Wednesday Bible Study: P is for Pontius Pilate

So today, I want to look at Pontius Pilate- specifically his interview with Jesus and what he SHOULD have learned.  Because it strikes me that Pilate saw him as (just) a good man- and like so many, never took that next step.  I want to look at what he asked of Jesus, what he said to Jesus, and how it can apply to us.


The first thing Pilate wants to know, in all four Gospels (Mt 27:11. Mk 15:2, Lk 23:3, and Jn 18:33), is, "Are you a king- are you King of the Jews?"  He is absolutely referring to the physical realm here- it's the only realm he cares about.  For him, he is looking for an actual claim or a statement of rights- something legal that he needs to address.  He's requesting proof.  This is the go-to question from atheists, really- "Why should I believe something you can't prove?"  But see, it depends on what you accept as proof.  Paul tells us that God has manifested Himself throughout creation, so He won't accept, 'prove it', as a defense (Romans 1:20).  Asking for a sign?  The Bible gives two responses to this.  One is in Isaiah 7, where he demands the faithless King Ahaz ask for a sign, and he refuses.  Isaiah then forces the sign on him- the prophecy of the Messiah's birth (Isa. 7:10-13).  The other is when they demanded a sign FROM Jesus- and since He Himself was the sign they should have been looking for, and the only other sign he would give was His own burial and resurrection (Mt. 12:40).

Pilate, however, isn't exactly looking for proof of His messiah-ship, just if He is a king by the standards of man.  So Jesus answers, "Do you say this of your own accord, or did others say it to you about me?" (Jn 18:34).  Jesus is NOT going to give him something he is NOT seeking.


To which Pilate, snark-master that he is, responds, "Am I a Jew?" (v35).  A throwaway question for him, but not for us.  Too many people think they will never have access because they're not a "member of the club".  "I'm not a church person,", "You're not a Catholic," and so on.  The intellectual equivalent of, "I'm going to hell anyway," and how many times do you hear people who don't take God seriously say THAT?  He's not taking Jesus seriously.


He follows that up with, "What have you done?"- that your own people turned you over to me?  Pilate has asked a critical question here- though he doesn't know it.  The answer to why the Jews want Him dead is not one of what He has done- but who He IS.  The Jews will later explain this to Pilate, but for now, he's still asking in the physical realm.  What have you done, Jesus?  There are still wars being fought, children starving, women being raped, people getting sick and dying.  What have you DONE about it?  And Jesus explains the difference between God's perspective and man's:

Joh 18:36  Jesus answered, "My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world." 

Now, Pilate can go two ways with this.  He can accept there is a spiritual element here- in which case the whole thing is WAY above his pay-scale.  Or, he can think, "All right, this guy is off his bird."  And by his NEXT question, he shows which way he is leaning.

And that question, once again in snark-mode, is, "So, you ARE a king?" (Jn 18:37)  Basically saying to him, "I don't follow all this spiritual hogwash."  This is not Pilate trying to learn from Jesus; this is Pilate saying, "The whole thing is absurd."  This is not a 'then' thing:  Serene Jones, recently appointed head of New York's Union Theological Seminary, had this to say to the NYTimes:

“When you look in the Gospels, the stories are all over the place. There’s no resurrection story in Mark, just an empty tomb. Those who claim to know whether or not it happened are kidding themselves,” Jones said. “… Crucifixion is not something that God is orchestrating from upstairs. The pervasive idea of an abusive God-father who sends his own kid to the cross so God could forgive people is nuts. For me, the cross is an enactment of our human hatred. But what happens on Easter is the triumph of love in the midst of suffering. Isn’t that reason for hope?”

“I find the virgin birth a bizarre claim,” she said. “It has nothing to do with Jesus’ message. The virgin birth only becomes important if you have a theology in which sexuality is considered sinful. It also promotes this notion that the pure, untouched female body is the best body, and that idea has led to centuries of oppressing women.”

Asked what happens when people die, Jones responded, “I don’t know! There may be something, there may be nothing. My faith is not tied to some divine promise about the afterlife.”

Head of a Seminary.  Let that sink in.

Jesus again answers in a way Pilate can't accept:

 Jesus answered, "You say that I am a king. For this purpose I was born and for this purpose I have come into the world--to bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth listens to my voice." 

To put in Pilate's own snark, Jesus answers, "This 'king' thing is important to you.  The TRUTH is what matters.  If you were really seeking it, you'd hear Me."

And Pilate finishes himself off with his famous next statement, "What is truth?" (v38).  This is Pilate thinking it's all about philosophy.  Philosophies are like opinions, they don't hurt anybody usually.  And with this, Pilate judges Jesus to be just another harmless philosopher, whose presence he can take or leave.  He then tells the Jews, "I find no guilt in this man," and tries to just walk away from the whole thing.

But what comes next can't just be walked away from.  He gets two pieces of information that blow his comfortable diagnosis of "harmless philosopher" away.  

The first comes from his wife:

Mat 27:19  Besides, while he was sitting on the judgment seat, his wife sent word to him, "Have nothing to do with that righteous man, for I have suffered much because of him today in a dream." 

The second is provided by Jesus's accusers themselves:

Joh 19:7  The Jews answered him, "We have a law, and according to that law he ought to die because he has made himself the Son of God." 
Joh 19:8  When Pilate heard this statement, he was even more afraid. 

He might have been able to pass off what the Jews said, but when his wife added her voice, he had to change the very nature of his questioning, from seeking legal right to something far more powerful...

