Still Here!

BUSY lately. I blame daylight savings time. I could use 26 hours a day, but they gave me 23. I have been pedaling uphill into the wind ever since.

Haven't had time to blog or to lurk for very long at my usual favorites. Hope to catch up with everyone this weekend, but right now it is 12:15 a.m. and I need to be up at 6. (yawning)

Peace

I am happy to hear Candy and the VTC ladies have come to a truce. I'm not certain that either side accomplished what they set out to, but then again...maybe they did...I guess we will just have to wait and see.

Their dispute proved to be good exercise for my brain. As much as I enjoy Bible study at my Lutheran church no one ever says infant baptism is meaningless or calls a communion wafer a "cracker". Nor does anyone talk about when they got "saved." Also, I've never heard anyone challenge the Pastor on sola scriptura, sola fide nor any other "sola". I know of no one questioning him about what version of the Bible we use, or state that our version of the 10 commandments is deficient.

Yes, it was good to use the old noggin for some higher thinkin'.

Yes, I will continue to blog -- I DO have other interests! :-)

VERY busy this weekend. Have a very blessed Holy Week.

Veiled References?

Candy has successfully blocked the IP addresses of most of the RC sisterhood at VTC and disabled her RSS feed making it difficult if not impossible for them to read her blog. (Oh well, it was fun while it lasted.) I guess that is why they missed her comment on their blog post.

Tracy at VTC wrote in her post "Head covering and Catholic Women": The moral law requires all women to wear the veil on their hearts. A woman should not wear the veil on her head, until she is wearing it first on her heart. A woman who wears the veil on her heart accepts the place that God gives to women in the Church, the family, and society. Women who wear the veil on their hearts are imitating the Virgin Mary in her humility, submissiveness, and obedience to Christ.

Candy at KTH blogs "Are you being tossed in the wind?": I am saddened at the fact that many of those blogs teach that "women must have a veil over their hearts, before the veil on their heads will mean anything." Now that disturbs me. Why? Because 2 Corinthians 3 specifically speaks of a veil over our hearts, and it says that if our hearts are veiled, then we are not in the Lord, but when we truly turn to the Lord, then the veil is removed from our hearts:"But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart. Nevertheless when it [he or she] shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away." -2 Corinthians 3:16

When I read Tracy's phrase "veil on her heart" it did raise my eyebrows. There are 4 definitions of the word veiled (from dictionary.com):
1. having a veil: a veiled hat.
2.covered or concealed by, or as if by, a veil: a veiled woman.
3.not openly or directly expressed; masked; disguised; hidden; obscure: a veiled threat.
4.lacking clarity or distinctness: veiled sounds; a veiled image.

None of those is particularly descriptive of a Christian's heart. But, I think what Tracy is trying to say is that the inner workings need to be sufficiently humble for the outer symbolism to be meaningful.

Candy replies with what Paul wrote in 2 Corinthians 3:16. I'd like to expand on this a little because I think it is applicable.

2 Corinthians 3:14b-18: For to this day, when they read the old covenant, [the law] that same veil remains unlifted, because only through Christ is it taken away.[the gospel] Yes, to this day whenever Moses is read [the law] a veil lies over their hearts. But when one turns to the Lord, [the gospel] the veil is removed. Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. [from the law] And we all, with unveiled face, beholding the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another. For this comes from the Lord who is the Spirit.[process of sanctification]

In a nutshell: veiled=Moses & law & old covenant; unveiled=Jesus & gospel & new covenant.

and had it not three corners...

Candy blogged this week about 1 Corinthians 11 and Christian women wearing headcovering. I'm generally in agreement with her and with the comments made by KH. It's audiaphora.

When I was a little kid the oldest old ladies wore hats to church every Sunday. I liked that. I wanted to grow up and wear pretty hats too. A hat to match every outfit. I definitely did not associate their "headcovering" with submission. It was fashion.

And there lies my problem with headcovering. I think Amish/Mennonite prayer caps are adorable. I'd love LOVE to wear one of those black bonnets. I'd look so darn cute! And no bad hair days. And no my-roots-need-touching-up days! Woo-hoo! If I wore a scarf, veil or hijab I'd have dozens of colors, styles and patterns to coordinate with my blouses and sweaters. Accessories!! Yes, my heart races at the thought of it!!

Obviously my heart nor head is in the "right place" on this headcovering issue. I can't get passed the aesthetic feelings. And besides that, my husband would think I'm loony.

