If I sound a bit grumpy its because I just spend two hours reading mans Sabbath theology. If I have learnt anything that is to stray away from fallacy. The early church has openly taken responsibility for the changing of the Sabbath day from the seventh day to the first. Little do they know and all the millions that follow, it is one big lie. You might say how is it a lie people all around the world enter through church doors every Sunday. Well gay partners are allowed to marry in some states now, but that doesn't mean that God recognizes it. God doesn't recognize common-law marriage either but many people do it. The hearts of many men will fail them. The strength, wisdom and wealth of man will also fail them. No man on the face of the earth, not yesterday, not today nor tomorrow has been given the authority to change what HASHEM has established. I am a Messianic Jew but don't think for a moment I follow this Lords day routine. What God sets apart has Holy cannot be removed. How is it that men and women can read what the early Roman church takes responsibility for, and not see it for what it really is. Persecution, persecution and persecution. Today the Roman church or Catholic Church is a billion strong. The second commandment is not to have any idols of any kind, especially in the image of any heavenly body. Hello. I'm worried about the salvation that so many think they carry around with them. Yes it is a gift. Yes it is grace. It is not do what you want. The church body just like our observant Jewish brothers have the task of picking up the bible for themselves and study. Yeshua said my people perish for a lack of knowledge. If trust comes from hearing you better know who you're listening to. 

Perhaps this is an issue of identity. Early second and third century Rome dictated by Constatine had no desire for the Jewish identity, and hence came a change to the weekly Sabbath. Jews and Gentile followers were being persecuted by the thousands just as in fifteenth century Spain. So what was one to do? Again I ask how is it no one in the church is speaking up. Rome is to busy following the Pope rather then God. We are not to bow to anyone but the Father in Heaven. The church has taken it upon itself to lead the blind to the spiritual gas chambers, and doesn't know it. Who's perfect not anyone Jew or Gentile but lets be honest, when will man stand up as many of our forefathers had and take a stand. This goes beyond hatred for the Jewish identity, it is ignorance. 

Please read your bibles starting with Genesis not John. Read it all. Digest it, allow it to manifest within your spirit.

Shalom.

We can perhaps see how naive and silly is American mindset. They appears to apply the following logic:
Kill/Torture Jesus Christ=Bad,
Jews do the Kill/Torture,
Jews is bad people.

They seems to forgot that without the hideous treatment and suffering of this Jew. How could Christianity be formed otherwise? How would Christian from all of the world to identify him as the saint without suffer the greatest hardship?

All that said, I want to introduce you to a new resource by FFOZ and give a little critical review . . .
........................................................

FFOZ recently released a series of benchers and teaching tools related to Birkhat HaMazon, or Grace After Meals. Grace After Meals is a Jewish tradition based on Deuteronomy 8:10:

So you will eat and be satisfied, and you will bless ADONAI your God for the good land he has given you.

That is why the main Jewish prayer for food comes AFTER the meal. It's a wonderful tradition.

So, FFOZ has a book about the history and laws of Birkhat HaMazon called Breaking Bread (see it here).

They have a bencher with all the blessings as well as (see below) a possible early Messianic Jewish version of grace after meals from the late first or early second century (I know it sounds like a questionable historical idea, but see below). The bencher comes in a less expensive paperback (here) or a leatherflex (here).

They also have a line of audio teachings and even a children's book (see all here).

And here are two really useful things:
1. They have CD's with all of the melodies so those who do not have a community in which to learn these blessings can do so.
2. They have English translations that go with the same melodies and you can hear the English sung as well as the Hebrew!

Now, for those not used to Jewish prayer, know that chanting in English is not common (though a modern mystical rabbi named Zalman Schachter-Shalomi is known for doing this). I know a lot of people are going to love chanting the blessings in English. And according to Jewish halakhah, this is permitted, though Hebrew is preferred (not least because people from different countries speaking different languages can all pray together when Hebrew is the language of prayer).

So, what about this idea that there may be an early Messianic Jewish version of grace after meals? Here is where I think someone at FFOZ has come up with something amazing. I don't know much about Didache scholarship, but I wonder if one of the PhD's on staff shouldn't write this up as a scholarly monograph and get it into an academic journal. Authors of Breaking Bread, Aaron Eby and Toby Janicki, make a compelling case that the Didache, an early Christian (or Messianic) writing from late first century or early second century, is a document that has been read wrongly from the perspective of later Christian ideas. The authors contend that parts of the the Didache reflect Jewish customs and issues not found in later Christianity.

To put it simply, they contend that the Didache is better read without assuming certain later Christian ideas but in an earlier, more Jewish context.

Take, for example, the well-known prayer from the Didache quoted for so long as an example of a supposed early Christian Eucharistic prayer. I include it here in a Christian translation by J.B. Lightfoot:

Chapter 9, But as touching the eucharistic thanksgiving give ye thanks thus. First, as regards the cup: We give Thee thanks, O our Father, for the holy vine of Thy son David, which Thou madest known unto us through Thy Son Jesus; Thine is the glory for ever and ever.

Then as regards the broken bread: We give Thee thanks, O our Father, for the life and knowledge which Thou didst make known unto us through Thy Son Jesus; Thine is the glory for ever and ever. As this broken bread was scattered upon the mountains and being gathered together became one, so may Thy Church be gathered together from the ends of the earth into Thy kingdom; for Thine is the glory and the power through Jesus Christ for ever and ever.

But let no one eat or drink of this eucharistic thanksgiving, but they that have been baptized into the name of the Lord; for concerning this also the Lord hath said: {Give not that which is holy to the dogs.}

Chapter 10, And after ye are satisfied thus give ye thanks: We give Thee thanks, Holy Father, for Thy holy name, which Thou hast made to tabernacle in our hearts, and for the knowledge and faith and immortality, which Thou hast made known unto us through Thy Son Jesus; Thine is the glory for ever and ever. Thou, Almighty Master, didst create all things for Thy name's sake, and didst give food and drink unto men for enjoyment, that they might render thanks to Thee; but didst bestow upon us spiritual food and drink and eternal life through Thy Son. Before all things we give Thee thanks that Thou art powerful; Thine is the glory for ever and ever. Remember, Lord, Thy Church to deliver it from all evil and to perfect it in Thy love; and {gather it together from the four winds}--even the Church which has been sanctified--into Thy kingdom which Thou hast prepared for it; for Thine is the power and the glory for ever and ever. May grace come and may this world pass away. Hosanna to the God of David.

Notice a few things:
1. This translation makes it sound very Christian, but eucharist is simply a Greek word meaning “to give thanks.” It has come to mean the ceremony of the bread and wine representing Christ in Catholic churches (Protestants call it Communion usually instead of Eucharist).
2. The prayer is definitely Messianic/Christian since it refers to Jesus, baptism, and the teachings of Jesus.
3. Yet if translated somewhat differently this prayer can be seen as the very Jewish prayer that it is (eucharist = giving thanks, church = congregation, etc.).
4. Most importantly, this prayer does not mention the death of Yeshua nor his body and blood at all. It is more likely a blessing with bread and wine than an early Eucharistic prayer.
5. And finally, the prayer has some similarities to the Jewish prayer, Birkhat HaMazon.

I will say more about FFOZ's new resources for teaching grace after meals in future posts, but for now, I hope that this resource will help the developing Messianic Jewish movement take on the tradition of grace after meals. I hope this practice will spread. Our fledgling movement needs to move to the center of Jewish life and away from the fringes. Thanks FFOZ for blessing the MJ community with these needed resources.

Ouch.