Joh 19:9  He entered his headquarters again and said to Jesus, "Where are you from?" But Jesus gave him no answer. 

This was now Pilate asking, "who are you, really?" So why didn't Jesus answer him?  Because He HAD been answering him, all along, and Pilate didn't listen.  Perhaps, had Pilate asked this instead of smart-mouthing, "What is truth?" earlier, he might have gotten an answer.  But here's the thing.  He should have took that fear, looked for truth, and came humbly before Jesus.  Instead...

Joh 19:10  So Pilate said to him, "You will not speak to me? Do you not know that I have authority to release you and authority to crucify you?" 

How many people come demanding of God and get no answer; then turn and say, "Well if you're not going to talk to me, you must not be real."  They, like Pilate, choose to believe that they are in control, they are in charge of 'their relationship with God'.  But Jesus explains that it doesn't work that way...

Joh 19:11  Jesus answered him, "You would have no authority over me at all unless it had been given you from above. Therefore he who delivered me over to you has the greater sin." 

So at this point, Pilate COULD have realized that Jesus had taught him much:

-You have to SEEK God;

-You have to take it seriously;

-You have to accept that there is a spiritual dimension to creation, not just the 'evidence of your eyes';

- You have to see past the things that don't seem to make sense;

- You have to understand it's far more than philosophy and morality;

-You have to see Jesus for who He truly is;

- and you have to accept that there are bigger things than you.

All of which would have started him on the road to faith.  Instead, he decided it was a bit scary and something he didn't want to think about.  

Joh 19:12  From then on Pilate sought to release him, but the Jews cried out, "If you release this man, you are not Caesar's friend. Everyone who makes himself a king opposes Caesar." 

So Pilate just wanted to be done with it all- he didn't know for sure who or what Jesus was, and it was bad policy to push it.  However, there was one thing he was SURE of- he was more afraid of Caesar than he was of Jesus.

Acts 4:18Then they called them in again and commanded them not to speak or teach at all in the name of Jesus. 19But Peter and John replied, “Judge for yourselves whether it is right in God’s sight to listen to you rather than God. 20For we cannot stop speaking about what we have seen and heard.”…

So now, he was in a spot between two fears, and he saw but one way out- to pass the buck:

Mat 27:21  The governor again said to them, "Which of the two do you want me to release for you?" And they said, "Barabbas." 
Mat 27:22  Pilate said to them, "Then what shall I do with Jesus who is called Christ?" They all said, "Let him be crucified!" 

"Then what shall I do with Jesus who is called Christ?"  The Jews were trying to get out with their 'righteousness' intact by forcing Pilate; Pilate was returning the favor by making them choose.  This is Pilate going along with the crowd as his excuse for his choice.  But not only was he saying, "everybody does it', he was adding to that, "So it's not my fault..."

Mat 27:24  So when Pilate saw that he was gaining nothing, but rather that a riot was beginning, he took water and washed his hands before the crowd, saying, "I am innocent of this man's blood; see to it yourselves." 

Mat 27:25  And all the people answered, "His blood be on us and on our children!" 

And here's the application- the second half of this story, Pilate demonstrates all the excuses that won't fly when you meet Christ after you die:

- "I didn't understand..."

- "I prayed and got no answer..."

- "This is all kinda scary..."

- "I wondered what people would say or do about me..."

-  "I did what everyone else was doing..."

What's your excuse?

Martin World News- Dumb Story Edition

Today, let's see if we can repeat our success popularity mild interest by reprising one of the most beloved  many variations on our theme- we'll go to news sites and find the dumbest story to grace a front page.  Hopefully I won't be saying, "Well the dumbest story here is the same as the dumbest story there" too often....


1- Fox News

And we use the term 'news' more and more charitably, as out of this site's first ten headlines, 3 are entertainment stories and one involves a pitcher trying to keep a man at 2nd base from stealing signs by balking him to third.  And as close as that comes to dumbest story, our actual winner is...

Michael Avenatti labels Alyssa Milano a 'disgusting hypocrite' after tweet about his November arrest

Which she may well be, maybe even in this case.  However here's the dumb part- the Queen of Opinions-without-Brains made her comments on Mr. "Oh, he's the porn lawyer" back when he got arrested for tossing some misguided girlfriend out on her butt- literally- and got arrested for assault- which was November of last year.  His response came Monday afternoon- 215 DAYS since the tweet he attacked.  Sure seems like the kind of lawyer you want on your side for a "speedy" trial, huh?


2- CNN

Now I have to give CNN kudos- their first ten headlines WERE all news stories.  BUT, they have to dip into the 'stupidity well' of celebrities as well.  And here's what makes front page news...

Cardi B suffers wardrobe malfunction at Bonnaroo and finishes her set in a bathrobe

Perhaps she might want to look into something more substantial than... well, beads... to start with...

Cardi B-fore...

Cardi after

3- BBC


Most of BBC anymore is the 'anti-Trump' news and the 'pro- LGBTQ' news.  Finding something on their FRONT page is a bit difficult (and frankly, their humorous 'News From Elsewhere' page has run a bit dry lately), but I did manage this one...

Cat filter accidentally used in Pakistani minister’s live press conference


A Pakistani politician's live-streamed press conference descended into farce when a cat filter was switched on by mistake.


Shaukat Yousafzai was briefing journalists last Friday when the setting was accidentally turned on.

The video, posted to the official Facebook page of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party, was deleted minutes after the press conference.

