The Christian Horse

I alluded to this joke in a comment at Better Bibles Blog. It seems that it is known even in California. I think I had better tell my version of it before someone else steals my thunder. I hope it is new at least to some of my readers.

A country pastor, in the old days before cars, went into town to buy a new horse. The horse dealer said to him, “I’ve got just the horse for you, Reverend. It’s an excellent horse, and what’s more, it’s a Christian.”

“A Christian horse? What do you mean?” asked the pastor.

“Well, it was brought up in a good Christian home, and it will really love you. Also it has learned Christian commands. To get it to start, you need to say ‘Hallelujah! Praise the Lord!’, and it will only stop if you say ‘Amen!'”

The pastor had a good look at the horse and decided to buy it. The dealer reminded him of the special commands it needed. Then the pastor jumped on the horse, and at his cry of “Hallelujah! Praise the Lord!” the horse shot off and the pastor started on his way home.

It was a beautiful day, and the horse was so good to ride that the pastor started to canter across the open countryside. The horse broke into a gallop as they sped across the hills.

Suddenly the pastor realised that they were coming towards the top of a cliff. He tried to stop the horse, tugging on the reins and shouting “Whoa! Stop!” But the horse kept going. At the last minute the pastor remembered what the horse dealer had told him. “Amen!” he shouted. The horse immediately stopped and skidded to a halt right on the brink of the cliff.

The pastor exclaimed, “Whew! Hallelujah! Praise the Lord!” …

The Archbishop, the Pope, and the Holy Grail

From the latest edition of Clare News, the magazine for alumni of my Cambridge college:

When the Archbishop of York met Pope Benedict XVI in Rome recently, he gave him an unusual gift …: a special, one-off beer called ‘Holy Grail’ …

Holy Grail beer bottle

For a fuller version of this story see this page on the brewery’s website, which also has a picture of the beer bottle, and its full name:

MONTY PYTHON’S HOLY GRAIL Tempered with burning witches

– with the “GR” crossed out.

Clare College has a strong theological tradition, numbering among its past members Prof Charlie Moule and Archbishop Rowan Williams. But in this case the link with the college is not the Archbishop, nor the Pope, but the head brewer.

Church Council Secretary

I have recently been re-elected to the District Church Council of my church (not a PCC as we are part of a team ministry), and also chosen again as secretary of this Council. So I have been landed again with the positions I laid down a year ago at the end of my maximum three year continuous time on the Council.

Fortunately our Council is not at all like this description of a committee, just sent to me by one of my fellow Council members:

Oh spare me some pity, I’m on a committee, which means that from morning to night
We attend and amend and contend and defend without a conclusion in sight.
We concur and confer, we defer and demur, and reiterate all of our thoughts,
We revise the agenda with lots of addenda and consider a load of reports.
We compose and propose, we suppose and oppose and the points of procedure are fun
But though various notions are brought up as motions, terribly little gets done.
We resolve and absolve but we NEVER dissolve, since it’s out of the question for us,
What an awful pity to end our committee – where else could we make such a fuss?

But perhaps I do need some pity for what I have taken on again – more minutes which take hours to write up!

Wrong Bishop of Durham

I thought for a minute that Jim West had a scoop for me, that Bishop NT Wright had started a blog. But it turns out that this blogger is not the Church of England Bishop of Durham, England, but, from his “about” page,

Tom Wrong, the Free Universalist Interfaith Bishop of Durham, North Carolina.

So not to be taken too seriously, I think.

However, he does have a good point about dreams in this post. In the ancient world dreams were taken much more seriously than they are today, and this understanding is reflected in the biblical text. But if Bishop Wrong is intending to suggest that the biblical authors wrote up what they had dreamed as the biblical text, he should offer some evidence for this, for here he may indeed be Wrong.

Anointing with oil

I have just discovered Roger Mugs’ interesting pseudonymous blog theologer. Thanks to Nathan Stitt, another interesting new blogger, for the link.

Among Roger’s recent posts this one caught my eye: Anointed… with oil. Now anointing with oil for healing is something I take very seriously, so please don’t think that I am mocking the idea here. Like Roger, I have been blessed with being anointed with oil, as much as can be held on a finger. And I have done it myself a few times. Maybe sometime I will blog seriously about prayer ministry as practised in my church.

Nevertheless, as I commented on Roger’s blog, there is also a humorous side to anointing oil. A few days ago I was helping the lady in charge of our church prayer ministry find some olive oil in the church kitchen to refill the anointing oil bottles. But she complained that the oil we found wasn’t “Extra Virgin”. Sounds like something from Matthew 25:1-13, except that there the extra virgins were the ones looking for oil to refill their bottles.