And focus groups of Michigan independents appear distinctly under-enthused about Palin's convention debut. Here's two focus group participants:

Diane Murphy, 42, Sterling Heights independent: “It appears that, once she makes up her mind, that is the end of it. We live in a gray world, not every answer is black and white.”

Jan Wheelock, 58, Royal Oak independent: “Nothing worked for me. I found her barrage of snide remarks and distortions to be a major turnoff. She is not a class act. The most important point she made is that she will be an effective attack dog.”

And here's some more focus group independents giving their impressions of Palin's speech: http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/09/michigan-indepe.html 

Thus the rhetorical "shock and awe" base strategy that Palin represents is likely to prove a strategic blunder by the McCain campaign.

It cedes the center to Obama-Biden (where the race is likely to be decided).

But McCain was---and continues to be---clearly in a bind, essentially hostage to the theocratic wing of his party.

He had to hope that Hillary voters, centrists, and independents would overlook, or not notice, Palin's far-right ideology.

But it's not working.

And it doesn't help when Rush Limbaugh enthuses over your pick in apoplectic terms. It tells people something about how extreme Palin must be when Limbaugh gets this excited about a candidate.

Georgia Republican Rep. Lynn Westmoreland used the racially-tinged term "uppity" to describe Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama Thursday.
 
Westmoreland was discussing vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin's speech with reporters outside the House chamber and was asked to compare her with Michelle Obama.

"Just from what little I’ve seen of her and Mr. Obama, Sen. Obama, they're a member of an elitist-class individual that thinks that they're uppity," Westmoreland said.

Asked to clarify that he used the word “uppity,” Westmoreland said, “Uppity, yeah.”

Is it any wonder that of the thousands of delegates to the Republican convention this year, only 36 are African American?

And isn't it curious that the congressman so easily conflates the two terms---elitist and uppity---within his quote, using them interchangably?

Hmm.

It wouldn't be because the term elitist, when Republicans refer to Obama, is code for uppity, would it?

Republican strategists wouldn't be comfy speaking to the electorate in racial code, would they?

This anti-Hellenistic mentality is also seen in the Book of Jubilees (which is also found in the Dead Sea Scrolls) where even the angels in heaven have the Torah, that which distinguishes Israel from others. The earth reflects heaven and since the angels in heaven worship and follow the Torah, so too the people on earth must do the same (15:28-30). Doing the works of the law is what distinguishes the Jew from the Gentile, those who have false gods. For example, after retelling the story of the fall of Adam and Eve, it says, "[I]t is prescribed on the heavenly tablets as touching all those who know the judgment of the law, that they should cover their shame, and should not uncover themselves as the Gentiles uncover themselves" (3:31-32). Following the Torah is what made Jews righteous in the sight of God and others unrighteous in His sight. They believed that those who follow the Torah properly will be vindicated by God. N.T. Wright in summarizing second temple Judaism says, "Many if not most second-Temple Jews, then, hoped for the new exodus, seen as the final return from exile. The story would reach its climax; the great battle would be fought; Israel would truly ‘return’ to her land, saved and free; YHWH would return to Zion" (Jesus and the Victory of God, Fortress Press 1996, pg. 203). Wright is probably right that many believed that they were in exile. What kind of exile they were in is tougher to pin-point. Some may argue that they believed they were still under the Assyrian exile (B. Pitre). Whatever exile they thought they were in, the fact is that they were unable to do something appropriate. It was a lack of freedom to adhere and act the way they were supposed to. Freedom, then, was never thought of as doing as one pleases, but doing what one ought to do. The Qumran community thought that they were not free because the Jews in the Temple have corrupted and violated the Torah.

Of course we cannot limit first century Judaism to these texts alone. Nonetheless, these two tell us an important point which, I believe, has been neglected in some studies, which is, eschatological hope is hope for proper worship. This is implicit in every eschatological movement. Jews wanted to be free from Roman oppression because they believed that the Romans were idolaters. The Qumran community separated themselves from the Temple because they believed that the priests and other Jews there have fallen away from the covenant of God and have followed the ways of darkness, not that of God; their worship is meaningless. Jews then wanted Yahweh to liberate them from oppressors, oppressors who worship other gods. This too is reflected in the story of Jesus and the Samaritan woman at the well. We read that the woman said, "Our ancestors worshiped on this mountain; but you people say that the place to worship is in Jerusalem" (Jn. 4:20). Here we see a struggle between people on proper worship. One says that proper worship is done on the mountain Gerizim and the other says that it is done in Jerusalem. And Christ answers, "But the hour is coming, and is now here, when true worshipers will worship the Father in Spirit and truth; and indeed the Father seeks such people to worship him" (Jn. 4:23).


"But the hour is coming, and is now here, when true worshipers will worship the Father in Spirit and truth; and indeed the Father seeks such people to worship him." This is nothing new. The history of Yahweh and man can be summarized as man struggling to give proper love and worship to his God. We can understand the myth of Eden as God proposing man His love and man failing to respond properly. Such is a tragedy beyond all tragedy: love rejected. It is, in the truest sense of the word, ugly because man outside of love becomes a caricature of himself. In order for man to love God properly, he must denounce other idols, denounce those which seem to fulfill his desires but in reality cannot (the tree of knowledge). St. Maximus the Confessor said, "For he [Adam] had to make a free decision whether ‘to cling to the Lord and become one spirit with him’ or ‘to cling to a harlot and to become one body with her’ (1 Cor. 6:16f.)—the latter of which, in his blindness, he chose" (Centuries of Knowledge I, 13, quoted in Hans Urs von Balthasar, Cosmic Liturgy: The Universe According to Maximus the Confessor, Ignatius Press 2003, pg. 182). This is something which should disgust all of us, that the all-loving God would be rejected by man for his own pleasure. Such a rejection can only be repaired by forgiveness. God need not have to forgive man. He has absolute infinite freedom. There is nothing that He owes to man. Man has value only insofar as his source of value sustains it. Yet, God does act. St. Athanasius said,

So then, men having thus become brutalized, and demoniacal deceit thus clouding every place, and hiding the knowledge of the true God, what was God to do? To keep still silence at so great a thing, and suffer men to be led astray by demons and not to know God? And what was the use of man having been originally made in God's image? For it had been better for him to have been made simply like a brute animal, than, once made rational, for him to live the life of the brutes. Or where was any necessity at all for his receiving the idea of God to begin with? For if he be not fit to receive it even now, it were better it had not been given him at first. Or what profit to God Who has made them, or what glory to Him could it be, if men, made by Him, do not worship Him, but think that others are their makers? For God thus proves to have made these for others instead of for Himself. (On the Incarnation of the Word ch. 13)

God would not allow men to keep up with their idolatry, to fail to worship Him properly. We can see that there is a correspondence in salvation and proper worship. God saves us so that we can adore Him. "Let my son [Israel] go, that he may serve me" (Ex. 4:23). We see this clearly in the instruction of the Passover, "Remember this day on which you came out of Egypt, that place of slavery. It was with a strong hand that the LORD brought you away…For seven days you shall eat unleavened bread, and the seventh day shall also be a festival to the LORD. Only unleavened bread may be eaten during the seven days; no leaven and nothing leavened may be found in all your territory. On this day you shall explain to your son, 'This is because of what the LORD did for me when I came out of Egypt’" (Ex. 13:3,6-8). This notion of remembering is important for salvation history. Forgetfulness of God’s redemptive love led Israel to become impatient and to sin. Even after being saved from the slavery of the Egyptians, they would rather be in slavery than to give the love and worship God demands of them (Ex. 14:11, Num. 14:2-3). Mindful of their forgetfulness, the Shema is commanded to be "drilled" to their children: "Speak of them at home and abroad, whether you are busy or at rest. Bind them at your wrist as a sign and let them be as a pendant on your forehead. Write them on the doorposts of your houses and on your gates" (Deut. 6:7-9). Of course we know that Israel would not be faithful to their part of the covenant. She would fall into idolatry, chasing after other gods, which is the same as adultery. It is the same sin Adam committed in Eden. And God would punish Israel as He punished Adam: "I will punish her for the days of the Baals, for whom she burnt incense While she decked herself out with her rings and her jewels, and, in going after her lovers, forgot me, says the LORD" (Hos. 2:15). Punishment, however, is not annihilation. It is a means to turn back to God:

