Sunday, May 31, 2015

As a man thinks

Now we turn to farming. 'A sower went out to sow'. We see intent; we see the purpose – but not necessarily the sower's qualifications. Instead, we see that this sower throws seeds anywhere and everywhere. Perhaps he is not the farmer, but a hired hand. This parable is found in Matthew 13:3-9.


Some fell: by the way side, on stony ground, among thorns, on good ground. Seems this guy was in a hurry to get through. Impoverishment was not an issue, neither scarcity of seed. The process seems disorderly, yet a certain amount of seed does appear to fall within the parameters of 'good ground'.
Each final location of sown seed, of course, is meant to represent a measure of human reception. All are measures of the human condition, and show plainly not only that all of us receive the same seed, but also illuminates what each of us might do with what we receive.

Way side? Too busy. Stony ground? Uncommitted. Thorns? Hanging with the wrong crowd. For the way side, the parable states that the gift is trampled down without concern, that it is fodder for the wild animals. Some variations of the parable also show the gift being eaten by worms, or in other words, spoiling and becoming foul.

For the stony ground, the parable expresses a lack of moisture and depth of earth. It cannot find a place to take root, and thus becomes a pitiful attempt that ends in harsh failure. Does the seed fail? No, It is of the same stock that falls into good ground. No, it is the stony ground that fails. And for thorns, the parable shows us that the fruit can only be choked out – thwarted by the proliferation of everything other.

The parable gives us only one winning combination: seed falling into good ground. In certain variations of this parable, the 'good ground' is put forth as ground that has been prepared for the seed. Let us take a moment to consider the standard for successful farming.

Firstly, it cannot be the way side; prepared ground is ground dedicated to one purpose. Stones must be removed so that the seeds can take root. The thorn bush must also be removed: the farmer wants no competition with his seed as he has dedicated the good ground only to his own seed. So then, the entire field must be worked to insure that the seed gets equitable amounts of moisture and sunshine.

In this parable, the seed sprang up and increased. Some thirty, sixty, and a hundred fold. Let us briefly consider seeds that produce ears – like wheat or corn. How many ears can a single ear reproduce? Here in the Midwest, I see huge fields of corn, and know that each ear contains the potential to make hundreds more.

Is it only a coincidence, then, that Christ concludes with “He that hath ears to hear, let him hear?” I think not. Let us imagine that the seed is the mind of God. All of us receive it, not just the Christian, but Jews, Muslims, Atheists, and every other mind set. What we do with it is what makes of us 'way side' or 'stony ground' or 'thorns' or 'good ground'.


Since we have assumed that the seed is the mind of God, let us further consider that the 'good ground', or prepared ground, must be an adequate habitat for such mentality, and that the preparation is Christ's closing statement. The more one trains his ear to hear, the more that ear will receive. What we hear takes root in our minds. Proverbs 23:7 tells us, 'As a man thinks, so is he.'

Sunday, May 24, 2015

Mind of God

Christ speaks of his relationship with Satan in Matthew 12:29, so naturally, we want to know the meaning of this parable. He had just told his audience that a house divided cannot stand, for they, including Pharisees, at least thought, and perhaps voiced the bold assertion that Jesus cast out devils by the power of Satan.

On the most basic level, none of us can do two things at once – if those two things are opposites. I can face forward, but not forward and backward. In fact, no matter how fast I might try to spin around, my back will always be behind me. How then can I both gather, and scatter abroad?

So Christ gave an example of this conundrum in a parable. It immediately points out both the problems of the situation, and the planned focus inherent in such problem solving. Not only must one map out one step at a time, but one must place those steps in their proper order. 'First, bind the strong man, then spoil his house.'

In this, Christ presaged his coming conflict with Satan, moreover his intent to take from Satan what he was guarding. Christ foretold his victory in the clear steps of the parable. Luke 11:21-22 is an alternate telling of the parable that illuminates the attributes both of the standing enemy and the coming conqueror.

The strong man armed to guard his palace represents Satan. His palace was this world, and his goods were the allegiances we made with him, and the practices we held in common. He had not only armed himself with handy weapons, but also with supposedly superior armor. If you think your armor is good enough, you feel distanced from attack. You feel safe, in a place all your own, and untouchable.

Christ said of himself, 'When a stronger than he shall come upon him, and overcome him, he takes from him all his armor wherein he trusted'. This shows us that Satan had built not only his palace, but indeed, his entire kingdom, trusting in armor that could be defeated. If he trusted in it, then so did his legions of enslaved minions, associates, and collaborators.

