It’s been some time since I started this fledging category of Reasons to Read and hopefully in writing this post I can give the curious reader one more reason. The first reason to read was to confirm what you’ve been thinking. The second reason to read is not unlike it: one should read because some things just stick in the memory and haunt you for hours and sometimes days (and sometimes longer, if you’re lucky).

Reading feeds the mind and produces cud that can be regurgitated at moments of boredom or leisure.

Cud: the portion of food that a ruminant returns from the first stomach to the mouth to chew a second time (Dictionary.com). Some things you read just need that second chew. Believe me, you’ll know what those things are when you read them; if you don’t, you need to quickly develop an eye for what those things are because they will come back to haunt you when you go to chew them that second time but find that they’ve lost their flavor (i.e., you can’t remember exactly how that quote went or where you read that blog post about such and such). I have a whole folder of bookmarks of articles, blog posts and pages I’ve read that I thought might come back to haunt me later.

One such writing is George Orwell’s essay Politics and the English Language which I have recently discovered by way of The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language. Here’s a full version of the essay (it’s fairly short and an overall fun read).

What particularly in the essay has led to ruminant tendencies in my thought life? Six little rules to cut “out all stale or mixed images, all prefabricated phrases, needless repetitions, and humbug and vagueness generally”:

1. Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.
2. Never us a long word where a short one will do.
3. If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.
4. Never use the passive where you can use the active.
5. Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.
6. Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.

As I read and write more and more, I become ever convinced that metaphors and similes are key. Orwell takes it one step further though and warns the writer against using hackneyed phrases in rule #1 above. “Once upon a time…” needs to become “in a galaxy far far away.” What do you think about the image of cud I used in the paragraphs above? To my knowledge I’ve not seen this metaphor employed in print before though it seems obvious enough and I don’t doubt it’s in print even now; nonetheless it serves well. I want to strive to imagine concepts in vibrant metaphor never before seen in print in order that I might not surrender to the expressions of others. Orwell’s point in giving the six rule speaks to this (emphasis mine of course):

What is above all needed is to let the meaning choose the word, and not the other way around. In prose, the worst thing one can do with words is surrender to them. When you think of a concrete object, you think wordlessly, and then, if you want to describe the thing you have been visualizing you probably hunt about until you find the exact words that seem to fit it. When you think of something abstract you are more inclined to use words from the start, and unless you make a conscious effort to prevent it, the existing dialect will come rushing in and do the job for you, at the expense of blurring or even changing your meaning. Probably it is better to put off using words as long as possible and get one’s meaning as clear as one can through pictures and sensations. Afterward one can choose — not simply accept — the phrases that will best cover the meaning, and then switch round and decide what impressions one’s words are likely to make on another person.

Hopefully something from Orwell (or from me) will stick in your mind and prove that because some things just stick is one more reason to read.

Happy regurgitating!

Theology I (Dr. Keathley)

• If you’re attending Southeastern and getting the Southern Baptist discount (1/2 off tuition) and plan on not serving in a Southern Baptist church and giving back to the Cooperative Program (which pays that other half of your tuition) after you graduate, you should go down to the Business Office right now and tell them not to give you the discount and start paying the regular price

New Testament I (Dr. Black)

• I can’t pray unless the Holy Spirit prays, but the Holy Spirit won’t pray unless I pray; prayer is an inter-trinitarian process.
• “Abba” was an intimate word used by a son to a father wherein obedience (not love) is at the core. The essence of “Abba” is “not my will but yours be done.”

Church History I (Dr. Hogg)

• Early on (at the time of Jerome) baptisms were done in the nude. (How symbolic of casting off that which is earthly and being born again!)
• In translating the Bible into Latin (what would later become the Vulgate) Jerome started to translate the Apocrypha, but ceased doing so, considering them uninspired and not Scripture. The apocryphal material was added back into the Vulgate after his death (in a sub-Jerome translation) and continue to be in the canon of the Catholic church today.