"Therefore, I will hedge in her way with thorns and erect a wall against her, so that she cannot find her paths. If she runs after her lovers, she shall not overtake them; if she looks for them she shall not find them. Then she shall say, ‘I will go back to my first husband, for it was better with me then than now.’ So I will allure her; I will lead her into the desert and speak to her heart. From there I will give her the vineyards she had, and the valley of Achor as a door of hope. She shall respond there as in the days of her youth, when she came up from the land of Egypt. On that day, says the LORD, She shall call me ‘My husband,’ and never again ‘My baal.’ Then will I remove from her mouth the names of the Baals, so that they shall no longer be invoked. I will make a covenant for them on that day, with the beasts of the field, With the birds of the air, and with the things that crawl on the ground. Bow and sword and war I will destroy from the land, and I will let them take their rest in security. I will espouse you to me forever: I will espouse you in right and in justice, in love and in mercy; I will espouse you in fidelity, and you shall know [in the biblical sense!] the LORD…I will sow him for myself in the land, and I will have pity on Lo-ruhama. I will say to Lo-ammi, ‘You are my people,’ and he shall say, ‘My God!’" (Hos. 2:8-22,25).

That divine justice is divine mercy is also seen in this passage, "When Israel was a child I loved him, out of Egypt I called my son. The more I called them, the farther they went from me, Sacrificing to the Baals and burning incense to idols… How could I give you up, O Ephraim, or deliver you up, O Israel? How could I treat you as Admah, or make you like Zeboiim? My heart is overwhelmed, my pity is stirred. I will not give vent to my blazing anger, I will not destroy Ephraim again; For I am God and not man, the Holy One present among you; I will not let the flames consume you" (Hos. 11:1-2,8-9). Here we can get a glimpse of why God has been patient (longsuffering) with man. Although Israel has kept moving farther from Him, God is a father who saw Israel as His son. He remembered when Israel "was a child," like a mother who never ceases to see her son, no matter how old he is, as her baby, and this overwhelms His heart and was moved with pity. Although man is wicked, He never stops waiting for His prodigal son to come home simply because he is His son, and for Him to stop waiting is contrary to His nature as a father.

Within this historical and theological background, we can get a glimpse of the Paschal Mystery. God, seeing that His people are in exile, is in harlotry, will save her so that she can become His bride. Man, ever since the fall, has fallen into the dominion of Satan, that is, idolatry. Satan’s main purpose is to drive God’s people away from Him, away from His love, away from submitting to His will. As foreseen by the Hosean passage above, God will not allow the harlot to remain a harlot, but God will make her to be what she was in the beginning, before the fall, pure and spotless. To do this He Himself will assume a human nature, orienting man to what is above. Man, ever since the beginning, has a natural desire for God but is oriented towards evil. This orientation comes from wanting to be like God without God, choosing the tree of knowledge rather than the tree of life. To St. Maximus the Confessor, the "tree of knowledge" refers to our senses which have "the criteria for telling bodily pleasure from pain; more precisely, they are the power of ensouled and sensitive bodies that gives them the ability to be attracted by pleasurable things and to avoid painful things" (Quaestiones ad Thalassium 43, Balthasar 183). The fall of man was seen as a disorder, a misuse of the powers of man. In explaining the Confessor’s theology of the fall, of man’s misuse of his powers, Balthasar said, "This comes to giving an intellectual nature sensible, temporal, transitory food to nourish its being and, so, to poison it at its root, to hand it over to death. For the opposite of what Adam hoped for was bound to happen: instead of the intellect assimilating the world of sense to itself, which could only have happened to God’s order and plan, the sensible realm took over the intellect" (pg. 184). Balthasar quotes St. Maximus,"The first man turned this capacity—I mean the mind’s natural longing for God—toward sensible things as soon as he was created, and so, from his first conscious moment on, an unnatural pleasure drew him toward sensible things, through the medium of his sense faculties" (Quaestiones ad Thalassium 61, pg. 188). Exile really started in Eden when man understood freedom as absolute autonomy from God.

Although man is oriented towards death, to sin, he still longs to be with God. It is this capacity that makes him different from other animals. Each animal has certain needs, but no animal has a need like that of man. Man has more needs than animals, emotional, spiritual, and intellectual. This need can be summarized as the need to love since all the faculties of man, the whole man, is required for self-giving. Love includes not just an act of the will and the intellect, but man’s affectivity. It is in this way that we can say that man longs to know God, that is, in the biblical sense of the word. Love is an integration of these faculties to its own ends so that it can attain the End of man. The sensitive powers must be submitted to the intellect which in turn must itself be submitted to the Logos.

It would take the Logos Himself to submit the whole world to Himself. St. Athanasius beautifully said:For men's mind having finally fallen to things of sense, the Word disguised Himself by appearing in a body, that He might, as Man, transfer men to Himself, and centre their senses on Himself, and, men seeing Him thenceforth as Man, persuade them by the works He did that He is not Man only, but also God, and the Word and Wisdom of the true God. (On the Incarnation of the Word ch. 16)

St. Thomas Aquinas said, "For the first man sinned by seeking knowledge, as is plain from the words of the serpent, promising to man the knowledge of good and evil. Hence it was fitting that by the Word of true knowledge man might be led back to God, having wandered from God through an inordinate thirst for knowledge" (ST III q. 3 a. 8). Christ, then, was sent to the world so that He can know the Father. In knowing God, man can, in the Holy Spirit, know the Father. Again, it is important that the type of knowledge we are speaking of is biblical knowledge, that is, marital intimacy. As St. Athanasius said, "...the Word was made flesh in order to offer up this body for all, and that we partaking of His Spirit, might be deified, a gift which we could not otherwise have gained than by His clothing Himself in our created body, for hence we derive our name of ‘men of God’ and ‘men in Christ’ (De Decretis 14). Deification is what man longs for and we can say that it was also the longing of the Jews in Christ’s time. They had long for the Presence of God, the presence which tells them that God has not abandoned them but has kept His promise of not letting Israel stay in harlotry.

Within the context above, we can understand the author of the Hebrews better,

"For it was fitting that he, for whom and through whom all things exist, in bringing many children to glory, should make the leader to their salvation perfect through suffering. He who consecrates and those who are being consecrated all have one origin. Therefore, he is not ashamed to call them ‘brothers,’ saying: ‘I will proclaim your name to my brothers, in the midst of the assembly I will praise you’; and again: ‘I will put my trust in him’; and again: ‘Behold, I and the children God has given me.’ Now since the children share in blood and flesh, he likewise shared in them, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and free those who through fear of death had been subject to slavery all their life… therefore, he had to become like his brothers in every way, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest before God to expiate the sins of the people" (Heb. 2:10-15,17).