The blunder was blamed on "human error" by the party, which runs the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province in north-west Pakistan.

"All necessary actions have been taken to avoid such incidents in future," it said.


Unfortunately for Mr Yousafzai, the cat was already out of the bag.


BTW, BBC joined CNN in keeping news stories at the top.  Perhaps Fox should look around itself...


4- Australia Broadcasting Company 

I thought I would try these guys and save myself weeding through News AU's latest reality-TV yarns, and I was well rewarded...

Indian stuntman missing after attempting Harry Houdini trick in the Ganges River

So my first thought is, "You know the kinds of things that get put in the Ganges- and you want to do THIS in it?"  But daredevil Chanchal Lahiri, known by his stage name "Jadugar Mandrake" (Wizard Mandrake) had to try this one.  Unfortunately, he never came up, and hours of scouring later, it would appear that the Wiz is now discussing the 'escape from the afterlife' trick with Harry.   Apparently he started with untying the knots that kept him attached to the winch, which wasn't his best plan.  But he's been known for screwing these things up before...


When Lahiri tried another stunt at the river in 2013, he was assaulted by onlookers who saw him escape from a locked cage via a door that was clearly visible.

He was beaten and punched and his long flowing golden-brown wig was pulled off by the crowd.

Least that won't be a problem this time...


5- Xinhua

The Chinese aren't exactly a jokey news bunch, so you have to have a keen eye to find something with possible entertainment value.  It's like trying to find a story in their top five without the name 'Xi' in it.  But I think this might just pass muster...


China installs, upgrades 30,000 toilets for tourists since 2018

Now, I believe this is a throne we've sat upon before here on MWN, but you aren't going to come closer to a joke in Chinese media than this last paragraph of the story...


Since the toilet revolution was launched in 2015 to increase the number and sanitation of toilets at tourist sites, China has seen much improvement in terms of the quantity and quality of tourist toilets, with higher level of management of toilets, according to the ministry.

"The toilet revolution".  Shouldn't it have been flushed, rather than launched?

"No, my good man!  Launched is perfectly acceptable..."

This can only spiral down from here...


6- Moscow Times

At first I told myself I wasn't going to use this article.  Not only was the humor dubious, but how can I, after making fun of Xinhua for Xi stories, use a Russian story with Xi in it?  But after reading some of the pull lines in the story, I decided, why not?

Russia's Putin Gives China's Xi Ice Cream on His 66th Birthday

Looks more like an ice cream cake to me.   Gosh, don't you wish the icing was decorated with Winnie the Pooh?  Anyway, here's some of the story...

While Putin gave Xi Russian ice cream - the flavour was not mentioned - Xi gave Putin back some Chinese tea, the report said.

Gee, ice cream or (gag) tea.  Putin 1, Xi 0.

Pictures on Chinese state television's website showed the two men inspecting a white cake decorated with red and blue confectionary flowers with the words written on it, in somewhat shaky red-coloured Chinese characters, "good fortune double six".

To which Xi replied, "Does this mean we are going to casino?  Put 100 yen on double 6!"

It was not immediately clear if Xi ate any of the cake.

Probably had to check it for proper proletarian doctrine...


7- Deutsche Welle 

Well, howsabout we round things out for the night with a good ol' dose of PC?

Swiss bank UBS loses bond role in China after economist's pig comment

Now, mind you, this is estimated at a half- to a full billion dollars worth of business shot in the butt.  And over what, pray tell?


The decision followed a remark by Paul Donovan, a global chief economist at UBS, in a podcast last week in which he attributed a rise of consumer prices in China to sickness among pigs.

"Does this matter? It matters if you are a Chinese pig. It matters if you like eating pork in China," Donovan said last Wednesday.

Seems pretty straightforward, yes?  HOWever, somebody decided that when he said, "Chinese pig,"  he was was calling Chinese PEOPLE 'pigs'.  Where they got one from the other, I don't know.  You know how the PC crowd is (I keep sniffing for torches and listening for pitchforks myself).  But thank God he didn't say, "Chinese Poohs..."

Sunday Message: Lord's Prayer pt 6

Somewhere in between a Saturday nap and a phone call, I heard a snatch from a preacher pointing out that a father has a duty to pass the Word down to the children.  Otherwise, you end up like Israel- within two generations they're worshiping Baal and doing menial work for the foreign-tribe-of-the-week.   Thus I knew I had to rely on God to pull me out of a lethargy and get onto the next part of the Lord's Prayer.  And what I thought was an easy line proved quite a stickler....

Mat 6:11  Give us this day our daily bread, 

What could possibly be hard to understand in this?  Apparently, it is the word 'daily'.  Observe...

Adam Clarke:  The word επιουσιαν has greatly perplexed critics and commentators. I find upwards of thirty different explanations of it. 

Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown:  The compound word here rendered “daily” occurs nowhere else, either in classical or sacred Greek, and so must be interpreted by the analogy of its component parts. But on this critics are divided.

Robertson's Word Pictures:   This adjective “daily” (epiousion) coming after “Give us this day” (dos hēmŒn sēmeron) has given expositors a great deal of trouble.

So what is the controversy?  Well, I could copy-paste one of their descriptions, but you'd only get a headache deciphering it.  Let me, after a couple ibuprofen, give it a try.  Basically, this SEEMS to be a unique word in the Greek, and some speculate that the evangelists coined it to give the sense of an Aramaic original.  In essence, it refers to what is needed TOMORROW- but that would seem to contradict Jesus Himself just 23 verses later:

Mat 6:34  "Therefore do not be anxious about tomorrow, for tomorrow will be anxious for itself. Sufficient for the day is its own trouble. 

