Something I will not reference led me to some thoughts on the current situation with the "caravans" of people heading through Mexico to the United States. It leads me to a question that is being asked by some others- some well-meaning and some not. That question is: Does the United States, as a Christian Nation, have a duty to accept just any ol' body in their borders?
And the answer there lies in the concept of Christian Nation. And why the United States is NOT one.
First let's ask, can a nation be a Christian? Is an entire nation saved, or just individuals? Will any nation go in its entirety to heaven? Answer: That would be absurd. Nor do you get to heaven by your membership in a nation, ethnic group, or religious grouping. I would like to think that is obvious... but, you have Catholics who think they merit heaven (after a pit stop in purgatory) just on their baptism into the church; you have Jews who think that "God's Chosen People" is a physical birthright despite the examples of Ishmael and Jacob; and others. Fact is, remind yourself of Ephesians 2:8-9...
Eph 2:8 For by grace you are saved, through faith, and this not of yourselves; it is the gift of God; Eph 2:9 not of works, that not anyone should boast;
...or Romans 10:9...
Rom 10:9 Because if you confess the Lord Jesus with your mouth, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.
... so that dispenses of that aspect. But what if you say, "Well, a 'Christian Nation' doesn't mean that, it means it is founded on Christian values"?
Declaration of Independence: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
The Constitution: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"...
Do you see that, while respecting the rights of people of faith, there is a definite NON-link between God and government? Do you see that while the Declaration recognized a CREATOR, it did not recognize Christ as that Creator?
Some might challenge me, then how is it that God so richly blessed this nation? To which I challenge you- are Christians to be known by their BLESSINGS, or by their FRUIT? You know the answer there is fruit, and I turn you once again to the original Constitution:
Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.
That was a political compromise by this "Christian" nation, assigning the value of a slave as 3/5ths that of anyone else- and a Native American no value at all. The fruit of that compromise was kicking Civil War over slavery down the road 80 years.
So then, you say, what about 2 Chronicles 7? Let's look at that famous passage:
2Ch 7:13 If I shut up the heavens and there is no rain, and if I command the locusts to consume the land, and if I send pestilence among My people,
2Ch 7:14 and My people, on whom My name is called, shall be humbled, and shall pray, and shall seek My face, and shall turn back from their evil ways, then I will hear from Heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.
This is often brought up in requests for corporate prayer about our nation, by many respected pastors, and I am not here to knock praying for our nation. BUT... this is NOT a general promise, this is directed to GOD'S people, called by HIS name- and that is Israel. God only ever named two nations after Himself. Israel in the OT, the Christian Church in the new. And that itself brings us to a disturbing revelation. Because of these verses, many people have prayed corporately for the United States- who is not subject to this promise. How many have EVER prayed for the CHURCH based on this verse? With the divisions between us, the false teachings both institutionalized and creeping in amongst the "faithful" churches, we NEED to direct this prayer call TO the one nation that is a Christian Nation, the Kingdom of God on Earth.
And to close back at the original question: Many of us in that Kingdom of God are in the secular boundaries of the United States- a nation, while blessed by God, that rules over many faiths and non-faiths. Ruling necessitates a Rule of Law. The immigrants who legitimately want into this country need to OBEY that Rule of Law. Oh, but wait- aren't we supposed to disobey that law if it goes against God's Word? Yes we are. The example given- and the ONLY example given- was when the government tried to prohibit the TEACHING of the Word of God. NOT on how legitimately passed laws that are not against the teachings of Christ or the Ten Commandments should be enforced. Thus, you may pray for these that want a better life, you may give to charities that help them. And those that do come in, you should treat them as you treat anyone else in Christ. BUT what you can't do is break legitimate laws to let them in or give them access to what legal citizens have on the excuse that it is a "Christian duty". And what you shouldn't do is shame anyone else if they say, "No, you can't come in illegally", because it is their "Christian duty", or the United States' duty as a "Christian Nation."
So today, we are in November 2nd, 1965, and since I am frankly sick of politics, I have only one item for the lead in. It isn't so much a news item as an "overheard conversation", into which I was drawn by the opening line...