We are not trying to get away from the Anselmian theory of atonement, but simply trying to put it in a different picture, that is, the obedience of Christ undoing the idolatry man and responding with espousal love to God. Christ represents Israel, and by his blood, has delivered Israel from sinful and adulterous oppression. His blood will wash her robe and make it white (Rev. 7:14) so that He and the Father can dwell in her (Jn. 14:23). God is not pleased with man in exile and harlotry. He is not pleased with men in disunity. Here we understand God's punishment coinciding with man's autonomy. Christ came in to this world to appease God's anger, God's unpleasant disposition towards man in disunity.

We can see this clearly when we take into recognition what baptism is. St. Paul tells us that we who are baptized are baptized into the death of Christ (Rom 6:3). In the early church, those who were preparing for baptism were advised to turn away from the harlotry and evil of sin and turn towards God. It is Christ’s passion applied in the world, the exodus from sin to the presence of God. This has been pointed out by Jean Danielou in his marvelous book The Bible and the Liturgy (University of Notre Dame Press 1956). He quotes St. Cyril of Jerusalem, "If your wedding day were approaching, would you not leave everything else and devote yourself entire to preparing for the feast? You are about to consecrate your soul to her heavenly Bridegroom. Should you not leave these material things in order to gain the spiritual?" (pg.23). We have already talked about the material and spiritual, the intellectual and sensitive distinctions. Here we note that baptism is a consecration of one’s soul to Christ. And Christ does the baptizing, the consecrating (Heb. 2:11). Consecrating to Christ requires renouncing, as Christ did and Adam did not, Satan and evil. Danielou quotes Cyril again, "You first entered into the vestibule of the baptistery, and, while you stood and faced West, you were told to stretch out your hand. Then you renounced Satan as if he were present, saying, ‘I renounce you, Satan, and all your pomp and all your worship’" (Mystagogic Catecheses XXXIII, pg. 26). Facing East, then, is turning away from Satan and looking to God and back to the Paradise, the place we have fallen away from. It is a turning back to our origin by looking forward to eternity. St. Maximus says, "In looking for his end, man meets his origin, which essentially stands at the same point as his end…For we should not seek our origin, as I have said, as something that lies behind us; rather we should seek out ways toward the goal that lies before us. It is through his end that man comes to know his lost origin, once he has realized that he must not look for his origin to find his end" (Quaestiones ad Thalassium 59, Balthasar pgs. 187-188. Compare this with the doctrine of epektasis of Gregory of Nyssa). We also see these words from St. Cyril of Jerusalem to the catechumens, "Already the perfume of blessedness is wafted to you, O catechumens. Already you gather spiritual flowers to weave heavenly crowns. Already the sweet perfume of the Holy Spirit is poured out. You are in the vestibule of the royal dwelling. May you be led into it by the king. From henceforth, indeed, the flowers have appeared to the trees. Now the fruit must ripen." (Procatechesis XXXIII, Danielou pg. 193). Cyril, like many Fathers, have applied the Canticle of Canticles to Christian initiation. Danielou says, "From the fact that the Canticle is the prophecy of the eschatological marriage of the Messias and the New Israel, we are right in seeing it realized in the Christian sacraments, in which the perpetual marriage of Christ and the Church is carried out" (pg. 205).

We read from the early hymn of the Church that Christ, "though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God" (Phil. 2:6). This refers to the Incarnation, that God sent His Son to the world to free man. God became man, that is, the Son "left the Father" so that He can cling to His wife: "That is why a man leaves his father…and clings to his wife, and the two of them become one body. The man and his wife were both naked, yet they felt no shame" (Gen. 2:24,25). Like St. John Chrysostom, to say that the "Son left the Father," does not mean that the Son lost His divinity. Rather, it refers to the Incarnation (Homily 20 on Ephesians). The kenosis of God must be seen in light of the Genesis passage of man leaving his parents in order that he can cling to a wife. But this wife of his, man, is a harlot. Because man had sinned against God, sin has become a property of man. Every man is enslaved to it. The Son, Jesus Christ, did not come to this world with a Cross. Man had given it to him. By assuming a human nature, Christ, in some mysterious way, took sin. "For our sake he made him to be sin who did not know sin, so that we might become the righteousness of God in him" (2 Cor. 5:21). Sin became a "property" of Jesus Christ, who did not commit any sin or was stained with original sin. He possessed the sin of the whole world. In a sense, as Hans Urs von Balthsar put it, the cross is the incarnation of sin. Christ carried His cross, sin incarnated, the cross man gave to Him, all the way to Calvary so that He can restore mankind. He ate with sinners, touch sinners, and will save only sinners. On the Cross, we can see what troubled men, especially philosophers and theologians in the past. On the Cross, we see the coexistence of good and evil. Sin and evil, as Dietrich von Hildebrand pointed out, is not simply a privation of goodness or a turning away from God, but wages war on God. Only within this context can we really understand Christ’s cry to the Father, "Father, if thou art willing, remove this cup from me; nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done" (Lk. 22:42). He wanted to remove His "cup," that is, becoming sin because by becoming sin, he is "waging war" against His Father (on Gethsemane as a trial of hope, cf. Fr. Antonio Lopez's "On Restlessness"). We can see this notion of "waging war" clearly in the image of the crucifixion. Here on the Cross, God was rejected, spat upon, beaten, humiliated, and put to death. There is no greater image of what sin is. It is man’s response to God ever since the beginning. Yet, we do not see God’s wrath. The Father’s silence is revelation that He has taken away His wrath, but rather opens his arms to the prodigal son. Christ asks the Father to forgive the sins of world: "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do" (Lk. 23:24). With this cry, we can be sure that the God’s words are true, "My heart is overwhelmed, my pity is stirred. I will not give vent to my blazing anger" (Hos. 2). In a sense, we see that the overwhelmed heart of God is "struggling," that is, in the Crucified heart of Christ, we see a battle between good and evil. Satan is laughing ("If you are King of the Jews, save yourself") while Christ is crying: "Have pity on me, LORD, for I am weak; heal me, LORD, for my bones are trembling" (Ps. 6:3). Christ’s cry overcomes the laughter of those who look down upon the lowly: "The LORD has heard my weeping. The LORD has heard my prayer; the LORD takes up my plea" (Ps. 6:9-10). On the Cross, Christ draws all men to himself (Jn. 12:32) and because the Father sees His Son’s obedience, He did not "give vent" to His "blazing anger."

"Father, if thou art willing, remove this cup from me; nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done" (Lk. 22:42) says Christ. Here, he unties the knot of disobedience. Christ’s sensitivity leads him to say "remove this cup from me," but his obedience leads him to say "thine, be done." In submitting his human will to the divine will, he has healed the disordered love of man that existed ever since his fall. In so doing, man can know love God properly. On the Cross, proper worship has been accomplished where both of Christ's intellectual and sensitive powers are oriented towards God. Christ embraced death so that man can embrace God. The pierced heart of Christ is the circumcised heart God demanded, that heart which has no barrier (foreskin), a heart that is totally open. It is the heart that is free of idolatry and sin. It is a heart that cannot be destroyed, for, on the third day, he rose again. Here the whole history of human race has been embraced. In the Risen Christ, we can see the face of God, the face which knows no impatience, the glorious face which is forgiving. Only when we encounter this forgiving love can we be able to worship God properly. True adoration of God requires that man is able to love again. It is this forgiveness which makes him love again. In the Risen Christ, we get to see what true adoration is: union with God. Adoratio (to kiss, to embrace) is a gift from God which in our part must make our own. The Risen Christ has embraced us and we must unveil ourselves so that we can consume his flesh. The promise of God from Hosea is realized, "I will say to Lo-ammi, ‘You are my people,’ and he shall say, ‘My God!’"Christ has impregnated in our souls a love, the Holy Spirit, which orients us towards our Father above: "Abba! Father!" To see the Risen face of Christ is to see his love, that is, to remember what he has done. Only when we join ourselves to Him, proclaim his death and joyfully sing to his glory can we truly know Him.