My headcovering is this: a knit stocking cap. It is 7 degrees below zero on my thermometer. At my age practicality trumps fashion.

Last thought -- we should not be looking in the mirror for holiness. It isn't in long hair, dresses or headcoverings.

We should look to the cross on Golgatha.

...There is only one who is good....

Have a blessed day.

Serenity now...and then

Why can't we all just get along?

If I had a "mantra" for motherhood, that would be mine.

I am a peacemaker mother and, as it turns out, that is a bad thing. I'm suppose to let my kids work out their differences so they learn "social skills" and to "compromise" and important "lessons."

But they argue all the time and it annoys me. (Yes, yes, it only annoys me because I LET it annoy me...ugh). So I intervene and try to work out a solution that will make everyone happy and (hopefully) quiet.

They argue over things. (I had it first! )
They argue over food. (That's my cookie, you already had two! )
They argue over places. (I called shotgun! )

Most of the time my efforts are for naught because no matter what solution I suggest one child will declare That's not fair!

Fairness. Is life ever fair? Too often goodness goes unrewarded and evil goes unpunished...And sometimes your brother eats the last cookie even though he has already had two.

Fairness, it seems, is a matter of perspective. The son who ate the last cookie thought it was fair for him to take the cookie because he got to it first. The son who complained had already ate a cookie, cleaned up the crumbs, and left the room. It looked like he was done eating cookies, but he was only taking a break and planned to come back and eat his second cookie later.

God, give us grace to accept with serenity the things that cannot be changed, courage to change the things that should be changed, and the wisdom to distinguish the one from the other.

I can't change life to make it fair. And often I lack the wisdom to discern what fair even is. I like the second paragraph of the Serenity Prayer (though tacked on):

Living one day at a time;
Enjoying one moment at a time;
Accepting hardships as the pathway to peace;
Taking, as He did, this sinful world
As it is, not as I would have it;
Trusting that He will make all things right
If I surrender to His Will;
That I may be reasonably happy in this life
And supremely happy with Him
Forever in the next.

I like the thought "hardships as the pathway to peace." Yes, I expect peace to come easily. (Why can't we all just get along?)

Ok, I've got my "courage to change the things that should be changed." I'm going to bake another batch of cookies.

And, so help me, a certain son will get the last cookie.

John 3 & Baptism

Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God."

There are a variety of opinions as to what Jesus means by "water" in verse 5 of John chapter three. Some say water means amniotic fluid, but if Jesus meant natural birth why didn't he say "of the womb"? Some say water means baptism, but if He meant baptism why didn't He say baptism? Some say it means living water, but again, why didn't He say living water?

Enigmatically, at least to us, Jesus simply says water. Perhaps we need to look at the verse in context.

John just finished telling us that Jesus is omniscient - He knows what is in a man without the man's testimony. Along comes Nicodemus, a high ranking Pharisee, and Jesus answers Nicodemus' question before he asks it. Compare this to the interaction with the rich young man found in Matthew 19 (also in Luke 18 and Mark 10). In Matthew the RYM asks (v 16), "What good deed must I do to have eternal life?" and Jesus answers (v 17), "If you would enter life, keep the commandments."

Not the same answer He gave Nicodemus.

Next the RYM asks Jesus which commandments he should keep. Jesus lists a few and the rich young man claims to have kept all of them. He asks Jesus (v 20), "What do I still lack?" Jesus knows the RYM has not kept all the commandments (covetness, idolatry) and tells him, "“If you would be perfect, go, sell what you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.” Ouch...the RYM went away sad.

But notice the answer to "what do I lack?". It is (v 21) "If you would be perfect...come, follow me." See it again in Mark 10:21: "You lack one thing: go, sell all that you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.” And Luke 18: "One thing you still lack. Sell all that you have and distribute to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.”

The interaction with the RYM illustrates the Law (you must be perfect [but you are not] to enter heaven) and the gospel (follow Jesus and you will have treasure in heaven). The young man needed to get rid of the possessions, not because it was a good work that earned his salvation, he needed to give it all away because it was a stumbling block keeping him from following Jesus. Read the rest of the story and note what He says in Matthew 18:29, Mark 10:29-30, Luke 18:29-30.

Back to John 3 and Nicodemus. Nicodemus is wondering much the same thing as the RYM, how to enter the kingdom of heaven. And Jesus tells him he must be "born of water and the Spirit."