Baptist History (Dr. Harper)

• We think of America being founded on religious liberty for all but, at the time of the colonies, one was only aloud freedom of religious expression insofar as one practiced the denomination of that particular colony. Consequently, to practice otherwise was met with persecution.

The Albert Mohler Radio Program

• Tuesday – Dr. Mohler interviews Dr. Patterson (President of Southwestern Seminary) about a new degree program in their college that has caused a lot of media attention and controversy: a degree in the humanities with an emphasis in homemaking. The point of the program is this: there are those women who have both the desire and ability to be a stay-at-home homemaker, or those women who may find themselves on the mission field needing to make clothes and subsist without electricity and running water; this program is to equip those women. The program is open to women only (“as soon as we get a pregnant man walking in, we’ll sign him up”); but requires two years of both Classical Greek and Latin. Dr. Patterson invited any dissenters to come take the program and see if they can pass!

The Way of the Master Radio

• Wednesday – The hosts of the program are on tour in Europe and toured the John Bunyan museum in England (which reminds me that I need to finish Pilgrim’s Progress). This podcast takes the listener right through the museum with the crew.

Upgraded to Wordpress 2.3 in about 10 minutes through subversion and command line. Subsequent upgrades should just happen in a snap; I just had to get my installation switched over to subversion. Switching over was a breeze and will save a lot of time and hassle in the future.

Wordpress, Gutenberg would be proud!

Drew,

Thanks for your thoughtful reply, but I am still not convinced. I accept that the ways of God are a mystery but isn’t it partly that we are too ignorant and too stupid to understand his ways? I suppose what I’m saying is that he doesn’t want to be mysterious and we would know more about the mystery if we opened our eyes? Should we know where God was in that Amish atrocity a little while back in Pennsylvania, or in the 9/11 massacre? I’ve heard it said that the devil is still a powerful force in the world and influences people to do evil things? Do you think this is right? Wasn’t he just a “bogey man” invention to frighten people into doing as they were told, usually by the church?

You pose the question “Is it OK to question when struck with suffering? ” Do you think God minds when we question what he’s doing? Is it alright to be angry at God for letting some really bad thing happen. I’ve heard of famous and devout Christians being angry at God, but I can’t remember any names off-hand. Will he forgive people who are angry at him?

Jack

Jack,

I cede your point that the ways of God are a mystery partly because we are too ignorant. The question then is, Ignorant of what? The answer to that is: the Bible. Paul gives some very appropriate words for this discussion to a young pastor named Timothy. He says, “continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work ” (2 Timothy 3:14-17). In other words, to the extend that we are ignorant of the Scriptures we will be ignorant of God for in the Scriptures God has chosen to reveal himself, pulling back the curtain to allow humans to catch a glimpse at what he is up to. Furthermore, while it’s necessary to point to the Scriptures and affirm their sufficiency for informing humans about what we need to know, it’s also necessary to affirm that as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are God’s ways higher than our ways (Isaiah 55:9).

A Latin axiom sums this up nicely, “finitum non capax infiniti”, or the finite are not capable of the infinite. That is, because God is infinite we finite humans are unable to totally grasp him. If we were able to totally grasp who God is, then he wouldn’t be any bigger/better than us and therefore not God. It’s not that he doesn’t want to be mysterious, but rather that we’re only capable of so much. Fortunately, God has condescended to provide us sacred writings which provide us with the knowledge of how to be saved. Had he not come down to us in Jesus and the Scriptures, rest assured we would not have been able to reach up and demand anything of him. “Whatever the Lord pleases, he does, in heaven and on earth” (Psalm 135:6).