I don't know if I was more amused by the "neither nitwit nor illiterate" line, the fact they were talking about "waterless fountains", or the bottom credits:
Clipped from The Cincinnati Enquirer, 02 Nov 1965, Tue, KENTUCKY EDITION, Page 6 (emphasis NOT mine, lol)....
Hey, guess what? This week, I DO have a 6D ready! I WILL remember the Label Game this week! And I will have Diana Ross and th... Nardole, what?
Miss Ross wanted a gratuity for the show that was above budget. The OTHER girls did agree, though... although, you might not like their replacement for Ms Ross...
Who? Who is it?
Let me start things off with LAST week's label game, and I cannot believe that the thing that takes me the longest to do, I have now forgotten TWICE. We were in 1964 then, and with the Beatles AND Beach Boys on Capitol, it was no surprise that Capitol easily had the most songs on the MusicVF hot 100 of the year with 9- no one else had more than 5. BUT... that also makes it hard for the big total to get the best average position, which is the name of our game. And that mark- an average position of #11... belongs to...
Motown! And this, not surprisingly was a Supremes-led attack, with Baby Love (#1), Where Did Our Love Go (9), and Come See About Me (20), along with Mary Wells' My Guy (14).
In fact, I'll just simplify by saying Motown won again in '65! This time their five tunes averaged 26.0, with Stop In The Name Of Love (12), I Hear A Symphony (20), Back In My Arms Again (23) from the girls, and the Four Tops contributing I Can't Help Myself (Sugar Pie Honey Bunch) at #18 and It's The Same Old Song at #57. This time, Capitol racked up 11 hits in finishing just under 10 back ( they lost by 27.5 in '64), which means that they have erased a 13 hit lead by RCA in two years- both labels now have 44 hits, with MGM at 39 and Columbia with 37.
Three debuts on the M10 this week. AND I would like to apologize for putting up the "wordy" official version of the Knocks' Brazillian Soul. I knew better than not to preview videos, so I will shoulder the blame. But, Knocks? Maybe instead of "official video" you might want to label your mini-documentaries "director's cuts"? Whatsay?
At #10 though we have the first of our three newbies- and it's an old favorite: The Derevolutions!
*********************************************
All right, let me introduce the Supremes: Florence Ballard, Mary Wilson...
...and, er, Elvis Presley. Good to have you here, ladies!
F and M: Thank you! E: Whuddabout me?
You're always here. Anyway, we have 17 candidates from 74 stations, and we just missed having a winner lap the field again! Here's the one-vote wonder list...
E: Gimme that! Here you go, ladies... F: (Giggles) Thank you, Elvis... We start with Tom Jones and What's New Pussycat, which had already peaked here, but was on the South African Chart... M: Wow, we get South African songs, too? E: Just wait! Sometimes he gets songs from Laurenco Marques... M: Where's that? E: After the show, I'll SHOW you... F and M: (Giggles)
Uh, guys...
M: I'm sorry (giggles). Next we have The McCoys and Hang On Sloopy, which was #13 on Cashbox... E: Yeah, then we got ... Hey! Who the heck is this New Breed?
Well, they were actually a no hit wonder, but their song Green Eyed Woman was a local hit somewhere. The other notable was that amongst their members was future Eagle Timothy B Scmitt.
E: Man, you took my WHOLE turn... F: Roy Head was number 4 with Treat Her Right... M: And the Staler Brothers got a vote for Flowers On The Wall, despite the fact it was a few weeks away from hitting the charts. E: Man, she got to read her own song... anyway, Next was Fontella Bass with Rescue Me at #11... F: Sonny and Cher had Baby Don't Go dropping to #27... M: Oh, and WE had I Hear A Symphony at #29! Yay! E: An' it was the big mover, going from 59 to 29, 30 spots! F: BUT, it still only got the one vote...
Don't take it too hard, after all, you DID win last week- plus you got two label wins in a row for Motown! Anyway, here's the Best of the Rest...
