Book Review: No Time to Spare

I recently finished reading No Time To Spare: Thinking About What Matters by Ursula Le Guin. The author wrote many well loved fantasy novels, including the Wizard of Earthsea trilogy. She lived into her eighties and recently passed away. This book is a collection of non-fiction short writings that were mostly taken from her blog, which she started as an octogenarian. She covers many topics with humor and intelligence. Some of the articles are about what it is like being an author, life, aging, politics, and cats. I thoroughly enjoyed every word.

Philippians, part 2

We now move into Philippians chapter two. The first half of the chapter is very well known in christianity. It starts off with Paul telling the Philippians to make his joy complete by being likeminded, having the same love, spirit, and purpose. "Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves." Let us pause right there.

At first glance this policy may sound admirable. However, it fails on a fundamental level. Its almost impossible for a person to think everyone else is better than they are. Better in what way? More skilled at certain tasks? It is usually clear when a person is better at a job than another person. Should they try to  act as if they are not? Are they to be considered morally better? Even if they are a thief or a murderer? Are they to be considered spiritually better? On what grounds? We cannot know the exact level of the quality of each persons psyche. We cannot measure a person's spirituality. We don't even really know what that means. Is all ambition selfish? Is it wrong to surpass the accomplishments of another, and accept recognition that you have done so? Would it not be a lie for a master craftsman to consider his new apprentice better than himself? Some people have better lives than others, because of circumstances, choices, opportunities. It is natural for people to look for ways in which to better their lives according to cultural standards. Where is the fault? Some people act better, some people sing better. Some people are wiser, kinder, and gentler than others.

I would say that the fault, if there is a fault, is in not treating others with the same regard we would wish for ourselves if we were them. Why should we expect to be treated with regard, if we are unwilling to extend the same to others?  Some remedies are empathy, sympathy, and compassion. Those are not  the same as false humility and self-abnegation. If we find ourselves in any kind of position that is considered superior to another, we also need to recognize how much of a lottery life is. It is not because of our personal virtue that we were born at a certain time, in a certain place, to a certain family, with certain genes. Life is not fair, but we can refrain from kicking others when they are down, without making a pretense of groveling in the mud ourselves. We can also refrain from exploiting any advantage we have over another person.

I  think Paul fails at his own advice. He clearly thinks he is better than the readers of his letters in many ways, even though he tries to deny it. He seems to think he knows more about what Jesus and god want because he's got a personal phone line to god. He receives revelations. God chose him to go to the Gentiles. He expects other christians to listen to him and his teaching about Jesus. He expects everyone to listen to him and his teachings about Jesus. When he tells the Philippians to be likeminded, he means that they should all think and believe as he does. You can bet your boots he thinks he's better than those other people in chapter one who are supposedly preaching the gospel just to make trouble for him. He thinks he's doing all his unselfish preaching work for his god, who probably doesn't exist. So who is he really doing it for? He's doing it for himself, because he believes his own delusions and is convinced that he will reap the ultimate reward if he perseveres. This is the same motivation of vast numbers of Christians who have also believed Paul.

Philppians, part one

As we begin the letter to the Philippians, we see that the letter is not just from Paul, but from Timothy also. The letter goes on to thank god for the Philippians. They are told that they are prayed for with joy because of their good work. Paul longs affectionately for all of them. He prays that they will  continue to have an abundance of love, discernment, purity, and righteousness.

In verse twelve, Paul talks about his incarceration. He is in chains, under the oversight of the palace guard. At the end of the letter (4:22) we see this is Caesar's palace, which would be in Rome. The palace guard knows that the reason for his imprisonment is his religious proselytizing. His chains have actually encouraged other believers to speak "the word of god"more courageously.

 Verses 15-18, Paul speaks of two groups of people who preach Christ: 1. Those who do it out of envy, rivalry, and selfish ambition, just to stir up trouble for Paul. (This makes absolutely no sense to me) 2. Those who do it out of good will and love. Then Paul goes on to say it doesn't matter. Either way, the gospel gets preached. If it doesn't matter, why mention it? Who are these people who preach the right thing for the wrong reasons? If they are preaching the same gospel as Paul, wouldn't they end up in chains also?

So, no matter what, Paul will rejoice. He knows that the prayers of the Philippians and help from the spirit of Jesus Christ will cause him to be released. (Magical thinking) Paul also hopes that he will have enough courage to not do anything he will be ashamed of later. He wants Christ to always be exalted in his body, even if that means becoming a martyr. "For me, to live is Christ, to die is gain."
This is what Christians all over the world claim to believe, but their actions say otherwise. Most of them don't really want to die. They make every effort to stay alive as long as possible.

Paul, on the other hand, says he is torn between living or dying. He wants so bad to die and be with Christ, because that is the best possible outcome. However, it would be better for the Philippians if he stayed alive. That's why he knows he won't die yet. Then, he will get to continue on with them and their joy in Christ will overflow because of him. Conceited or what?