But neither the term nor the explanation is quite that simple.  The thought that either Matthew and Luke, or a Greek translator, made up what is a compound word just for this spot (as the word never appears again in the Bible and very rarely elsewhere) seems plausible- until Robertson points out...

Epiousios has all the appearance of a word that originated in trade and traffic of the everyday life of the people ... The opinion here expressed has been confirmed by A. Debrunner’s discovery (Theol. Lit. Ztg. 1925, Colossians . 119) of epiousios in an ancient housekeeping book” (Light from the Ancient East, New ed. 1927, p. 78 and note 1). So then it is not a word coined by the Evangelist or by Q to express an Aramaic original. The word occurs also in three late MSS. after 2 Maccabees 1:8, tous epiousious after tous artous. 

So it was an existent, but rare, word.  And again, the sense of it...

The meaning, in view of the kindred participle (epiousēi) in Act_16:12, seems to be “for the coming day,” a daily prayer for the needs of the next day as every housekeeper understands like the housekeeping book discovered by Debrunner.

And again, we ask, how does this fit with Jesus's teaching on tomorrow?  Well, frankly, the expositors might be picking a nit on this one.  If you are praying for TODAY'S bread, you are praying about provisions in the future anyway, right?  The key here, to me, is Jesus did not say, "Do not PRAY about tomorrow,"  He said don't BE ANXIOUS about it.  Praying is not supposed to be a worry-driven activity... it is to be a CONFIDENCE-drive activity.  Listen to what James, The Lord's brother, says...

Jas 1:5  If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask God, who gives generously to all without reproach, and it will be given him. 

Jas 1:6  But let him ask in faith, with no doubting, for the one who doubts is like a wave of the sea that is driven and tossed by the wind. 

Jas 1:7  For that person must not suppose that he will receive anything from the Lord...

One more thing about the time-order of this:  I think Adam Clarke actually hit the whole of the point in this statement:

There is probably an allusion here to the custom of travelers in the east, who were wont to reserve a part of the food given them the preceding evening to serve for their breakfast or dinner the next day. But as this was not sufficient for the whole day, they were therefore obliged to depend on the providence of God for the additional supply. 

So we all start out with a basic beginning each day:  Air, life, basics depending on the culture and part of the world we live in.  And sometimes these things are not enough; we need what only God can give.  Clarke goes on:

 Indeed, many of the primitive fathers understood it as comprehending that daily supply of grace which the soul requires to keep it in health and vigor...

But, isn't bread, bread?  Sure, but the word that gives us bread- the Greek Artos, refers to the lifting and raising of the bread as the yeast acts on it; and that word comes from another which has this meaning:

A primary verb; to lift; by implication to take up or away; figuratively to raise (the voice), keep in suspense (the mind); specifically to sail away (that is, weigh anchor); by Hebraism (compare [H5375]) to expiate sin: - away with, bear (up), carry, lift up, loose, make to doubt, put away, remove, take (away, up).

So now, read the passage with this in mind:

Give us our daily lifting up;

our mental stimulation (keeping the mind in suspense);

our ability to move on (sail away);

our ability to bear up;

the expiation of our sins.

Jesus really taught us to ask for everything in a little.  And to find everything in a little.

Time Machine co-ordinates VICVIII54661473

Today, we go to June 14th, 1973- and the terrible disaster in Wageningen, Netherlands (get a picture of the map of the Netherlands in your mind, and stick a dart dead center).  There, at the Wageningen University and Research, the Laboratory of Nematology was burnt to the ground...

And what is Nematology, you ask?  Why, it's the study of...

...that's right, nematodes...  On the bright side, the worm-fry was a rousing success, and no humans were injured.


Welcome to this week's Time Machine, and hopefully we'll get some good stuff from POTM Neil Diamond, we'll (yes, again) have a 'live' 6D, and one M10 debut- and it lowers the average year that the countdown's songs came out in to 2011!

Nardole:  Um, sir, we have a problem...

Let me guess, no Neil Diamond...

N:  Well, I had a bit of a head cold (which is a bit ironic, really*), and I thought you said, "Phil Diamond"...

Who the hell is PHIL Diamond?

N:  Well, he has an acting credit... a movie in 1964... but I saw the director was Tony Orlando, so...

Tony Orlando?  What did HE direct?

N:  Well he did do this movie Phil Diamond was in, The Block... 'A twisted tale of prostitution, blackmail, and murder involving strippers at a sleazy "gentlemen's club". '...

And what else?

N:  Let me see... there was Hot Nights On The Campus... Lust And The Flesh...

Do you think that MIGHT not be the same Tony Orlando?

N:  I... yes, I am beginning to...

Well, that means I'm doing the Panel myself, on top of the 'live 6D'...

N: Does that mean you don't want Phil Diamond?

YES, that means I don't want Phil Diamond!


NOTE * "Nardole is introduced in the 2015 (Doctor Who) Christmas special "The Husbands of River Song" as the employee of the Doctor's wife River Song (Alex Kingston). In the course of the episode, he is decapitated, with his head ending up as part of a cyborg body." Hence, irony.

Anyway, while I get around to getting set-up and calmed down, here- since I have only one debut, let me play you the week's big mover, up 25 spots from 71 to 46 on this week's Cashbox chart- shout out to Tim Rowlison...