E: Okay, we gots Len Barry's 1-2-3 at #10 with 3 votes... F: And Australian star Normie Rowe with 2 votes each for the a and b sides of his hits Shakin' All Over and a very uptempo version of Que Sera Sera... M: The Vogues had You're The One at #7 with 2 votes... E: Uh, yeah, we got The Byrds and Turn Turn Turn at #54 with 3 votes... F: And that's it! We're ready for the Final contestants!
Yep! And like I said, we have a BIG winner this week, but who is it? Choose from the #3 A Lover's Concerto by the Toys... Get Off My Cloud by the Rolling Stones at #2... Let's Hang On by the Four Seasons at #22... and at #1, Yesterday by the Beatles!
************************************************
The debut at #8 is a serious, solemn thing- this is a true story by the lead singer of the band Bad Wolves. KC clued me in to this one- and it says a LOT to our world today...
*******************************************
So who is Cotton, and what was his dream? Well, if you watched Bless The Beasts And The Children, you know... if you didn't (like me), Cotton's Dream is the original form of what would be variously called "Nadia's Theme" and "Theme to The Young And The Restless"! The main composer was Perry Botkin, Jr, and it wasn't his first rodeo in the music world. Once upon a time, an Alka-Seltzer jingle called No Matter What Shape (Your Stomach's In) was a hit for a "group" called the T-Bones. But the "T-Bones" were just ( and I use the term "just" relatively) members of the famous studio players known as the Wrecking Crew. The record was a hit, the label wanted a tour, the WC had better things to do. Mr Botkin was among the WC on the single. But a "public" T-Bones was put together for the tour.
Both groups were organized by one Judd Hamilton, who was also a part of the public group- along with his brother Danny and the rest of what would become Hamilton, Joe Frank, and Reynolds! Danny Hamilton, through his brother, had also been a member of a group called Avantis, along with Pat and Lolly Vegas, the Mexican/Native American brothers who would later form Redbone (Come And Get Your Love). And Avantis would make the first recording of the song Keep On Dancing, which by the Gentrys was at #5 with no Panel Love.
*******************************************
Our final debut at #7 comes to us courtesy of another heads-up by former boss Tim, and once again it's Blackberry Smoke- with a little help from one Amanda Shires. And you'll recognize the tune- it's a Tom Petty Classic:
*****************************************
Stat Pack!
Knew 33 here and 19 in the UK, including Panelists Get Off My Cloud (17, debut), Hang On Sloopy (8), and Baby Don't Go (16).
At 101 was a two sided hit for Barry McGwire that I really enjoyed- Child Of Our Times/Upon A Painted Ocean. Child peaked at #72 on Billboard.
The #65 in '65 belongs to "the Sinatra of the Blues", one Bobby Bland, with These Hands (Small But Mighty). It peaked #63 on BB and #4 R&B.
And the #1 in the UK was Ken Dodd with Tears- their biggest hit of 1965 and the #39 best selling song of all time in the UK. Known as "the last of the great music hall singers", He was knighted New Years Day 2017 - 15 months before his death at the age of 90 earlier this year.
*******************************************
The rest of the M10:
Radiation City drops from 5 to 9 with Ghost Organ.
Also dropping is Anna Burch- her 7th week with What I Want sees her fall 3 to #6.
Alkonost climbs 2 to #5 with the instrumental of Paporotnik.
And the big news- Sucker's Prayer falls from the top to #4 for the Decemberists.
Roseanne Cash goes up 1 to #3 with Not Many Miles To Go.
ELO crashes towards the top, climbing to #2, a 4-spot jump, with Surrender.
Giving us a new #1...
...Frankie Cosmos and Apathy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Whether she cares or not, that puts us at 90 #1s all time!
And the winner of the Panel?
Well, if you took the Seasons, you got a measly 5.4%...
I could really come to hate Greek. More in a minute.
This week our verse is one I would have never thought controversial, or would lead me on such a merry chase. We are up to- and I really should have known it would from where it's located- 1 Corinthians:
1Co 3:16 Do you not know that you are God's temple and that God's Spirit dwells in you?