Let me also add that it’s is really easy for us to assume that we have comprehensive knowledge of a situation and quickly judge a situation as completely senseless. For example, image that you were walking through a big building and came to a private room where men dressed in all white were holding down a man and sawing off his arm. Your reaction might be to turn around and run as quickly as possible to call the police so that they can come and stop these madmen from injuring this poor man. You assume you have full knowledge of what’s happening and quickly judge that this man is being tortured. Would it inform your decision if you knew that the men dressed in white were surgeons and that the man losing his arm was in danger of losing his life from gangrene that could spread from his arm to the rest of the body? You would still cringe at the sight of pain, but you would understand what must be done.

This is a simplified example which we can easily and readily understand with just a little bit more knowledge. There are those acts, however, that cry out for justice and it seems almost impossible to see any good that could be accomplished through them, or why God would allow such events to take place. You mentioned two examples: the Amish schoolhouse shootings and September 11th. What possibly could God see in permitting the Amish schoolhouse shootings? I think there is no better place to look for such an answer than in Scripture and how Jesus responded when confronted with a similar conundrum.Luke 13:1-5:

“There were some present at that very time who told him about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices. And he answered them, “Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans, because they suffered in this way? No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish. Or those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them: do you think that they were worse offenders than all the others who lived in Jerusalem? No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.”

I want to cite for you at length John Piper’s commentary on this passage of Scripture in relation to another tragic event in the family of the Amish schoolhouse shootings and the tower of Siloam, the bridge collapse in Minneapolis on August 1 of this year. Note:

“Jesus implies [in the above passage] that those who brought him this news thought he would say that those who died, deserved to die, and that those who didn’t die did not deserve to die. That is not what he said. He said, everyone deserves to die. And if you and I don’t repent, we too will perish. This is a stunning response. It only makes sense from a view of reality that is radically oriented on God.

All of us have sinned against God, not just against man. This is an outrage ten thousand times worse than the collapse of the 35W bridge. That any human is breathing at this minute on this planet is sheer mercy from God. God makes the sun rise and the rain fall on those who do not treasure him above all else. He causes the heart to beat and the lungs to work for millions of people who deserve his wrath. This is a view of reality that desperately needs to be taught in our churches, so that we are prepared for the calamities of the world.

The meaning of the collapse of this bridge is that John Piper is a sinner and should repent or forfeit his life forever. That means I should turn from the silly preoccupations of my life and focus my mind’s attention and my heart’s affection on God and embrace Jesus Christ as my only hope for the forgiveness of my sins and for the hope of eternal life. That is God’s message in the collapse of this bridge. That is his most merciful message: there is still time to turn from sin and unbelief and destruction for those of us who live. If we could see the eternal calamity from which he is offering escape we would hear this as the most precious message in the world.”

I have to admit that I have often thought that Jesus was merely side-stepping the question people really wanted to know amidst (seemingly) senseless tragedy. What people really want to know is why does such and such happen, but Jesus spins the event around and poses a penetrating proposition to each of us that unless we repent, we will likewise perish. The tragedy becomes a teaching moment and a moment in which to point people toward both their sinfulness and exhort them to throw themselves upon the mercy of God in whom alone rests salvation. Jesus turns the question around not to avoid answering it, but to shake the listener awake (the megaphone we talked about in the previous email) and address the more pressing issue: the eternal destiny of those who are still alive and the necessity to repent or perish. Jesus was capable of explaining to his listeners the mystery behind the events that took place, but he didn’t; rather he ultimately pointed people to God. Therefore, seeing that I am considerably less capable than Jesus, I will do the same.

Finally, you ask if I think God minds if we question what he’s doing. I think he minds if we question in an attitude of pride that questions because we think we know better than God. This is foolishness. The one knowing little questioning in pride and mockery the One knowing all! However, if the one knowing little, questions in an attitude of submission and humility, I believe it pleases God to see faith seeking understanding. It should bring one closer to God through prayer and studying the Bible. Also, considering Piper’s comments above, what right does the one knowing little have to question the One knowing all? I would be very careful about being angry with God for anger toward him could be a sign of rejecting him altogether, which is the only unforgivable sin.