Not the same answer he gave the RYM.

Remember Jesus is omniscient. Just as He knew in what areas the RYM was lacking/not lacking, He too knows what Nicodemus is lacking/not lacking.

Nicodemus is not lacking water. Two important terms (today's vocab lesson) from Judism 101: <u>Mikvah - a ritual pool of water, used for the purpose of attaining ritual purity. Immersion in a Mikvah is performed for the following main purposes: It is used in connection with Repentance, to remove the impurity of sin. It is also used in connection with Conversion, because the convert has taken upon himself or herself to adopt the lifestyle of the Jew, that is based on the recognition of G-d as King of the Universe and on the obligation to perform the commandments of the Torah.

Tevilah- full body immersion in a mikvah. (See Wikipedia for more on ritual washing.)

The Pharisees were all about keeping the law (see Matthew chapter 23). Especially note verses 25-26: “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you clean the outside of the cup and the plate, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence. You blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and the plate, that the outside also may be clean."

Jesus tells Nicodemus he must be "born of the Spirit" which we know as regeneration, new life, to be born again, or born from above -- the light and the life we are blessed with when by God's grace the Holy Spirit dwells within us and draws into a faith relationship with Jesus as our Lord and Savior. Getting the inside of the cup clean--so to speak.

We cannot will ourselves to be reborn - it is the work of God/the Spirit as Jesus says in John 1:12-13 and again in John 3:8. By the power of that Spirit we are able to believe in Jesus, and those that believe will have eternal life (John 3:15-18).

So that brings us back to the issue of water. Given the amount of ritual washing involved in Jewish life, there is little doubt that Nicodemus would have understood water to be mikvah. Does this mean we must keep the laws for ritual washing in order to be saved? Remember the RYM? We see law & gospel presented side by side. In this case, the law is the water, or rather the ritual washing that it represents. But the "water" wasn't enough - the "cups" are still dirty on the inside. That is where we need Christ, where the Word of gospel found in John 3:16 saves us.

Additionally, from the definition of mikvah we learn it is used in connection with conversion. It is also used in cases of adoption. This is what is involved in converting adopted gentile infants and children to Judiasm (from convert.org):

• Jewish parents in all movements need to convert adopted Gentile minors for the minors to be considered Jewish. The adoption itself, or even the raising of the children as Jewish, does not make the child Jewish.
• The conversion of an infant or child has Jewish legal sanction. According to the Talmud (Ketubot 11a), it is permissible for a religious court (a bet din) to convert a gentile infant. The basis in Jewish law is that it is a privilege to be Jewish (Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh Deah, 268:7). Therefore, a minor can be converted even though not mature enough to understand the act because making the minor Jewish is performing a favor for that infant or child.
• Jewish law also allows those people converted as an infant or child to renounce the conversion when they reach maturity. After girls reach 12 or boys 13, converted infants and children can legally reject the conversion and go back to their previous religion. If they accept Judaism or are silent, they are deemed to be considered adult converts.
• The conversion of a female infant or child according to Conservative and Orthodox practices only requires tevilah (immersion in a ritual bath called a mikveh). A male child also requires immersion in the mikveh. Prior to the immersion, the male must have a brit milah (a legal circumcision ceremony performed by a mohel). If possible, this should be done on the 8th day after the birth of the boy. If a circumcision has already been performed, a drop of blood needs to be drawn in a ceremony called hatafat dam brit. A Hebrew name can then be given to the child, though some wait to give the name until after the tevilah ceremony. There is usually a wait of a couple of weeks between the circumcision and the immersion.
• A Bet Din, usually consisting of three rabbis, is convened for the immersion. Parents can enter the mikveh. If the children are old enough, they recite the needed prayers; if not a rabbi does so for them. After the tevilah ceremony is completed, and a name chosen if one has not already been selected, the child is declared by the Bet Din to be Jewish.
• The conversion of infants and children is, of course, a moment of joy for parents, but it is also such a moment for the entire Jewish community. New children add precious lives to the community and bring with them that most valuable idea of hope for the future.

