Have you ever wrestled with God? Gen. 32:22-32 describes the famous incident when Jacob wrestles with God (or with an angel). God (or the angel) appears matter-of-factly in the story: Jacob sends his family and retainers ahead, “[s]o Jacob was left alone, and a man wrestled with him till daybreak.” (Gen. 32:24.) The “man” “could not overpower” Jacob, but injuries Jacob’s hip with a “touch.” Jacob refuses to let the “man” go until he receives a blessing. The blessing is given, and Jacob’s name is changed to “Israel” “because you have sruggled with God and with men and have overcome.” (Gen. 32:28.) “El” refers to “God,” and the verbal root of “ysr” (“Isra”) apparently refers to “struggle.” After the man leaves, Jacob names the place “Peniel” — meaning “Face of God” — “because I saw God [elohim] face to face, and yet my life was spared.” It seems clear that Jacob realized at some point that this was no ordinary wrestling match.
Month: April 2006
Good Friday Services
Tonight my chuch holds its annual Good Friday service. It will be big and beautiful, with a trumpet player from the New York Philharmonic, singers from the Metropolitan Opera, choirs, and strings. I don’t feel like going. I feel spiritually tired and beat up, like I did this morning before we got to the lake, shuffling up from the river with worm guts on my hands and no fish to show for the effort.
Not to criticize our Good Friday service or the similar events occuring at other churches around the world today, but what I want to do tonight is to visit Gethsemane for a while, and then to curl up at the base of the cross and wait. I don’t want to shower, put on my pressed khakis and crisp blue shirt, and play the good American Evangelical. I want to feel the dirt, smell the blood, hear the cries, know in my bones the depths of “my God, my God, why have you forsaken me,” feel in my guts that truly “it is finished.” It is finished.
Good Friday Miracle
Today I took my young boys fishing. We got to the river around 10:00 a.m., which was far too late. The river had been stocked with trout, and the fisherman had been lined up elbow-to-elbow since the early morning. We caught nothing, and the boys began to argue and whine.
There’s a small lake near the river, so we took our poles and worms to the lakeside, and within minutes we were hauling in fish. These weren’t the fat trout we’d been looking for in the river. They were tiny young bass and sunnies, no more than six inches long. I found myself a bit depressed by this at first. Another grand plan seemed to have been reduced to something much smaller.
But as my older son pulled in his fifth sunny, he exclaimed “this is a miracle dad — all the sudden we’re catching lots of fish!” My boys were laughing with delight as they pulled in and threw back one little fish after another. It turned out to be a great day. Sometimes joy is just a matter of perspective.
Breaking 100
In golf, one of the first signs of improvement is when you “break 100” — score lower than 100. Most recreational golfers don’t usually break 100, even though a score in the 90’s isn’t a “good” score by any objective measure, but I would consider it “good” for me. This has been one of my goals since I started playing golf a couple of years ago. So today I inched a little closer — I shot a 98 — but that score included two really bad holes where I took a double par. My “real” score was probably just under 105, which for me actually isn’t awful. One of those bad holes was the 9th, a par 3. I got my tee shot into the air but it faded right and landed in a greenside bunker. Shouldn’t have been a disaster, but then I got uptight and played bunker ball — skulling three bunker shots over the green and into the bunkers on the opposite side. Ugh! That rattled me, and on the next two holes I hit some really ugly shots, including a succession of embarrassing dribbled fairway woods and another bunker burner on the par 5 11th hole. But, to my credit, I calmed down and had three pars and three bogeys after that, including a very nice up and down out of the greenside bunker on 18. Slowly, slowly, I’m starting to hit some better shots and to put together decent holes. Now I have to avoid those mental meltdowns and put it all together.
I spotted an abstract for what looks like an interesting paper by Charles Reid at the University of St. Thomas Law School, titled “The Three Antinomies of Modern Legal Positivism and Their Resolution in Christian Legal Thought.” The abstract is quoted below, and the paper, which has been published in the Regent University Law Review, is available on SSRN. Legal positivism, in brief, is an essentially utilitarian school of jurisprudence that denies any connection between positive (humanly enacted) law and morality or “natural law.” It is the dominant school of jurisprudence in the U.S. Reid’s article provides an excellent overview of what legal positivism claims, and suggests a number of ways in which the deep traditions of Christian jurisprudence provide better answers to some important legal issues. I haven’t had time to digest the article yet, but if you’re interested in law and Christian thought, this seems like an excellent primer that goes far beyond the shallow “Christian America” arguments sometimes found at the popular level.
Free Will and the Brain
In an earlier discussion with Ahab, we got into the question whether morality is determined by how the brain evolved. Ahab essentially was making the materialist argument that what we as human beings are is reducible to our physical structure and the operation of our physiology according to established physical laws. In the materialist’s view, we are simply “wet computers” that operate according to very complicated, but theoretically discernible, programming. There is no room, then, for free will, and notions such as “morality” are antiquated ways of describing what are really in essence physical processes. Stephen Barr’s excellent book Modern Physics and Ancient Faith provides an strong critique of this view from a scientific perspective.
More Testing
Today we took the little guy for an Auditory Brainstem Response (“ABR”) test. This test measures whether sound that enters the ear is properly stimulating the auditory nerve. It requires sedation, which is always a bit disconcerting. He did fine, though. The test was negative — there is no problem with his auditory nerve or hearing. This is a good thing, but also in a way disappointing. If that were “the problem,” there are implants that can help correct it. Next week we go for an extended speech evaluation, and then in a few weeks we go for the 72-hour video EEG and start the new meds. Keep us in your prayers.
More Early Opderbecks
Here’s another picture from the “Opderbeck” book. This is Hermann Op der Becke, born in 1786 and died in 1885. This picture proves that the Opderbeck body type — which is not, shall we say, tall and lithe — lies deep in our family genes.
I’ve also been trying to use a web-based translator to figure out some of the text. Here’s what I have so far (anyone know German?).
Engaging Islam
An oganization I support and greatly respect is the Institute for Global Engagement. The IGE is a “think tank” with the goal of fostering theological reflection on and faith-based engagement in international affairs. They publish an excellent journal, The Review of Faith and International Affairs.
I particularly like the IGE’s approach to Islam. Unlike much of American Evangelicaldom, the IGE doesn’t reduce Islam to radical jihadism. At the same time, the IGE’s approach is realistic about the problems of radical Islam and the difficulties inherent in promoting the development of moderate Islamic societies. Some good articles from IGE’s site about this are here, here, and here.
Ethics Week Presentations
This week is ethics week at the college where I teach. I had the opportunity to participate in two panels, one sponsored by the Debate Club and the other by the Jewish Business Leaders club. The Debate Club presentation concerned ethics in doing business in China, specifically relating to censorship regulations concerning web portals such as Google. A copy of my notes is available here. The Jewish Business Leaders Club presentation was a “Religious Perspectives” panel, in which I participated with Rabbi Ricky Hadari. It covered three business case studies in which companies or employees were forced to make hard ethical choices. A copy of my notes is available here.