Just some notes and reflections from my class on Judaism with Prof. Philip Spivey...

-“Protestant Bias”: reducing religion to belief, exemplified in a question such as “What does Judaism believe,” as if 1) Judaic belief is homogenous, 2) belief is the central question in religion.

-Judaism is a religion, not an ethnic group.  It has practitioners from every ethnic group.  55% of Jews in the U.S. are gentile converts.

-Converting to Judaism is generally a year-long process (rather than a 30 second prayer) involving intense study under a Rabbi.  Typically, the Rabbi will try to discourage the prospective convert from converting 3 times during the conversion year in order to check his/her level of commitment.  How would churches be different if Christians adopted some of the good points from this?

-“The Chosen People” is not a superiority claim.  They see themselves as chosen to serve, not to be God’s favorites. 

-“TaNakh” (Hebrew Bible) is an acronym.

Torah (Instructions) -canonized c.4^th century B.C.

Nevi’im (Prophets)  -canonized c. 200 B.C.

Ketuvim (Writings)  -canonized c. 1^st century A.D.  Became used by all Jews by c. 150A.D.

The Hebrew Bible was altogether canonized, made official, late in the first century A.D.  It was closed to additions as a move by Jewish leaders to keep “The Way” (later called “Christianity”) followers from adding in what would become the New Testament.  This means that at the time of Jesus and the NT writers, there was no official standard Bible in Judaism, which may explain reference to Apocrypha stories.

-In Judaism, there is no doctrine of “Original Sin.”

-In Judaism, there was, historically, no “Satan.”  He only appears in the story of Job (understood to be a metaphorical parable rather than a literal history), but is not the same figure that Christians attached to as the supreme Devil. 

-In Judaism there was no afterlife until around the 6^th century B.C.  Even when afterlife was introduced, it was generally called “resurrection” (i.e. on earth).  Isaiah may allude to it, and Daniel is the first prophet to definitively point to resurrection.  Because of Daniel’s time and place, the question is raised of whether or not afterlife was a concept adopted from the Babylonian religion of Zoroastrianism.  Hell was introduced into Jewish theology around the 3^rd century B.C., after all Old Testament books were already written, hence hell’s absence in the OT.

-The Torah (the first 5 books) are generally thought to have been constructed, not by Moses, but by Jewish leaders during the Babylonian Exile of Judah (586 B.C. to 516 B.C.) as their best collection of the oral tradition of Torah passed down threw the centuries.  We have no definitive reason to think the Torah, as we have it now, existed in writing before this.

-Generally, Jews as a whole, and even most of the more conservative Orthodox streams, do not consider anything in Genesis before Abraham to be literal.

-The Rabbis of the Talmud insist that interpreting scripture must take on 4 distinct levels: the literal, the homolitical (parable), the philosophical, and the mystical.  More on this later, but the literal understanding is considered the easiest and most primitive of the four.

being Pagan is, as far as I am concerned, a wonderful thing: It means being responsible first of all for one self, as Sarah put it in words in her blog recently:

For us the gods are something like guides. It almost seems that religion in paganism is, first and foremost concerned with personal growth so what good would it do to have a god who would just be nice even if we screwed up? I mean, yes, there are that kind, "parent gods" and maybe you need them at times. But then, if you want to grow you need tasks as well and a god who sets them.

Yet of course being responsible for yourself requires you to be rather strong and self-conscious. In fact there are some Pagan teachers (every kind from "guru" to "parent-" or "siblinglike" can be found) that would require their students to have a secure rooting in "worldly" spheresbefore they can enter the realms of the magic. A prerequisite that can also be found for Kaballah students- and I guess in many other places - too where whoever wants to become a student of Kaballlah has to be of about fourty years age or older, financially independant and a parent as only those circumstances will allow him or her to be earthed enough to be able to deal with the strong and potentially dangerous energies and wisdomof Kaballah. I have no idea whether that applies to Hollywood-Kaballah too, yet this is the version I was told in Israel where Madonna and collegues are in generally looked at a little ... sceptical (as you might imagine).

Fellow Pagans sometime look a bit puzzled (sometimes even funny) when I tell them I am not forcing "magic" abilities at the moment for I am just too concerned with worldly things such as my career and, well, just being young and enjoying life. I know the Pagan 101, both concerning techniques and ethnics, and that's it for the moment and I am happy with it. Maybe one day when I will have grown older and have settled down (which would include stopping changing countries on a two-year basis or so *g*) I might sit down and exercise or bury myself in literature searching for whatever I think is important. And who knows maybe by the time my hair has grown grey (which with my genetics could take some decades) I will also start teaching. If I can get a whole new generation of Pagans started with my crazy ideas about Paganism, why not?

Yet not now. Not today. Today the only thing I mess around with is Pagan Politics;) You already know my point of view if you've been reading my blog from its beginnings: I just don't see why every Pagan needs to be a high priest (or worse). Unfortunately that makes it hard to share my way of life with fellow Pagans for many of them regard my lack of (Pagan) ambitions as a sign of fear or lack of strenght and talents. It's one of those things where people need to get to know you first but that takes some time and you don't always feel like taking that time. It's just a pain in the ass if you either keep your mouth shut or have to defend yourself every time you meet new Pagans.

People always tell you if somebody's worth it, he will accept what's different about you. Of course that applies to the mere fact of being Pagan too. Yet if you fall in love with that guy-next-door it doesn't make things any less difficult at all. Telling him that you are Pagan and that Paganism means something to you and that, yes, you do believe in magic, still resembles the classical TV-series or movie-situation of "Oh darling, there's something you need to know: I' am witch." Even without the broomstick. You know it's true that if he can't live with it he's not the right one anyway but all those great advises don't change a thing about the fact that you might be hurt badly by a person you love. And there's no worse feeling in the world then being let down by your friends just because you told them you were Pagan and now they think something's wrong with you for you are a little backwards believing in magic and so on.

I always try to tell new friends as soon as possible, mostly colloquial while in some discussion that comes close to the topic, without making a huge thing about it. It'd be something like "you know, I believe in magic too, why not?". Funny enough I have experienced that often enough about ten minutes later we have found out that that person's either Pagan too or thinks it's a really interesting way of life or at least doesn't care too much. It seems we naturally get along best from the first minutes with those people that have a similar general idea of life and how it works. Actually there's not a single friend in my life at the moment who thinks I am nuts- which I am, no doubt about that - because I believe in the "extranatural" (which I consider the most natural thing in the world ...).