**********************************************

Ah, that was nice!  So let me start us out on our 24 song, fifty-three station total rout of a Panel board with the one-vote wonders.

The first was a song I really enjoyed at #75- Shirley Bassey and Never Never Never.

And being's we're in the early seventies, we'll no doubt be getting a Barry White bedroom song of the week for a while. This time, at #6 on CB, is I'm Gonna Love You Just a Little More Baby.

Then at #4, we kick you out of bed with Edgar Winters and Frankenstein at #4.

One of Donovan's later singles, he was at #57 with I Like You.

Top ten really getting hammered this week- another 1-voter was Elton John at #2 with Daniel.

The REAL Tony Orlando and Dawn were at #6 with Tie A Yellow Ribbon Round The Old Oak Tree.

Last week, we lost icon Dr John.  As if in tribute, his Right Place Wrong Time got a vote at #15.

I told Laurie I found it amazing that a week that saw rock instrumental Frankenstein at #4 had at #5 the other great rock instrumental of that year, Focus with Hocus Pocus.

I'm a bit disappointed that SOMEbody voted for one of the all time muy disgusto songs- Lou Reed's Walk On The Wild Side, which had peaked in April.

Another missed the memo tune was Stevie Wonder's You Are The Sunshine Of My Life, which hit #1 last month.  Not to mention Maureen McGovern was still a week out from the Hot 100 at #124 with The Morning After.

Recent POTM Paul Simon was at #12 with Kodachrome.

The vastly underrated Wildflower by Skylark was at #20.

And at #94, Charlie Daniels and Uneasy Rider.

The also receiving votes crew looked like this:  With 2 votes were Jim Croce and Bad Bad Leroy Brown at #30; Sweet and Little Willy, which peaked last month; Deep Purple's Smoke On The Water at #50; George Harrison's Give Me Love at #8; the Tower Of Power and So Very Hard To Go at #65; and the Doobies with Long Train Running at #19.  And we had a single three-vote song- Billy Preston and Will It Go Round In Circles at #11.

And that leaves us with a three song final- though not a close finish.  Choose from:
McCartney and Wings, My Love, at #1;
Sylvia and Pillow Talk at #3;
or Clint Holmes with the song I voted for as 'the song I would have had at #1 back then', Playground In My Mind at #9.


**********************************************

A few days back I played ELO's Roll Over Beethoven, always one of my favorites, from an lp which, oddly enough, I had never listened to- 1973's ELO II.  And I heard a song there I just fell in love with.  Debuting all the way up at #5 on the M10 this week, here's the song that drug the M10 average song age up to 8 years old....




**********************************************


Hey, let me bring Elvis in here!

"Now whadda you want?"

Well, I thought you might wanna help out with the 'live 6D'- It has something to do with you...

All right, then!

So we start out with Joe Puerta.  Know him?

No, man...

Well, Joe started out as bassist and co-founder of Ambrosia, and wrote their hit Holding On To Yesterday.  He would go on to be an original member of Bruce Hornsby and the Range...

That's after my time, son...

I know, but hang in there.  Now I bring up Mr Hornsby because he co-wrote End Of The Innocence, the title cut to former Eagle Don Henley's 1989 lp.  And I got there because a couple other really good songs on that lp and the one before it- New York Minute, All She Wants To Do Is Dance, Sunset Grill, and others- were written by or co-written by guitarist Danny Kortchmar...

Now, HIM I know!

Yep, Danny was a star guitarist for a lot of people, but his start came with Carole King and James Taylor...

Now, I got it from here.  Him and James Taylor decided to teach us white boys how to write a blues song, an' they came up with Steamroller Blues...

Yep, and your version of it was at #10 without a Panel vote this week.

***************************************************************

Well, I've given out the Big Mover and the 'Chris's #1' for this week, so the rest of the Stat Pack:

Kris Kristofferson's great gospel tune Why Me is our #73 in '73.  Many people know this song better for the chorus than the name...

Lord help me Jesus, I've wasted it so

Help me Jesus I know what I am

Now that I know that I've need you so

Help me Jesus, my soul's in your hand.

At #101 this week was a group I literally found nothing about, the Invitations, with a tune called They Say The Girl's Crazy (but the song was pretty good).

The main debuts this week were the Stories and Brother Louie at 88 and the Eagles and Tequila Sunrise at 96.

And the UK #1 was Leather Tuscadero herself, Suzi Quatro and Can The Can.

*****************************************************

The rest of the M10:

Pure Bathing Culture was stuck at 10 again this week with Veil.

A song that grows increasingly hard for me to make it through without tears, Tame Impala and Eventually, falls from 5 to 9 in week #8.

The other two last week's debuts, Geowulf's I See Red and Okey Dokey/Dent May and Thick And Thin, move up 1 spot to 9 and 8 respectively.

In week #9, the Dig and Moonlight Baby finally fall from 1 to 6- and in so doing move into 10th place all time.

Moon Taxi's Now's The Time and Idlewild's You Held The World In Your Arms flip spots to 4 and 3 respectively.

Agnes Obel takes her second straight four-spot jump to #2 with Riverside.

And that means the new #1 is...

King Leg and Seeing You Tonight!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And on the Panel:  A vote for Sylvia got you 9.4%...

One for Clint Holmes got you 11.3 %...

But yer winnah, with 28.3 %.....

Paul McCartney and Wings with My Love!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Nardole, that's PAUL- not Saul, not Raul, not...

N:  All right, I have it!

Good, so maybe we'll see Paul and his band when we go to 1974 next week!