So then, what is the fall of such a strong man? The leader of the host is both shamed and destroyed; he is displayed as a public example. Then, the legions are judged. They are stripped of all advantages afforded by the former association, and they are punished in a manner befitting their former association. What was taken from them is divided among the new regime. The spoils of conquest are an intrinsic element of war. What side are you on?

Now, there was a moral to this story, for the teaching of Christ often extends past the parable to a closing argument. In this case, Christ points out the difference between the host of the strong man, and the host of the conqueror. It is a difference that damns the one and blesses the other.

Matthew 12:31-32 is the summation in Christ's own words. “Wherefore I say unto you, all manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men, but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. And whosoever speaks a word against the son of man, it shall be forgiven him, but whosoever speaks against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, nor in the world to come.”

So, was that the armor that Satan trusted in? Was that the price of collaboration with the strong man armed to guard his palace? What was that armor, and that perceived advantage? What were they all hiding behind? A lie will always evaporate under the conquering light of the truth.

Essentially, Christ's closing argument compared Christ with the Holy Spirit. We must be certain we have not overlooked this telling point. From the human point of view, the Trinity occupies a single entity. We may recall that Christ is, at times, portrayed as a messenger bringing a message from a higher authority. We must ask, what makes Christ the son of man, if indeed he only referenced himself?

Jesus was a man imbued with the mind of God; that is to say the spirit of God. How such a thing comes together in a man is seen in two truths. God is a spirit named Holy. And, the Holy Ghost is a spirit named Holy. Picture the host of the strong man, and also the host of the conqueror. What we actually see is what one group encourages and the other does not – a Holy mindset: the mind or spirit of God. It is both the nature and message of the messenger. You can dis the messenger, but not the message.

Sunday, May 17, 2015

New wine

Matthew 9:16-17 is where we find our next parable. It speaks of sewing, cloth, wine and bottles. By now, I sincerely hope that all of us know that the language of a parable is symbolic. Parables are not merely quaint; parables use what we already understand to help us understand things we don't understand – things we're not even thinking about.

I bundle myself tightly in my work. I sit in an easy chair with my computer in front of me, my legs up, and a mouse and keyboard in my lap. It takes about a minute if I need to get up or reach something. Sometimes, what I need to reach is frustratingly just out of reach. Fortunately, I have a back scratcher sitting on my portable office nearby. It is about a foot long, and with it I can easily extend my reach.

Those things that are taught in a parable are just out of reach. The parable is a tool that extends our reach – so when Christ tells us about sewing a new piece of cloth onto an old garment, he is speaking of a common problem that many of us are already acquainted with. We, then, become equipped to reach the higher spiritual problem he wants us to pick up.

He tells us the same thing a second time using a variant, but still common problem: putting new wine into old bottles. There is a problem in both of these scenarios. It is a problem that hinges on the difference between success and failure.

What is the meaning of putting new cloth on an old garment? Firstly, it is an attempt at repairing a problem – it is a cheap fix realized through chewing gum and paperclips. The problem not only remains unresolved, it actually gets quite bad. In the illustration, the rent is made worse: the breach opens wider, and the new cloth is lost. Loss, here, is the point. Had an old piece of cloth been used, and the tear opened again, both fabrics were suitable as they were both already closer to loss than the new.

The old garment must run its course. It is meant to be lost. Old can never be made new – but new can be preserved. Adding new to old in an attempted rescue is a waste of the new. It is like casting pearls before swine. Then, there is the wine. Some cheap souls might attempt to reuse an old wine bottle, but the pressure of the new will always prove to powerful. As the Luke 5:37 variant of the parable goes: “the new wine will burst the bottles, and be spilled, and the bottles shall perish.”

New goes in new, and both are preserved. Meaning: a thing is meant to reach its end; it cannot be unnaturally preserved past its time and purpose. However, it may be renewed, by which I mean something new is spawned from the old. Something new is made to replace the old. Saving is not about the old garment, but about the type of it. Life, and eternity is not about dragging the old bottles along. Its about something totally new, and totally different.

There is a contention between success and failure – between the new and old. Success is keyed into the new and failure is keyed into the old. We naturally want to patch our favorite old jeans. Luke 5:39 tells us that our very nature strives to hang on to the old, the dear, the comforting – what we have had for so long, and invested so much of ourselves into. Any one who has tasted the old wine, will resist the new, and say the old is better.

So then, that spiritual problem just out of reach. Let us extend our reach, and take hold of it. Christ is a messenger with a new message. To put it in the old invites certain failure. Christ is life communicating life –how then can we hope to make it fit in a thing that must perish? If sight for the blind is preached, it must be preached to seeing eyes. That is the paradox. The definition is this: a way is opened only to those who are open to the way. New light for new eyes, a new message for new ears, new life for a new body. Salvation is that way. What will you make of it, failure or success?