Israeli Jews, by the by, are great with Pagans. At least those I met. Most of them are so grateful for the fact that you aren't Christian that it doesn't even cross their mind to regard you as some kind of "evil witch" or "savage" or so. Once I met an ex-orthodox-Jew-friend of a friend of mine and we where out eating (unkosher) seafood at the port when my friend, who always considered me being Pagan "cool" said: "You know, Migdalit's a Pagan!". What came next was that it took us the best part of an hour to convince him that I didn't believe in Jesus Christ (well, I do regard him as a great philosopher but that's about it) we never got to the point of him understanding what a "Pagan" was. Most people are really curious about Paganism in Israel and as bad as it is, I feel more religiousely free and understood within the Jews of Israel then within the Christians of Europe. If I think about where I would like my kids to grow up with no Pagan state to run to: Israel or Europe I'd absolutely opt for Israel, though it's not the country that supports our way of life on an energetic level. Sad, I know. But who knows: Perhaps Austria too has opened up by the time I have kids; there are so many of us out there by now ...

see you soon

yours,

Migdalit

In a barrack in Auschwitz concentration camp, the prisoners are called for a medical inspection. They do not know the criteria by which they will be judged, but those that fail the inspection will be killed to make room for new arrivals. However, the new arrivals are a day early thanks to the increased efficiency of the German railway system. Those waiting to die are faced by the people that will sleep in their beds the next night. Under these horrific circumstances, one man suggests they prosecute God for the abandonment of the Jewish people. Three judges are chosen, all rabbis, and the cases for both sides are presented.

God on Trial relies wholly on the power of words. None of the horrific events of the Holocaust are recreated for the screen, for which I am grateful. To actually show the violence and the degredation would be distasteful and manipulative, and would detract from the power of imagination. Instead the atrocities are described, given as evidence in the trial. Stories of Torahs burned, of fathers forced to choose which of his three sons to save, of entire families murdered and their bodies desecrated. The defence is presented in stories of previous times of hardship and oppression, through which Judaism survived. Rabbi Akiba (Antony Sher) however delivers one final blow for the prosecution, recounting Biblical tales of an unjust and vengeful God, a God that demanded bloodshed and sacrifice. As the Nazis killed even children, so God punished David by taking his child. He states that "God is not good", and the court finds God guilty.

The scenes of the rabbinical court are juxtaposed with images of modern tourists visiting the site of Auschwitz. The contrast is demonstrated particularly effectively by one scene towards the end. As the prisoners stand naked in the gas chambers, awaiting their deaths, the tourists stand on that same site some sixty years later. The two disparate groups are then shown standing side by side in the chamber, the visitors in coats and hats, the prisoners naked and malnourished. Together they join in prayer, demonstrating that the faith has indeed prevailed despite the verdict.

The drama was deeply moving, the personal struggles were reflected in the universal themes and vice versa. I watched the whole play as though I had a boulder on my chest, yet it wasn't as affecting for me as it could be for those with faith. I flirted with church as a confused teenager, but in my heart I never really believed in God, and never felt like I had a people. Frank Cottrell Boyce wrote for the Guardian about his own crisis of faith whilst scripting God on Trial, ultimately finding that it renewed his faith rather than damaged it, descibing it with the metaphor "a great storm puts out a little fire, but it feeds a strong one." By that token, I have no fire at all, so for me it is just weather.

Here are 2 quick facts from the trailer (http://wwjbmovie.com/trailer_sm.html):

• Americans spent $455,000,000,000 ($455 billion) during the holidays in 2007
• 26,000,000 (26 million) Americans are addicted to shopping

What about Canada?

• Canadians spent $34,500,000,000 ($34.5 billion) in retail stores in December 2004.
• Canadians had debts estimated at $760,000,000,000 ($760 billion) in 2005, nearly 1.5 times higher than the level in 1999
• In October 2001, some 44 million Visa and MasterCard credit cards were in circulation in Canada, with $39 billion in outstanding balances, according to the Canadian Bankers Association.
• Canada is projected to boost online spending from $8 billion ($8,000,000,000) in 2008 to $16 billion ($16,000,000,000) by 2009
• At Christmas (Dec), in 2004, Canadians spent $804 each, well above the average for the rest of the year ($555). Albertans spent the most at $967.
• In 2006, that rose to $876 for each Canadian. Albertans again topped that at $1113 each on average. Wow, it just keeps on rising.
• 37% of Canadians will spend roughly $353 CDN on back to school supplies with 34% saying they?ll spend $400 or more. Electronics, clothing, school supplies and shoes were the big ticket items.

Verdict: Get less stuff = get less debt = get less stress = greater contentment = work less

Read more about the film at: http://wwjbmovie.com/about.html

Sources
http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/071206/d071206c.htm
http://www.researchandmarkets.com/reports/c47753
http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/040923/d040923a.htm
http://www.marketingcharts.com/print/back-to-school-spending-canadian-consumers-remain-confident-1330/
http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/061207/d061207b.htm

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

WHAT WOULD JESUS BUY?
From producer Morgan Spurlock (Super Size Me) comes a serious docu-comedy about the new religion of rampant consumerism. The movie follows Reverend Billy and the "Church of Stop Shopping Gospel Choir" as they embark on a cross-country mission to save Christmas from the Shopocalypse: the destruction of humankind from consumerism, over-consumption and the fires of eternal debt! Reverend Billy, as you may recall, was a grassroots leader in OCA's "Frankenbucks" campaign against Starbucks. View the trailer and get the newly available DVD: http://wwjbmovie.com

One of the unique and fascinating features of Israeli society is that, for the most part, we have not forgotten the sacredness of every individual life, despite our decades-long battle for survival and the more than 22,000 victims - soldiers and civilians alike - who have died to build this country. The efforts made to bring Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev home, and the focus on saving Gilad Shalit are powerful examples of how this value is rooted in Israel's Jewish national consciousness. It is as the rabbis in Mishnah Tractate Sanhedrin have taught: the saving of one life is equal to the saving of a whole world, and the taking of one life is the equivalent of the taking of a whole world.

However, one of the great paradoxes and peculiarities of the State of Israel is that we often have a higher level of sensitivity to military casualties than we have to civilians'. We have a much higher level of outrage when dealing with victims of terror than with victims of everyday evil. Ten to 12 people can be killed a week in car accidents with nary an eyebrow raised, while two victims of a terror attack can bring the country to a standstill for days.

This last week three Israeli children were murdered by their families. The media gave to these tragedies their proper due. The murders of every one of these children received page-one coverage and opened the nightly news.

Now, I have no desire to exaggerate this phenomenon, or portray these deaths as a symptom of Israel's moral decay. Tragedies of these proportions will not continue week in and week out. Overall, relative to other countries, the murder rate here in Israel is still proportionally low.

This will comfort some. After all, one of the core foundations of Zionism was a desire to bring the Jewish people back to a normal existence entailing our susceptibility to the "normal evils" that befall all people who live in the real world.

Despite embracing normalcy, however, Israel was never formed to be a country like all others, and the Jewish people never saw the larger world as our moral barometer. One of the core features of the Jewish people is that we have always defined our own standards and fought for our right to live by them. The State of Israel is the product of this history and this people can afford to do no less.

In this week's Torah portion, Shofetim, we are taught that when somebody is found dead in or near a city, the political, religious and judicial leaders must present a sin offering – the egla arufa – and declare: "Our hands did not shed this blood nor did our eyes see this done. Absolve, O Lord, your people who you redeemed, and let not blood of the innocent remain among your people Israel."

A Jewish society is one that recognizes indirect responsibility and culpability for that which we allowed to happen, not merely for that which we directly caused. When somebody is killed in a society, it is not simply the moral decay or depravity of the individual murder that needs to be investigated, but the possible complacency and complicity, even if indirect, of others as well. Were there signs, calls for assistance from either the murderer or victim that could have avoided and prevented the tragedy if given proper attention? Did we do all that we could to create a society where such a tragedy would not occur?

I don’t think the horrific deaths of the three babies this week reflect a moral callousness and decay in our society at large, nor a larger crisis of values. They do, however, reflect a dulling of our senses, and a diminution of our ability to hear the cries of others. We find out again and again that there were signs on the wall when children are abused or murdered and when husbands beat or murder their wives, voices that called forth for help that were ignored. Car accidents, which take hundreds of Israeli lives each year, occur again and again on roads with clearly deficient safety features. We are experts at hearing the calls for help when it is too late. We are always ready to appoint national commissions to investigate after the fact. We have become a society that excels at post-mortem morality.