Wednesday Bible Study: O is for Obadiah

So today I decided (and I'll explain in a sec just how much of a misnomer "I decided" is) to work on the Prophet Obadiah, who gets a one-chapter space in the Bible.  I found there were three main questions to ask about him:  Who was he, WHEN was he, and did his prophecy come true?  I'll try to get that into an organized whole here.

So first question- who was he?  There were several Obadiahs in the OT, and different people have made different claims on this.  The Jewish tradition says that he was an Edomite convert to Judaism- an ironic twist to the story if it were true, as we shall see- and a descendant of Job's buddy Eliphaz the Temanite.  According to this, he was also the Obadiah who was a servant of the evil King Ahab, thus well-connected and very wealthy (though he spent much of it hiding the 100 prophets God told Elijah about), all of that from 1 Kings.

Reasons this doesn't fly:  IF he had been wealthy and connected to royalty, it would have likely said or at least showed through in his prophecy.  It did not.  Plus, as I will endeavor to show, it doesn't fit the timeline.

An Orthodox tradition says our guy is the third captain sent to Elijah (for those not in the know- Ahab's son Ahaziah sent for Elijah to stop the three-year ban on rain he had instituted.  The first two times, both the captain and his guard were consumed by fire from heaven called down by Elijah.  The third captain begged for his life and the life of his men before anything else, and Elijah spared him.), but again, I'll show the timeline precludes this.

Most of the commentators agree, though, that his name- "Worshipper of Yahweh"- indicates that he was both of humble origin and not someone who was known otherwise.


Next, WHEN was he?  My Bible's intro to the chapter noted that in verses 10-12-


Oba 1:10  Because of the violence done to your brother Jacob, shame shall cover you, and you shall be cut off forever. 
Oba 1:11  On the day that you stood aloof, on the day that strangers carried off his wealth and foreigners entered his gates and cast lots for Jerusalem, you were like one of them. 
Oba 1:12  But do not gloat over the day of your brother in the day of his misfortune; do not rejoice over the people of Judah in the day of their ruin; do not boast in the day of distress. 

-he lived after a point when Jerusalem had been attacked, and Edom (founded from Esau, brother of Jacob who founded Israel), stood by and encouraged the slaughter of "his brother".  It goes on to postulate four times that that could have happened, smartly eliminates two, and then deals with the remaining two.  One, the one it favors, was during an attack on King Jehoram by "Philistines and Arabs", following up on several sources doing a misguided connection between 'Arabs' and Edom.  The other was during one of the three attacks Babylon made on Jerusalem ending in the final conquest in 586 BC.  The authors felt that since Obadiah never mentioned Babylon, it had to be the earlier one.  But I call foul, for two reasons.  And one of them shows God's hand in MY story.

First off, look at the beginning of the book:

Oba 1:1  The vision of Obadiah. Thus says the Lord GOD concerning Edom: We have heard a report from the LORD, and a messenger has been sent among the nations: "Rise up! Let us rise against her for battle!" 

"WE have heard a report."  Of the four prophets who prophesied against Edom, Isaiah doesn't count as his is obviously an end-times prophecy.  Ezekiel and Jeremiah were real close to the same time, though.  Jeremiah's, according to 47:1 were "before Pharaoh attacked Gaza".  This was Neccho on his way back from the stalemate with Assyria in Carchemish, reliably dated at 605 BC. Ezekiel was in Babylon in the second exile in 601 BC, and thus had to be between that and around 592 BC.  WE means Obadiah had to be roughly contemporary, and a bit after, the other two- if we read this right.  But no Babylon?  Here's where God helps me out in a funny way.

I support a missionary in Papua New Guinea.  She often sends thank you cards, and they always contain "a verse that was on my heart".  On my way to look into Jeremiah's timeline, my Bible fell open to where I put her latest card, near Psalms 139 where her verse was.  But right next to the card was Psalms 137- particularly verses 7-9:

Psa 137:7  Remember, O LORD, against the Edomites the day of Jerusalem, how they said, "Lay it bare, lay it bare, down to its foundations!" 

Psa 137:8  O daughter of Babylon, doomed to be destroyed, blessed shall he be who repays you with what you have done to us! 

Psa 137:9  Blessed shall he be who takes your little ones and dashes them against the rock! 

V7 is basically the same prophecy against Edom found in Obadiah, in Jeremiah 49, and in Ezekiel 25.  THEY are the WE.  Thus Obadiah, by my estimate, MUST have prophesied between the late date for Ezekiel in 592 BC and Obadiah's own exile into Babylon in 586 BC.  And all linked together because God had me stick a thank-you note near Psalms 137!

And that brings us to the finale:  Was the prophecy fulfilled?  Well, here we have to turn to Josephus the historian.  He tells us of the conquests of John Hyrcanus I, the nephew of Judas Maccabeus, "the Hammer"  (with apologies to Charles Martel and lawyer Daryl Isaacs).  During his rule in Hasmonean Israel- around 134 to 104 BC- this happened...

 “Hyrcanus took also Dora and Marissa, cities of Idumea, and subdued all the Idumeans; and permitted them to stay in that country, if they would circumcise their genitals, and make use of the laws of the Jews; and they were so desirous of living in the country of their forefathers, that they submitted to the use of circumcision, and the rest of the Jewish ways of living; at which time therefore this befell them, that they were hereafter no other than Jews." Chapter IX, (2).

Sidelight A:   Idumeans=Edomites.  Just another name for the same.

