powerful way within the Temple. It is the holiest and most sacred space on earth to the Mormon.

It should be noted at this point that in LDS theology the term ‘salvation’ does not carry the same connotation that it does in Christian theology. The term salvation is not static and does not function the same way across all faiths. In the LDS mind the term ‘exaltation’ is more appropriate to describe the goal of the believer on earth and in the afterlife. This belief is based on the idea that there are different kingdoms or degrees of glory in the heavenly afterlife. The Mormon believer can only obtain the highest levels of exaltation if he or she participates in the solemn ceremonies of the Temple. So the centrality of the Temple to the Mormon faith cannot be overstated.

The holiness of the Temple is delineated by who can and who cannot enter it. Elizabeth Tice writes:

And not every Mormon makes it through the temple doors. Members are required to “fully live the gospel” including the donation of more than 10 percent of their gross income to the church. New converts must demonstrate at least one year of faithful behavior before being allowed to enter, and only the most faithful Mormon adults are allowed inside after a probing interview to determine worthiness. (Tice 43)

The exclusiveness of the Temple, the fact that it is only for Mormons who are judged worthy to enter by their authorities, marks it off from the rest of the world. It is not a place for those who are outside the faith or who are not living up to the level that the Church believes they should be. This separation from the world provokes a sense of security in the believer; a member that I interviewed said of the Temple, “I feel safe– that the world with its influences do not permeate into the holy rooms of the temple.”

The rites practiced inside the Temple are also sacred to Mormons and are not discussed in detail outside of the Temple. The fact that these rituals are secrets that are guarded by members adds to the mystique and sacredness of the Temple in the Mormon mind. The secret nature of the Temple rituals is a noticeable difference from Islam where all the rituals of the hajj are well-known and in our day can be watched on TV. Although non-Muslims are barred from attending the hajj or entering the holy ground around Mecca, what happens there is no secret. But the LDS Temple not only bars outsiders from entrance, but keeps the rituals performed within secret.

story from Rwanda

People from our church are in Rwanda right now. We received this from them yesterday:

The first time Francine became aware of being a Tutsi was when one of her classmates told her “One day, I shall kill you, because you are a Tutsi.” Bewildered and afraid, she went home and asked her parents what it meant to be a Tutsi, and why she was one. Her parents told her about what their family had suffered in previous anti-Tutis progroms. In fact, her father had lost his parents in progroms in 1959, and his brothers had all fled as refugees to Uganda. He remained behind alone. In 1994, he was working as a pentecostal pastor, overseeing a number of mixed congregations.

When the plane carrying Rwanda’s Hutu president was shot down in April 1994, Francine’s dad told his family at first, that now there will be peace. Her mother disagreed, ‘They will come and kill us.’ In fact, within a few hours, a Hutu neighbor and one of her dad’s parishioner’s came and told them, ‘My husband is preparing to come and kill you, run away!’ Soon, they heard voices coming from neighboring huts, shouting “Let’s start with the born-again one.” Their deaths seemed certain.

Francine’s father told his family of six in a calm voice, “Our live on this earth is over. We shall now go to live with Jesus in heaven. Do not be afraid. We shall be there soon. Let us pray.” Recalling that moment, Francine, who was nine at the time, remembers “I was wondering how we would get from there to Heaven. I could not figure it out.” Then, all the family prayed, Francine, her older brother, her younger brother, her two younger sisters, her mom and her dad. Once they finished praying, her dad announced confidently, ‘I believe we shall not die.’ Together, the family read the promises in Psalm 91, which her dad felt were given them for this time.

Francine’s mom took her two younger sisters and began to run to the church, where she thought she would be safe. On the way there, a Hutu parishioner told her, “There has been a massacre at the church already. If you go there, you shall certainly be killed. Come to my house instead.” She did. Francine, her dad and her older siblings joined her there. After a few days, the man told them they had to leave now.