The law of egla arufa challenges us to recognize this is not sufficient. A Jewish society is one in which every individual feels responsible not merely to give financial assistance to the needy, to bring criminals to justice, but to pay attention to our neighbors. We don’t need a commission to investigate what is happening in an Israeli society that has allowed the tragedies of this week to occur. These commissions absolve us of our individual responsibilities. What we need is to remind every one of us of our duty to recommit ourselves to being better listeners.

There are tragedies we cannot prevent, but there are many that we can. If there is any crisis of values in this society it is not because, as Binyamin Netanyahu has stated, we must bring people back to studying Jabotinsky instead of teaching the "Nakba." The crisis in values is that we don’t fully accept our individual responsibilities to love our neighbors as ourselves, or as in the words of Hillel the Elder: What is hateful unto you do not do unto others.

Let us all individually commit ourselves not merely to honor and mourn the dead and bemoan the tragedies, but to prevent them. It is in our power as individuals to save a single life, and whoever saves a single life has saved a whole world. The Jewishness of Israel will ultimately be measured not by our kashrut policies during the shmitta year, on whether hametz can be sold on Pesach, nor by whom we allow to convert, but by whether we allow this Jewish value, the responsibility to listen to the cries and needs of others, to permeate our individual and collective lives.

The Talmud and the Internet by Jonathan Rosen, is an extremely interesting book, taking on the facets of faith and modern technology in ar constantly changing world.

The theme of "Wandering Jew" is predominant throughout the pages of The Talmud and the Internet, as Rosen weaves between the varied worlds of Judaism, beginning before the Temple's destruction, through World War II, and to current times. Although the worlds are diverse and often filled with displacement, the similarities are also noted by Rosen, along with a sense of connection to the world and other Jews.

The Talmud was written by Jews, and within that context they became the "People of the Book", as they were in a constant state of displacement and continuing evolution. Rosen believes that the Internet is similar in that respect, as one can wander in and out of the internet through research and searching, and feel the displacement that the Jews felt during their journeys throughout the centuries. Yet, one can also feel connected to other Jews, within the realm of the Internet, and can feel connected to the Jewish community as a whole, or in part, in the ever evolving worlds of both Talmud and Internet. I bought this book in 2000, and much has changed regarding the Internet, in the eight years since. The Internet is in a constant state of evolution, much like the Jews are.

One can enrich their lives through the evolving doors. Whatever amount of knowledge one wants to gain, one can, by weaving in and out of Internet sites, the same way one can move through the pages of Talmud.

Some readers might feel that the book delves more into the Talmud than it does the Internet, and Rosen acknowledges that, before the book begins: "I spend more time discussing the Talmud than I do addressing the Internet, but though proficient in neither I am a child of both and I have set down some of the stories - ancient and modern, private and public - that help me make sense of the multiple worlds I have inherited".

I won't delve into the book further, as it will give away much of its content if I do. You will just have to read it for yourself.