Sidelight B:  The Catholic Encyclopedia dates this circumcision at 109 BC.  Going on, the site where I found the Josephus passage adds this:

William Whiston, translator of Josephus, adds this note: “This account of the Idumeans admitting circumcision, and the entire Jewish law, from this time, or from the days of Hyrcanus, is confirmed by their entire history afterwards.  This, in the opinion of Josephus, made them proselytes of justice, or entire Jews.”  Since that time, the Edomites have been part of the Jewish nation.  Some believe that the Edomites are still identifiable today as Sephardic Jews, but this is speculation.

      The Wycliffe Bible Commentary on Obadiah confirms that judgment came upon Edom in ancient times, starting with the Nabatean invasion soon after the time of Obadiah:

      “Soon after this time, Edom was pushed out of her ancient home by the Nabateans, so that she had to move to the west side of the Dead Sea.  Hebron was made the capital of her new home in south Judah.  The Maccabees, especially John Hyrcanus (c. 125 BC), subdued and Judaized the Edomites.  They were finally destroyed with the Jews in 70 AD by the Roman general Titus.”

So whether you want to count them as racially erased in 109 BC, or physically erased 180 years later, the gist is the same- No more Edom.  And if Josephus was right, there's the irony of the Rabbis saying Obadiah was a 'Jewish convert from Edom'.

And why can't it be both?  Because if we look more into Obadiah's own prophecy we find:


Oba 1:12  But do not gloat over the day of your brother in the day of his misfortune; do not rejoice over the people of Judah in the day of their ruin; do not boast in the day of distress. 
Oba 1:13  Do not enter the gate of my people in the day of their calamity; do not gloat over his disaster in the day of his calamity; do not loot his wealth in the day of his calamity. 
Oba 1:14  Do not stand at the crossroads to cut off his fugitives; do not hand over his survivors in the day of distress. 
Oba 1:15  For the day of the LORD is near upon all the nations. As you have done, it shall be done to you; your deeds shall return on your own head. 

What better way to 'return his deeds to his own head' than to make Edom PART of that which he mocked?  And further on...

Oba 1:18  The house of Jacob shall be a fire, and the house of Joseph a flame, and the house of Esau stubble; they shall burn them and consume them, and there shall be no survivor for the house of Esau, for the LORD has spoken. 

Oba 1:19  Those of the Negeb shall possess Mount Esau, and those of the Shephelah shall possess the land of the Philistines; they shall possess the land of Ephraim and the land of Samaria, and Benjamin shall possess Gilead. 

Esau 'burned like stubble', and his land taken by 'those of the Negeb" (the Nabateans).  Sounds like God covered every base- right down to a certain thank you card on a certain page...

A walk with you

So instead of running another "Ridiculous" post today to toast some people who really REALLY deserve it, I thought I'd share a walk with you.  And since I am still recovering the 2D method (Deep breaths and Distractions), I kept a pace count to see how far we- you and I went.

The 1/4 mile mark- Inland Trail heading for the north end of the woods.

He posed for a pic.  Nice bug!

Hi, Big Guy!

1/2 mile point.

Not many flowers left in the woods...

3/4 mark- back into the woods

Saw the black squirrel

Just past one mile

The rail is just about set to fall in...

Sorry to scare you, Mr Bunny

1 1/4 mile- by the pond

Watching the traffic go by...

There's this old overgrown trail I take, and at one point I saw that a deer had recently slept in its tall grass.  Moments later, I knew HOW recently...

1 1/2 at the river

Goslings sure are getting big!

1 3/4 miles- decided to backtrack back to the woods

2 miles- took the left path.  Down the hill, up the hill, down the hill, up the hill

2 1/4 miles, coming up on the barn... here's where it starts...

2 1/2 miles. South end of the Ponderosa trail- might as well be Trail of Tears for me anymore...

2 3/4 miles- home is on the other side of the tree line.

And at 3 miles, home just ahead!

Since I thought you might like it, here's a snapper me and KC saw the other day...

"Whaddever, dudes..."

But, that's ridiculous

In lieu of my usual trying to glean insanity from the news pages, I have decided to share a couple of stories that are... well, hard to believe, except that I was involved in them.  One involves cute cuddly animals, and one involves social media.  So let me tell the animal one first, so at least you'll stay for the first part...


So before I get to the story, let me warm you up with a FB post I made early last week:


Seen on today's walk: 1- still in the complex, one pair underwear, mens, neatly folded, with 1 pair socks, same; 2- St Joe Road, 1 wall unit air conditioner, some assembly required; 3- canal trail, two squirrels fighting falling out of a tree and down an embankment. As I listened, I heard them still barking at each other. One squirrel, pissed, emerges from the undergrowth, briefly thinking I was his sparring partner, decides I'm not and leaves. 4- Canal trail again, redwing male dive bombs me, hissing directly over my head. Beginning to think my hat's orange bill might be bugging him, may run an experiment later.


Now, while the rest could qualify, I just wanted to make mention of this because of #3- the squirrel thing.  To flesh this out, the incident was just south of Scrappy's trail to the landing, and the bank was a steep, bush-and-tree clogged drop which the two fighting rodents crashed from at least ten feet above.  I could hear the thrashing remnants of the landing, and could hear them barking at each other very loudly, so I came up to the edge of the bank to look closer.  The barking was separated by about 20 feet- one of them had apparently hit the... well, whatever he hit- running.  But that was the spot I kept hearing the thrashing, and eventually, he broke through the brush about a yard away from me, mad as hell (you can tell because they squint their eyes until they look Chinese) and slashing his tail back and forth like his butt was on fire.  He saw me, which rather surprised him because he thought I was his (former) friend.  I said, "Hey, bud,"  And he when back into hiding and barking mode.