The family was stopped at one of the feared roadblocks where many were slaughtered. The militia, a group of men armed with machetes, knives and clubs told them they were going to kill them. Her mom pleaded for mercy, saying “We are not Tutsis, we are Hutu. Don’t kill us.” Francince laughs nervously as she recalls the instant and adds, “My little sister repeated it, ‘We are not Tutsi, we are Hutu. Please don’t kill us.”
The killers laughed at them and said they knew very well they were Tutsi. They asked Francine’s dad, “Are all those your children”. When he said yes, they asked him why he had brought them into the world, as they were going to be killed. At that point, her father boldy declared, “In the name of Jesus Christ, you will not kill them!” They answered that they (the Tutsis) had killed their president. He retorded that he had not but rather that he was a preacher and preaching the gospel of peace. He got out his bible. One of the militia took the bible from him and began leafing through it, saying he was looking for RPF propaganda (the RPF was the Tutsi lead rebel army that eventually overthrew the genocidal regime and brought an end to the killing). He did not find any. At that point, the horde of armed man turned on their heels and began running away, shouting “We will not kill you. But someone else will!” Her dad began chasing after them, shouting “Give me back my bible.” The man who had taken the bible threw it away and Francine’s dad picked it up.

Then, some local officials found them and told them, they would be safe at a church nearby. Many people were already sheltering at the church. In the night, the father woke up his family and told them they had been betrayed and would be killed if they stayed in the church. So the family escaped in the shadow of the night. The next day, Hutu militia came, threw grenades in the church and light in on fire. There are no known survivors.

The people in the area presumed that the family had been in the church and was dead, so they stopped looking for them. They were then hiding at a nearby river, staying outside day and night. Her dad became very sick. At night, her mom would go and dig out potatoes, which is the only thing they had to eat. They drank water from the river. Many corpses were floating down that river every day. I asked her if that frightened her. She said it did at first, but then it had become normal.

After many weeks of hiding, the area was liberated by RPF forces, and the family were able to come out.
I wish I could tell you that their suffering was over at that time. It was not. Subsequently her father was ousted from his parish, being accused of anti-Hutu prejudice. In fact, when Francine had told her dad as a little girl that she did not want Hutu friends, he had rebuked her, saying “We are not Tutsi, or Hutu. We are children of God. And we are to love all people.” Losing their church meant losing their house, too.

Most of Francine’s relatives who were in Rwanda during the genocide have died. None of her Tutsi classmates survives. When she goes back, she runs into the boy who had told her, “One day I will kill you.” He is a young man now. She says she just looks the other way when she sees him. Her older brother was killed by genocidaires who had come back from exile in 1998. The hardship continues to this day. Her father is pastoring a much smaller church again, serving both Hutus and Tutsis in his congregation.

One day, when the family had no money to buy sugar for their tea, Francine’s younger brother told his dad, “You are a righteous man like Job in the bible. It is because of you that we all keep suffering so much!” Her dad did not retort anything but Francine says his heart was broken and she felt so sorry for him. Two days later, the brother told his dad, “Dad I had a dream tonight. You gave me money to buy sandals and sugar.”Again her dad remained quiet. Soon after that, there was a knock on the door. It was a neighbor. He had 60.000 Francs (ca. $300) in his hands and said to the dad “You are such a good man. Thank you so much for having loaned me this money! Here is your money back.” Francine’s dad quietly called her brother, gave him money and asked him to go get sugar. The boy fell to his knees and asked forgiveness.

Many times during the conversation, Francine said, “Ce sont des miracles. Ca nous depasse. (Those are miracles. That is beyond us.)

I cannot disagree. How will you and I react to testimonies like that?

Iraq the model?

The pessimist in me looks at Iraq and sees this:

1) A country moving closer to Sharia.
2) A country becoming more closely allied with Iran.
3) A country where Wahabbis now have growing influence.
4) A country that would take 50 years to ‘stabilize.’
5) A country headed towards civil war.
6) A country that will in the end, hate us.

And yet, the Neo-con answer is to broaden the war to Syria and Iran…

The best-case scenario, where a peaceful and democratic (read, secular) Iraq has a growing economy and is a city on the hill to the Middle East seems absurd to me. Egypt and Turkey are semi-stable because they imposed military rule on their populations long ago.