Sunday, May 10, 2015

Do the Math

Next parable, Luke 12:16-20. 'A man with a large harvest thought to pull down his old barns and build new'. It's that point many of us know and want. The upgrade; the one-up. In a sense, exchanging several old inadequate barns for one large state-of-the-art storage facility is comparable to the merchant who sold his little pearls in order to buy the pearl of great price.

'I have no room where to bestow my fruits'. It was a simple matter of logistics. The fact that he had a large harvest – what does that tell you? It tells me that he was not scratching out a simple existence. More likely, he sold his goods. The fact of several smaller barns speaks of expansion. The new storage facility speaks of a level of success that permitted the business to take the next logical step.

These elements are not the story, merely the backdrop. The story is the man's attitude of pride, his selfish driven quest for more, and of course, the blind spot in his reasoning. With greater storage filled to the max, he got cocky and proud. He thought he could live off his plenty for years, but he didn't know he was soon to die and leave everything to others.

'I will say to my soul' is a statement comparable to the pat on the back one gives oneself upon reaching a personal milestone. Such markers are reached in due time, and through no small measure of hardship. Doubtless, the man in this parable was an older man who had worked hard for many years to get where he was. He looked forward to many more years, years of ease, living off the fruit of his labors, and there is nothing necessarily wrong with that – except the math.

People die. They died sooner back then. Everyone of us faces such a point in our lives: namely the end of our lives. Many of us are hard workers, and frugal, saving up for our retirements – hoping for a few good years of ease. But, in every case where one of us dies, what we acquired in life is always left to those who remain. Sometimes, we plan it out, and other times it falls to chance.

The part about our life's work being left to others is never a problem for those who are in the habit of sharing, of caring for others. None of us know the day or hour; no one makes it out alive. But, is there room in our attitudes for other people. In our drive to be successful, have we made a place for fullness of life? The sad part of this story is not that the man died, but that he was so consumed with his plans and purposes that he overlooked the joys of the time he lived in.


What is the meaning here? Live now, love now. Do the math.

Saturday, May 09, 2015

Listen to the Ages

The present was made to be a past. When you finally reach your future, it will be present but for a short time.
D L Herring




























Sunday, May 03, 2015

Prayer fine-tuned

In Luke 11:5-13, Christ begins a short parable with a question to his disciples. He had just taught them how to pray. In other words, he had taught them how to approach God with a personal request. Using their own experience, he presented a scenario, and asked them how it would most likely play out.


These are the elements of the query: approach a friend and ask for help at an inconvenient hour, the friend has settled his household for the night, his children are asleep in bed.

The scenario is easy to visualize. I see a man clutching his night clothes answering in whispers from an upstairs window: “Shoo! Go away,” he says, “You'll wake the children.” At that point, the friendship matters less than his family obligations.

From my own experience, I can say, the whole day is filled with more convenient times. When I get home from work, and I am resting – enjoying and making the most of the few hours left to my day, I am less likely to accept a visitor, or even a phone call.

Likewise, my wife settles into her evening hours after a day spent in cleaning, ordering her house, working in the yard, and other activities – all of which tax her reserves of energy and patience. In the evening, she likes to watch her soaps. She is hard pressed to take a call even from a brother or sister.

The householder in the parable is reluctant to be disturbed. Yet, he sees that the most effective return to his ordered peace is to give his friend whatever he wants, and send him quickly on his way. Christ points out to his disciples that even though the householder is not motivated by the friendship, he is moved by the importunity.

It is a life lesson many of us already understand. But, there is more. The parable falls between two important points. The first was the prayer Christ had just explained to his disciples. The second was his affirmations on asking, seeking, and knocking.

He continued by asking his disciples a series of questions with obvious answers. This he did to show natural consequence. The obvious answers were things that occurred commonly – rather like the cause and effect of family ties. The point was, if they could give what was asked for, being sinners, then surely a righteous God could.

The entire exchange relayed through these verses targets prayer, or making a request of God. It is put forth that God is not subject to importunity, as the householder of the parable was. The relationship between God, our heavenly Father, and man is also put forth. Moreover, it is not only the asking of prayer that is considered, but seeking and knocking as well.


The topics of seeking and knocking may be dealt with separately – suffice it to say that the iterated 'asking' is shown to be something not broad and general, but rather, a thing fine-tuned and specific. The point that Christ comes to is specific, and relates to the initial prayer that he taught his disciples. The point is precisely this: one thing is asked for in prayer, that being the Holy Spirit (the mind of God.)