Now I tell that story because it made an excellent counterpoint to what happened yesterday.  I'd love to show you a GOOD picture of the scene, but it was my phone, and thus...

You might can kinda see, Mr and Mrs Duck, down at the stream near the apartment.  If my phone could enlarge stuff well, you'd see a squirrel at the base of the tree.  Here's what went down- I swear this is all true.


So the squirrel is looking for acorns or somesuch at the base of the tree, when Mr Duck decides to check him out.  Squirrel plants himself as if bracing for impact; Duck comes closer, drops his head low.  They look at each other for a few seconds; Squirrel goes up the tree, Duck moves away.  The Squirrel comes back down and resumes what he was doing; and Mrs Duck decides to have a turn at it.  She walks up;  Squirrel goes into his pose.  She stops, he comes a bit closer.  She drops her head and begins to 'mumble-quack'.

At this point, Squirrel apparently decides, "Oh, this is a game," and this is where it became really hard to believe.  He picks up a nearby twig, rolls over on his back and wrestles with it.  Rolls a bit towards the stream bank, drops the stick, and goes back up the tree.  Comes back down, grabs the twig, repeats the process.  This goes on 3 or 4 times, until finally the hen moves towards Mr Duck, apparently saying something along the lines of, "Yes, thank you, the jester was quite entertaining," and flies down into the stream bed.  The Squirrel goes up the tree, Mr Duck looks to where the Mrs. landed, and all lived happily ever after.


**********************************************


The other story:

Back when I was a pre-schooler and desperately trying to understand the world around me, I listened intently at Church and wondered just how many "Persons" went into "God".  I mean, there was God the Father, Jesus, Jesus Christ, Christ Jesus, Christ, Lord, Lord Jesus, and the Holy Spirit at least.  But as Paul says in 1 Corinthians 13, I put away childish ideas after I got older and the Nuns whittled it down to three.  And that made sense.

Skip ahead to around a year ago, when our good friend Al Penwasser (actually his alter-ego) introduced me to a FB knock-off without the censorship called MeWe.  It is more or less a group based thing; unless you go in with a bunch of friends, you need to pick a group or it gets real boring.  Al found that out and bailed early.  I bumped across it once in a great while because I joined some Christian groups.  Unfortunately, most of the players on MeWe are in a range from "a little off center" to honest-to-God flat-earthers (that isn't even a little exaggerated).

A few months ago, someone else I knew found himself at loose ends after Google+ went belly up and ended up on MeWe.  For a reason that still baffles me, he invited me into his circle (we'd had a bit of a falling out), and about the same time some other guy- a pastor of some stripe- invited me into his group.  Hoping that maybe things might liven up, I got involved again, because iron does sharpen iron, even if it's got some rust stains on it.

Well, yesterday, after a Sunday sermon on the Personhood and priorities of the Holy Spirit, I went on MeWe and a lady who'd invited me into her group (She's the group 'owner' by MeWe standards) posted an article asking what the difference is between the Holy Ghost and the Holy Spirit.  Now, much like the pre-schooler who learned from the nuns, I thought, "This is kind of a dumb question to start an article about the Spirit, because any clown knows that the ONLY difference is "Ghost" is a somewhat archaic word for "Spirit"- there IS no difference."

But I forgot what world I was in.  According to this article- which I bailed on before I even got to the part about what the difference is- The Spirit is NOT a Person, is NOT God, but like I said I said, I bailed before figuring out just who this author thought He was.  Thinking to myself, "If I want to set the record straight, I'm going to spend a lot of my Sunday reading this thing and then trying to put a rebuttal together myself (which I eventually did anyway), I found two excellent articles on the Godhood and Personhood of the Spirit and put them in the comments.

Part of the reply made a little sense.  Part of it crossed my eyes.

Essentially, she started out saying, "The Holy Spirit is God," then said that she was 'non-trinitarian.'  Then she threw in the even more bizarre, "The Holy Ghost and the Holy Spirit are the same, but different."  Frankly, I had no idea WHERE she was coming from.  I explained my point of view concisely and politely, she replied likewise, "We believe differently on Trinity."  Another thing she brought up was that, "As long as you believe in Jesus, you are saved."  That was good enough for me at that point.

Today, I thought more about it though- do you let someone go on happy with a doctrinal error like that?  I mean, in a way she was right- If her stance was based on misunderstanding, but not false religion, I don't think God sends anyone to hell for "not figuring out the details."  But once again, the story takes a turn.

I brought back up the article to make sure I was quoting right, and noticed that she had 'liked' my comment and another gentleman had put up a 'confused' emoji.  Re-read what I had said and what she had said.  And about two paragraphs ago, I thought, "let me bop over and copy my comment on my view of the Spirit."  And between my starting this post you are reading and two paragraphs ago, she DELETED not only the entire post, comments and all, but an entire 5-hour long message thread between herself and "confused".  Why, and what was in the deleted thread,  I have no idea.  In fact, I just looked, and she has DELETED the entire group!

I'd be surprised, but something very much like this happened when I first joined MeWe.  I confronted an administrator of one of the groups on something I thought he was wrong on.  He somehow decided that I was right about whatever it was, and soon later deleted his whole profile.

I guess, when it comes down to it, maybe FB isn't so bad after all...