Timothy George is on campus today and tomorrow giving lectures in chapel. To be honest, I was unfamiliar with the gentleman prior to hearing about his coming to SEBTS to deliver lectures. This says more about me than it does about him for today was a fantastic recap of the Reformation era in a lecture entitled Five Revolutions of the Reformation Era. The five revolutions corresponded to five well-known men of yesteryear:

1. Copernicus -posited heliocentricity contra geocentricity; Luther theocentricity contra anthropocentricity
2. Christopher Columbus – “Christopher” = “Christ bearer” (Greek); charting new geography displaced eurocentricity; that we would be Christ bearers (“Christophers”)
3. Gutenberg and his printing press – years later, Baptists in love with printing Bibles and publishing translations
4. Erasmus and his Greek New Testament – ad fontes approach; “do penance” (Vulgate) vs. “repentance” (GNT)
5. Luther and the rediscovery of the gospel – justification through faith alone in Christ alone (to be elaborated on tomorrow)

It doesn’t appear that the lecture is online yet, or else you would have a link pointing to it in place of this sentence. George did mention that the lecture today would be the first chapter in a forthcoming book; consequently, it’s possible that the lecture might not be posted online and you’ll just have to wait for the book.

Update: Lecture 1 and Lecture 2 for download. [HT: Denny Burk]

(Keep in mind this all happened in an instant.)

I just visited the bathroom at the library to open the door and find a young man, glabrous like I, staring at himself in the mirror. Surprised by my intrudence, he quickly turned towards the door and mumbled these words, “Sorry. Excuse me. I was just looking for something.” You were looking for something!? You were checking yourself out in the mirror, holmes.

The men’s bathroom can be awkward at times. It’s a mixture of personal and public that produces awkward. To this lad I extend grace. Go on, look at yourself in the mirror. Nevermind me.

So goes the name of a blog post tintinnabulating to turn bibliophiles world-wide into Pavlov’s pouch. Unfortunately, the photographer ran out of time to capture my personal library.

To say “so therefore” is redundant. Don’t do it. I’ve heard several persons with the title “Doctor” say it.

I propose that you’re only allowed to say “so therefore” if you throw “ergo” into the mix.

“So therefore” is redundant so therefore ergo don’t say it.

Naturally, because I am a philomniglot and linguist, I love poetry. Without a doubt some of the best, contemporary poetry is that which is spat by poets known as rappers. Consider this line I heard tonight in a store at the mall

I hit the club like a tennis match

Amazingly creative. I thought “hit the club like a tennis racket” might work as well. I might have to pass on my suggestion to the performer. =)

Today I had a crisis when I needed to cut lemons at work. You know the slice of lemon you can have in your water or iced tea at a restaurant? Those are the ones I needed to cut today. I needed to cut fresh lemons into aesthetically pleasing slices to be enjoyed in beverages all day long; but I failed. I don’t know how to cut a lemon. I did the best I could though, slicing first this way and then that way, trimming off peel here and seed there. I improvised, but I still don’t know how to cut a lemon.

This morning I took an online quiz for my Theology I class and scored 10/10, proving I do know something about “special revelation”; nonetheless, I don’t know how to cut a lemon. I can conjugate verbs in 8 languages, but I don’t know how to cut a lemon. I know the name of Augustine’s mother, but I don’t know how to cut a lemon. I’ve visited 12 countries, but still don’t know how to cut a lemon.

My plea for mutli-learnedness is a plea that men (theologians, scholars, seminary students) would strive to explore the world around (I mean really explore) and not set ourselves aloof. We spend so much time in the abstract: pondering Q but knowing nothing of lemons, or skinning rabbits, or self-similarity in nature.

I have a great example of multi-learnedness in my father. We have great examples of multi-learnedness in men such as William Carey (botanist and missionary) and Dr. David Alan Black (farmer and professor).

I’m going out to buy The Dangerous Book for Boys.