As I looked at the commentators, I saw my preconceived notions buffeted. Because, where I had always thought that this referred to every believer as a temple- we've ALL been taught that- the original meaning is that we AS A CHURCH are that temple. And that bothered me- I guess because if you consider yourself a temple, you have less excuse for sin, more reason to AVOID sin- and I could really use that! But if you are a brick in a building (which makes sense Biblically), you might lean on the CORPORATE morality and not so much your own.
So I asked the webs- which is it? And I came upon a GREAT article by Bill Webb on a site called Word and Way. He references a study by David May, professor of New Testament at Central Baptist Theological Seminary in Shawnee, KS, which makes several valid points. First of which is that, the Greek translated as you in all three cases are PLURAL. Which makes sense, I guess, because Paul wasn't writing to "the Corinthian". Here are some excerpts:
“Paul is not writing about individual Christians being individual temples with separate Spirits in each temple,” May explained. “Paul highlights that many folks make up one temple, which is the community of faith/church. And in that one community is the one Spirit (unity)...
“A small band of believers is created as a temple without walls that stands in contrast to the various pagan temples in Corinth and its environ,” he explained. “It is David against Goliath but just set in a different form. How can this ‘temple’ thrive and survive when it does not have all the necessary characteristics of a temple: building, rituals, priests, sacrifices and public festivals?”
May believes it survives and thrives because of its distinctive — the Spirit in its midst.
May further believes that the conclusion of verse 16 translated “God’s Spirit dwells in you” or similarly in several translations is best captured in the NIV: “God’s Spirit dwells in your midst.” In this context, it is not so much that a person is possessed by God’s Spirit, but rather that God’s presence among God’s people allows them to worship and serve God.”
For May, verse 17 — “If anyone destroys God’s temple, God will destroy that person; for God’s temple is sacred, and you together are that temple” — should not be separated from the previous verse. (Emphasis mine)
So I thought, "Well, this is a useful happenstance. I wonder if it could be applied to Matthew 16:18- the verse that calls Peter a rock and leads Catholics to name him Pope?"
Never shoulda went there.
What I found was a fascinating- if possibly apocryphal- exchange between a Catholic and a Jehovah's Witness. The Jehovan brought up the points I would have, after looking at the verse, because in the Greek Peter is masculine and "rock" as in "on this rock" is feminine.
At this point, I hope you will allow me a fragment of a dirty story to make the point that was about to skewer me. Working around many Mexicans, I picked up some, er, "gutter Spanish". I learned in Spanish, everything had a grammatic gender- with masculine marked with an "o" at the end and feminine with "a". So I asked a friend why the word for the masculine sex organ ended with the feminine "a"? He told me, "Because it is strong enough for a man, but made for a woman."
Point being: It might make sense to a speaker, but it'll never make sense to me.
The Catholic answered the Jehovan that the Greek in Matthew had to come through the original Aramaic, which was not a gender language. For them, rock was rock. In the Greek, though, the large mass of rock on which Christ would build the Church was in the Feminine gender- and he couldn't give Peter a feminine name. So he became Cephas, which is more like "pebbles"- and Flintstones aside, that WAS masculine in Greek.
I shook my head and left the bunny trail.
So I set out to find if there was any place that could bring me back to the concept of the Spirit living IN the individual. For most of my quest, the only thing I learned was: If KJV says "ye", it's plural; if "thou", it's singular. Not much help.
Then I came to Galatians 4:
Gal 4:4 But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law,
Gal 4:5 to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons.
Gal 4:6 And because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, "Abba! Father!"
Gal 4:7 So you are no longer a slave, but a son, and if a son, then an heir through God.
And in 4:7, son, slave, and heir are all singular. So I guess I am happy now.
This should be a lesson to all of you: I am not Paul, Peter, Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John. I do my best, with a LOT of help, but you need to check up on me. There may be a lot of times- like this one- where I "translate" based on my preconceived notions, and don't know it. I am just a learner like you.
A lone man looking for means of expression in a tsunami of information. Seeking truth justice and the American way in the perspective of a Nixon conservative. And the Commissioner of the free world's smallest and best fantasy football league.
Posts