And Adoption & Jewish Law from Star of David.org:

• For the child to be considered Jewish, he or she must be formally converted. Such a conversion is an absolute requirement of Jewish law, and dispensing with it can have serious consequences later in life, for the child may reach Bar Mitzvah age, want to marry or join a synagogue, only to be told by a rabbi that he or she is not really Jewish. The ceremony is simple, and should be done as early as possible.
• The conversion consists of two parts, circumcision (milah) and immersion (tevilah). If possible, a boy should be circumcised on the eighth day (but not on the Sabbath or on a Festival) with a slight change in blessings.
• Immersion is a requirement for both boys and girls. The immersion is done in a "mikvah," or Jewish ritual bath. Usually the immersion takes place as soon as the infant is old enough so that there is no physical danger. Six months is the age preferred by many rabbis. Yet it is permitted any time until "Bar" or "Bat Mitzvah."
• The immersion must take place before a "beit din" of three rabbis. The child should be naked and held in such a way that the water touches every part of the body. The child is quickly immersed, and two blessings are recited by the rabbi (or by the child, if old enough). The child is then immersed once more. (Some rabbis do it twice more.)
• The two blessings recited at the mikvah are: "Praised are You, Lord our God, King of the Universe, Who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us on the immersion." Praised are You, Lord our God, King of the Universe, Who has kept us alive, sustained us and allowed us to reach this season." Following the immersion and after the child is dressed, he or she is given a Hebrew name and welcomed into the Jewish community with a special prayer.
• Bringing an adopted child to the "mikvah" for a conversion is a happy event, worthy of celebration. Many couples invite other members of the family, take pictures, and celebrate with refreshments at home or at a favorite restaurant. As the child grows up, pictures and memories can be shared of the day the child was welcomed into the Jewish community.
• An important question still remains. What gives the "Beit din" the right to convert an infant to Judaism without the child's permission or understanding? The Talmud asked the same question.
• It answered that one can act to someone's advantage without his permission, and becoming Jewish is to the child's advantage. But there is an important proviso. Upon reaching the age of majority (12 for a girl, 13 for a boy), the child can protest and annul the conversion. He or she has a right to say, "I don't wish to be a Jew, and I consider the conversion invalid." On the other hand, acts of Jewish identity at the age of majority serve to reaffirm the conversion.
• For this reason, "Bar" or "Bat Mitzvah" takes on a particular importance to an adopted and converted child. It serves as a reaffirmation of the conversion done years before. It completes the process of conversion. Circumcision and immersion can be done to infants; acceptance of the "mitzvot" can only be done upon reaching the age of majority. The validity of the entire conversion is contingent upon assuring a positive Jewish identity upon reach "Bar/Bat Mitzvah."

It all sounds so very familiar. So much like baptism & confirmation. :-)

Ephesians 1:5: In love he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will...

Maybe I'll continue this...when I have the brainpower to tackle it...

Two cents on John Chapter 2

1. The words "hour" and "time" (as found in verse 4) are used to point to His inevitable crucifixion, His sacrificial death on the cross, not His glorification as Messiah. See Matthew 26:18; Mark 14:35, 14:41; John 7:6-8, 7:30, 8:20, 12:23, 12:27, 13:1,16:32, 17:1.

2.Verses 24-25 - But Jesus on his part did not entrust himself to them, because he knew all people and needed no one to bear witness about man, for he himself knew what was in man. For some reason these verses were underlined in my Bible. I don't recall why I underlined them, but it drew my attention and I looked a little deeper into their meaning. The following cross references are given:

• Isaiah 11:3 - And his delight shall be in the fear of the Lord.He shall not judge by what his eyes see,or decide disputes by what his ears hear,
• Deuteronomy 31:21 - And when many evils and troubles have come upon them, this song shall confront them as a witness (for it will live unforgotten in the mouths of their offspring). For I know what they are inclined to do even today, before I have brought them into the land that I swore to give.
• 1 Kings 8:39 - then hear in heaven your dwelling place and forgive and act and render to each whose heart you know, according to all his ways (for you, you only, know the hearts of all the children of mankind)
• Matthew 9:4 -But Jesus, knowing their thoughts, said, “Why do you think evil in your hearts?
• John 6:61 - But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples were grumbling about this, said to them, “Do you take offense at this?
• John 6:64 - But there are some of you who do not believe.” (For Jesus knew from the beginning who those were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him.)
• John 13:11 - For he knew who was to betray him; that was why he said, “Not all of you are clean.”

What is John telling us in verses 24-25? My guess, 1) Jesus is divine/God (He is omniscient). 2) Men are evil - He knows men and He knows they can't be trusted, no matter what they say.

It's not an altar call.

Enough eisegesis for tonight. :-)