We come to learn about Jonathan Rosen and his dedication to the Talmud, and his thoughts on the Internet as a force comparable to the Talmud. The Talmud and the Internet might be short on pages, but is is long on thought and semantics relating to displacement, faith, knowledge and Judaism. As we read and search, not all is at it appears, and external appearances can be deceiving in the ever-changing internet world, where much information is pushed under the surface. In my opinion, it is a metaphor for our connection to the world of Judaism during modern times, whether through reading Talmud or through the Internet resources available to us.
~~~~~~

We are going to hold a full service, including Erev Rosh Hashanah, Rosh Hashanah morning, Erev Yom Kippur, Yom Kippur, N'Eilah, and a light break fast - all for the amazingly reasonable price of $72 per person, not including donations.  Leon is a wonderful Rabbi who cuts through all of the ego stuff, and gets right down to the meaning of worship.  Have you grown tired of condescending Rabbis who yell at you on the pulpit?  Are you over the fashion show that makes you feel like you're wearing last years sale items?  Have you felt like your worship experience is parallel to a used car sales pitch?

We won't have any of that.  Not if we can help it.  We don't care what you wear.  We don't care what you have (or don't have)  We really mean that.  The only thing that is limited is space, so it's first come first serve.  We do have to pay for the house, for advertising, and for the food items for break-fast, so of course, donations are gratefully accepted, but not required.  If you want a loving, warm, and spiritual place to pray, this is it!  We don't even care if you speak Hebrew.  Come and sit for an hour - and just contemplate the year you left behind, and the year you wish to have for yourself.  That's all that is required.

I'm so excited to do something with meaning.  Yes, I loved the experience of standing in front of my congregation in years past, especially my solos and my 20 seconds of fame, but this is so much more worthwhile.  Even if there are 20 people in our congregation, if those 20 people are praying their kishkes out, then it was worth the trip!

So, I'm putting it out there, and I have full intention of filling the room with passionate, spiritual folks like me, who just want to get a little closer to Hashem this month.  Won't you join me?

So everyday I have to be seen with a Gay man. This is of vital importance to the ruler of the terrain I work in. I've had one of them forcibly kiss me on the lips, another drop his trousers.

To be perfectly honest, I would love to go on a dig somewhere in Palestine! Of course, I would just enjoy going to the Holy Land for a while, or maybe all of Asia Minor where the Church first developed. The closest I seem to be getting are these stories, so I like to post them as well.

Wall dating to Second Temple unearthed

The remains of the southern wall of Jerusalem that was built by the Hasmonean kings during the time of the Second Temple have been uncovered on Mount Zion, the Antiquities Authority announced Wednesday.

The 2,100-year-old wall, which was destroyed during the Great Revolt against the Romans that began in 66 CE, is located just outside the present-day walls of the Old City and abuts the Catholic cemetery built in the last century where Righteous Gentile Oskar Schindler is buried.

The sturdy wall, which is believed to have run 6 km. around Jerusalem, was previously exposed by an American archeologist at the end of the 19th century, the state run archeological body said.

The Israeli archeologist who started the ongoing excavation a year-and-a-half ago also uncovered the remains of a city wall from the Byzantine Period (324-640 CE) that was built on top of the Second Temple wall at a time when ancient Jerusalem reached its largest size after its southward expansion.

"In the Second Temple period the city, with the Temple at its center, was a focal point for Jewish pilgrimage from all over the ancient world, and in the Byzantine period it attracted Christian pilgrims who came in the footsteps of the story of the life and death of their messiah," said Yehiel Zelinger, the excavation's director.

He said the builders of the Byzantine wall were unaware of the existence of the earlier structure, yet they placed their wall precisely along the same route due to its advantageous location for the defense of the city.

The Second Temple Period wall, which was built without mortar, was "amazingly" well-preserved today to the height of three meters, more than 2,000 years after it was constructed, Zelinger said.

He voiced the hope that the First Temple wall would be uncovered next.

The excavation was initiated as part of a plan to build a promenade along the southern side of Mount Zion.

The promenade, which is expected to become a major tourist attraction when it is completed in the next few years, will run alongside parts of the newly exposed ancient wall.

The ancient walls were found by cross-referencing the detailed plans and maps of an excavation carried out in the 1890s by the Palestine Exploration Fund under the direction of archeologist Frederick Jones Bliss and his assistant Archibald Dickie with updated maps of the area.

"We knew that the walls were here somewhere but we didn't know exactly where," Zelinger said.

During the dig, the Israeli archeologists also found "souvenirs" left behind by the 19th century excavators: a laborer's shoes, the top of a gas light that was used to illuminate the tunnels, and fragments of Czech beer and wine bottles from 120 years ago.

The site, which will be open the public in the coming years, will be accessible to visitors for a sneak preview late on Thursday afternoon ahead of an archeological conference being held that evening at the nearby City of David.

The dig was carried out with the financial support of the City of David Foundation, which aims to settle Jews throughout east Jerusalem.

"This is one of the most beautiful and complete sections of construction in the Hasmonean building style to be found in Jerusalem," Zelinger said.

Anyway, I got back into Genesis this morning. I don't know exactly where I am, because the version I'm using doesn't have chapter or verse numbers. (Which is kind of refreshing, reading the Bible like an actual book.)

This is where the story gets depressing for a while. Eviction from the garden is followed quickly by the world's first murder, followed by more murder, followed by a list of people who seem to live for ridiculously long periods of time, followed by God finally throwing his hands in the air and deciding he's had enough.

But at the beginning of Genesis 4, God hasn't given up on creation. He's still fighting for it. When Cain gets ticked over the whole prime-sheep-versus-leftover-fruit incident, God pulls him aside and gives what sounds vaguely like a coach delivering a halftime pep talk. God seems to think Cain can actually beat back the sinful impulse that wants to rule over him.

Cain doesn't listen. He decides life would be better without his annoying little brother. Then God shows up and asks Cain where Abel is. Cain responds, famously, "Am I my brother's keeper?"

Um, that would be a yes. Remember that whole "it is not good for the man to be alone" thing? If community and companionship are woven into the fabric of creation, then the whole thing hinges on whether we take responsibility for each other. Individualism and "each to their own" are poison to God's creation.

Cain's life becomes a story of what happens when we reject the idea that we are our brother's (or sister's) keeper. The alternative is a life of "restless wandering." And that is Cain's fate. He is driven out. Sent away.

Cain understands that he's not being let off easy. He complains someone might kill him (kind of ironic, for a guy who probably hasn't had time to wipe the blood off his hands). What surprises me is that God doesn't go for the death penalty. Not only that, but he threatens to punish anyone who lays a finger on Cain.

Why? It's not as if the capital punishment isn't in the Bible. It's mentioned as the penalty for a number of crimes — and not just murder. So whatever happened to justice? Retribution? Deterrence?

Apparently God already knows what we've yet to figure out after all these years. The only thing violence ever leads to is more violence. In the words of the great theologian, Commissioner Gordon from Batman Begins (I know, I know, he doesn't get to be commissioner until the Dark Knight): "We start carrying semi-automatics; they buy automatics. We start wearing Kevlar; they buy armor-piercing rounds."

Maybe God's mercy on Cain is his attempt to short-circuit the escalation. Apparently, God still thinks we're worth saving from our worst impulses.

Unfortunately, a few generations later, a guy called Lamech loses the plot. He seems to think being Cain's descendant means he's got a divine license to kill. What he doesn't realize is that God's protection of Cain was meant to stop the violence, not give his descendants free reign to wreak havoc without fear of reprisal.

Things are looking pretty bleak. But there are threads of hope. Which is exactly what you'd expect in a world filled with the "knowledge of good and evil."

In some ways, Adam and Eve got exactly what they were promised when they ate the forbidden fruit. In Hebrew, to "know" can be a euphemism for intimacy... as in, "Adam knew his wife, and nine months later, out popped Cain." Knowledge isn't just intellectual awareness of something; it's an experience of it.

Knowledge can also imply control over something, as in, "Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you" (Jeremiah 1). Which may explain why the thought of possessing the "knowledge of good and evil" was so tantalizing to Adam and Eve. It meant control. Power.

In reality, it meant engaging in an endless (and often losing) struggle against evil... as in, "Sin desires to have you, but you must master it" (Genesis 4).

But the good news is, if there's knowledge of evil, then there must be knowledge of good, too. All is not lost. The ground still yields food. Women still give birth and perpetuate the human race. While some of Eve's descendants, like Lamech, make violence; others make tools and musical instruments. Some even call on the name of God.

Even at its worst, God cannot bring himself to give up on the world. Not entirely, because there is still good to be found in it — in the person of Noah.

For me, the stories of Genesis 4-6 are a reminder that we're meant to participate in the struggle between good and evil here and now, not sit and wait for it to be settled in some distant future apocalyptic event. It is this world that God cares about, and this world that he still hasn't given up on.

The direct addressees of these verses are the Children of Israel, which is to say, the Jews. As you may know, Muslims consider Jews to be 'people of the Book,' that book being the Bible. Because Muslims believe that the Bible is revealed scripture from God - with the Quran being God's final communique with men - Jews and Christians are both respected as people who acknowledge Allah and follow his word, just not all of it. For this reason, in Muslim culture, Jews were given the status of dhimmi, a second-class citizen (pretty good compared to anyone who wasn't Jewish, Muslim or Christian) and paid an additional tax and were subject to additional rules (related to dress, their houses of prayer, living situation, etc.).

The Jews and Their Scriptures in the Quran

In any case, this passage of the Quran acknowledges the traditional relationship between God and the Jews, with God recalling all that he had done for the Jews (presumably, freeing them from Egyptian bondage, giving them a homeland and protecting them so long as they were good). This was part of the covenant, which verse 40 calls a "pledge," though I'm curious about the original Arabic. Is the root of the word b-r-t/s?

Verse 41 is fascinating because it tells the Jews that they should recognize the holiness and from-God-ness of the Quran, these very verses, because it verifies (and complements) "what is already with" them, which is to say, the Bible (or at least the Old Testament). The next few verses are an exhortation along similar lines, telling them not to be misled, and then verse 44 asks why, if the Jews have read the Scriptures, do they not understand the veracity of this text.

My Thoughts

Though the Children of Israel will come up again and again throughout the Quran, this first mention sets up the historical attitude of Islam towards Judaism, which is that it must be respected as having understood part of the picture, but that the religion still rejects that which it knows should be true. I think that this attitude is well-intentioned and one of tolerance, but does not go the full mile when it comes to our modern sentiments about acceptance.

Still, for an idea originating 1400 years ago, we should appreciate what it's doing and not expect it to conform to our modern wishes. Fortunately, there are many Muslims today that take this farther and recognize that Jews (as well as Christians) have a right to worship God to the extent that they please, acknowledging those of His scriptures that work for them. I only hope this attitude spreads, not just among Muslims but Christians and Jews as well.

Some Questions and Related Articles

What do you think about these verses? What are your thoughts on the modern need for inter-religious toleration and acceptance verse the right of a religion to believe its traditional teachings (whether related to Islam or not)?

To read more Quran Day posts, click HERE.

The Cow 40-46

40. O Children of Israel, remember the favours I bestowed on you. So keep your pledge to Me, and I will mine to you, and be fearful of Me, 41. And believe in what I have sent down which veifies what is already with you; and do not be the first to deny it, nor part with it for little gain; and beware of Me. 42. Do not confuse truth with falsehood, nor conceal the truth knowingly. 43. Be firm in devotion; give zakat (the due share of your welath for the welfare fo others), and bow with those who bow (before God). 44. Will you enjoin good deeds on the others and forget your own selves? You also read the Scriptures, why do you then not understand? 45. Find strength in fortitude and prayer, which is heavy and exacting but for those who are humble and meek, 46. Who are conscious that they have to meet their Lord, and to Him they have to return.