At the end of chapter one, Paul tells the Philippians that whatever happens, they need to behave themselves. That way Paul will know they are standing firm in the gospel and are not afraid of those who oppose them. The Philippians' lack of fear will prove to those unnamed others that they will be destroyed, but the Philippians will be saved by god. I bet those other people were quaking in their boots. (Not) Paul says the Philippians were not only given the privilege to believe in christ, but also to suffer for him. Proof of this is they are going through some unnamed struggle that is just like Paul's struggle was/is, whatever that was/is.

My study bible refers us to Acts 16:11-38, to read about Paul's time in Philippi. There Paul and Silas were put in jail after exorcising a "spirit" from a little girl. They were miraculously released from their jell cell by an earthquake, but did not leave. After preaching to the jailor, he and his household were baptized. The magistrates let Paul and Silas go after they were found to be Roman citizens. Another important convert in Philippi was a woman named Lydia. This letter to the Philippians does not mention Lydia, Silas, the jailor, or the events depicted in Acts.

Philippians, introduction

We will now look at one of the letters attributed to Paul, the book of Philippians. This letter is assumed to be genuine, actually from Paul. It was written between 52 and 62 CE. This is before the destruction of Jerusalem and probably before any of the gospel books were written. We will not worry much about why it was written (according to scholars) but take it at face value, as though it were written for us today. Even though it was written specifically for the Church in Philppi, most fundamentalist Christians take all Paul's letters to heart, as though they were written for anyone who reads them, especially them.

We will look at how this letter compares to what is taught and practiced in Christianity today, how it compares to other Biblical writings, and what it says about Jesus as compared to the gospels.

Till later.

Malachi, wrap up

After reading Malachi, we can see that it is a very general book admonishing the Israelites to keep the law of Moses and to not slack off when it comes to sacrifices and offerings. It seems to encourage them to think of themselves as specially loved by Yahweh, above the other people groups in the area. They are also told to be faithful to him. Those who get the message, will be favored in the future, when the Lord comes. Those who don't are doomed to destruction. The day of the lord's coming will be foretold by Elijah. Elijah should have been long dead at this time, so  his name must be symbolic.

This book does not specifically mention heaven, hell, angels, Satan, or demons. It does not anchor itself in time by mentioning any kings or other historic figures living at the time of the writing. It also does not mention any secular historic events. In 1:10, temple doors are mentioned, so it was most likely written after the construction of the second temple. It claims to be a message or oracle from Yahweh, yet often shifts between the first and third person points of view.

A book like this would have been applicable as a sermon across many hundreds of years, to pull the Israelites back into compliance whenever they began to look upon their neighbors, and their neighbor's gods,  as not so bad. It would also give the priests leverage when the people would loosen the standards of their sacrifices and offerings. After all, the priests relied on those for their livelihood. The oracle is telling the people to shape up.

Malachi mentions the Old testament names Jacob and Esau, Israel,  Moses, Judah, Levi, and Elijah, that's it. No specific Old Testament events are mentioned except the giving of the law to Moses. However, verse 2:11, which says Judah has desecrated the sanctuary by marrying the daughter of a foreign god, is an oblique symbolic reference to Genesis 38. There, the original Judah, son of Jacob, and who the Jews are named after, married a Canaanite woman. Malachi suggests that such a man will be excommunicated by Yahweh, even if he brings offerings to the lord.

The past portion of Malachi, verses 4:5-6, are viewed by some Christians as prophetic of John the Baptist (symbolized by Elijah) and Jesus (representing Yahweh). It is my contention that you only get there if you already believe Jesus is god in the flesh. Otherwise, it really doesn't make sense, especially since the Israelites had just been told in the verses just before to remember the laws and decrees of Moses. Elijah is there because he was the prophet who supposedly didn't die, but rode a fiery chariot up to heaven. The other prophets are probably all dead by the time of this writing. This author apparently thought a new word from Yahweh was needed to keep the Jews in the proper traditional mindset.

Malachi, part 2

Malachi 2:17 brings us to Yahweh's fourth statement: "You have wearied the lord with your words." (Yahweh's talking about himself in the third person again.) The priests ask, "How have we wearied him? Yahweh's answer is, "by saying, 'all who do evil are good in the eyes of the lord and he is pleased with them' or 'where is the god of justice?'" I have trouble believing  that the Israelites actually said the first statement. I think it is hyperbole and that what was actually said was something like "(such and such a tribe) is not evil, god loves them too."  This would not have been tolerated by the more fundamentalist Jews, just as it is not tolerated by other fundamentalists today. The question "Where is the god of Justice?" Is a valid question, especially if it is about justice for all, not just a select group.

In chapter three, the questioners are told that a messenger will prepare the way for the lord, then he will come. However, not many will be able to handle his coming. He will, cleanse, refine, and purify, bringing justice to the downtrodden, and judgement to sorcerers, adulterers, liars, the dishonest bosses, and those who take advantage of the weak.

In verse 6, Yahweh makes a statement claiming he does not change. If the Israelites turn back to him, he will return to them. This definitely sounds like a post captivity claim. The Israelites ask, "How are we to return?" There is no immediate answer.

Yahweh's next claim is that the Israelites rob him. He is asked, "How do we rob you?" They apparently rob him quite literally, by not giving him the proper tithes and offerings. This is making me suspect this book was written by a priest. Who else would benefit from the people returning to the   Law of Moses's rules of sacrifices and offerings? The priesthood. Gods certainly don't need food or money. Yahweh tells them to test him by bringing the whole tithe into the storehouse, that there may be food in his house. Who will eat that food? The priests. Yahweh claims if they do that, he will throw open the floodgates of heaven and bless them with abundance. Give to get. The prosperity doctrine is not new.

Next Yahweh claims the people have said harsh things against him. They ask, "What have we said against you?" Apparently they said it was futile to serve god. (Amen) They got nothing from carrying out his requirements before. Plus, evildoers prosper.

Then some true believers got together and talked. Yahweh listened in on their conversation. He had a scroll of remembrance written in his presence, about those who respected him. What is a scroll of remembrance? Glad you asked. Kings would have scribes write down things they wanted to remember at a later date. It appears Yahweh does not trust his own memory. These godfearers will be saved in the future, when the day comes that the arrogant and the evildoers will be set on fire like hay stubble. At that time, those who revere Yahweh will cavort about like calves, trampling the ashes of the wicked under their feet.

Next, the Israelites are told to remember all the laws and decrees of Moses. This would fit much better after the question "How are we to return to you?" After that,  Yahweh says he will send the prophet Elijah before the dreadful day that the lord comes, which was previously mentioned. Elijah will "turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the hearts of the children to the fathers." If that doesn't happen, even though he says it will, he will come and strike the land with a curse." 'Cause that's what loving gods do.

Malachi, part 1

As I read through the first chapter of Malachi, I notice a literary pattern. First Yahweh makes a statement. Next, Israel or the priests ask a question based on the statement. Next, Yahweh elaborates. Then Israel asks another question based on what Yahweh just said, and so on.

The first statement Yahweh makes is "I have loved you." He is asked in return, "How have you loved us?" Then Yahweh talks of Jacob and Esau, when what he is actually referring to is the lands of Israel and Edom. Jacob and Esau were brothers, yet Yahweh favored Jacob. The statement "Jacob have I loved" is quite famous.  In Malachi, land of Edom is said to be a wasteland. Yahweh basically says it is cursed and under his wrath. The author of Malachi has associated Edom with Esau. Since we know Yahweh never actually spoke to anyone, the author clearly has some kind of prejudice against the land of Edom and its people that he wants to see maintained. If you read the Wikipedia article on Edom, you will see several possible reasons Israel may have had for its animosity. Plus, it is unclear if a kingdom of Edom even existed by the time of this writing. As is suspected of many prophetic writings, the prophet may have been writing about  Edom after it was already destroyed. This prophecy that is not actually prophecy is called postdiction.

Yahweh's second claim is to tell the priests that he gets no respect from them. They show contempt for his name. The priests ask, "how have we shown contempt for your name? Yahweh says, "You place defiled food on my altar." (This is his third claim) The priests ask, "How have we defiled you?" The answer to that question takes up the rest of chapters one and two.

These are the ways the priests defiled Yahweh: 1. They offered crippled and diseased animals as sacrifices. "Cursed is the cheat who has an acceptable male in his flock and vows to give it, but then sacrifices a blemished animal." If the priests do not listen to this admonition, they will also be cursed. Yahweh demands proper reverence, as in the old days when Levi was priest. 2. They married the daughters of foreign gods. This is akin to breaking faith with Yahweh. There is this weird kind of marriage analogy that represents Israel's relationship with Yahweh. In Malachi 2:14-16 it is not clear if god is talking about a man's actual relationship with his wife or his faith in god, or both. We are told Yahweh hates divorce. Yet Yahweh also hates the Jews' marriages to foreign women. He tells them not to break faith with the wife of their youth, but we saw in Nehemiah that the Jews were told to break up their marriages with the non-Jewish women. Confusing.

More to come.

Malachi, introduction

Recently, I mentioned that James and Jude were generic New Testament letters that seemed to be addressed to people who were more Jewish than Christian. Then I discovered that the book of Malachi also seems to be a generic Jewish book, of the Old Testament. Read about the book of Malachi here and the prophet Malachi here. Note that no one actually knows who Malachi was and if he actually existed. The book had to have been written after the completion of the second temple (about 515 BCE) and before the second century. That's a span of three hundred years possibility.

The title of the book, and the supposed author's name, means messenger of Yahweh. It does not seem coincidental that the the book itself purports to be a message from god. Remember the entire bible has a pattern of using names for people and places that do double duty in meaning. These names are not necessarily the actual names attached to individuals who actually existed. The double entendre names are there to give greater substance and authority to the texts, to imbue them with symbolism, metaphor, and a poetic sense of divine inspiration. "Bob has a message for you from god" doesn't sound half as impressive as "(The man whose name is messenger from god) has received a word from the lord."

Interestingly, some early Christians believed Malachi was an angel. This is because an angel was a messenger of god and the word angel was used in the greek text (Septuagint) for the word messenger. The text is called "an oracle" in verse 1. The book is claiming to be the word of the lord. This is the first time on this blog that we have seen a bible book make this claim for its whole text.

Do you think we will find anything new and exciting in this book? We will see. Till next time.