But if you want to know what biblical anointing was like, read Psalm 133:2.

Dragon slaying in Brentwood

Peniel Church in Brentwood has some competition, albeit more light-hearted, for the title of wackiest church in Essex, from nearby St George’s Anglican church. On 23rd April they are holding a special service for St George’s Day, at which

the vicar will urge his flock to fight against dragons and rescue the helpless.

“… We are encouraging people to turn up wearing a red rose. …

“Everyone is welcome – dragons and chargers may be left in Larkins Field in Ongar Road (by kind permission of the council).”

Let’s hope there isn’t any trouble between these dragons and any related beasts which might be hanging around Peniel Church, which is just off the Ongar Road.

Thanks to the Church Times blog for this link.

Love takes a long thyme

There has been discussion on several blogs in the last day or so, not all of it entirely serious, about how to translate the first clause in 1 Corinthians 13:4. Those involved include Lingalinga, Mike and Suzanne, first here and now here.

I think I was the first in this discussion, in a comment on the Lingamish post, to point out the link between this clause and the description of the Lord in Exodus 34:6 (there I wrote in error 34:7) and several other places in the Old Testament as “slow to anger”. As I pointed out in one of my first blog posts ever, the Hebrew phrase used for this in Exodus literally means “length of nose” or “length of nostrils”; but the word meaning “nose” or “nostrils” also has the metaphorical sense “anger”, and understanding “length” in a temporal sense leads to the understanding “slow to anger”.

The link between 1 Corinthians 13:4 and Exodus 34:6 is with the Septuagint Greek wording of the latter, makrothumos. This adjective is a compound word of makros “long” and thumos, which has a variety of meanings, including “anger”. So the Septuagint translator clearly chose it, or coined it, as a loan-translation of the Hebrew phrase understood as “length of anger”.

In 1 Corinthians 13:4 the Greek of the first clause is he agape makrothumei, the last word being the verb derived from makrothumos. This verb and a related noun and adverb (although oddly not the adjective itself) are used several times in the New Testament. In modern translations these are usually rendered with the “patient” word group. The KJV translation of them was “long-suffering”, which is a good reflection of the Greek compound word if the “suffer” part is correctly understood in its older sense of “allow” or perhaps “forbear”. But this rendering obscures the significant link with the Exodus passage.

So how should we render the clause? Some advocates of formal equivalence translation argue that words should be rendered according to their most concrete literal sense. The most concrete literal sense of thumos is “thyme”, the herb whose English name is derived from this Greek word. So makrothumos should be “long thyme”. Hence the tongue in cheek rendering in this post title:

Love takes a long thyme.

Suzanne took this same approach even further by reading the Hebrew idiom into the Greek word. I’m not sure this is a legitimate approach, but then she was not being as serious as I first thought she was. What she came up with was

The scripture truth that “love is long in both nostrils at once”.

But this sounds a bit like the Pinocchio approach to Scripture: the more you misrepresent it, the longer your nose and so the greater your love!

But in her later post Suzanne looked more seriously at this passage, and came up with the best rendering I have seen, which preserves the link with Exodus 34:6 and fits well into 1 Corinthians 13:

Love is slow to anger.

May we all remember to live in this kind of love, including Doug who this evening rants at me (with good cause), and above all myself.

Emerging "Grace"

Lingalinga (formerly known as Lingamish) has asked me to promote a comment I made on his blog to a post here. His wish is my command.

His post was a rant about modern rip-offs of the hymn “Amazing Grace”, which he associated in passing with the emergent church, concerning which I had just written in a comment elsewhere:

I think “emergent” has become the latest way for Reformed types to dismiss anyone they don’t like, to be added to “liberal”, “post-modern” etc. They make no real attempt to understand or engage with the people who actually use these labels. They just find one or two things they don’t like in any new movement and then add the whole thing to their implicit index of errors.

I could have added here: And then when they detect anything vaguely reminiscent of the new movement in anyone they don’t like they accuse them of being in that movement and use that as an excuse to dismiss them.

I hope that is not Lingalinga’s strategy for dismissing Chris Tomlin’s version of “Amazing Grace” because it has “an Emergent-style bridge thrown in the middle”.

I will risk even more of Lingalinga’s wrath by admitting to actually liking some of the “Amazing Grace” rip-offs he complains about, including the Chris Tomlin one. The motivation for some of these rip-offs is of course that churches insist on old hymns and musicians struggle to do something with them which is musically interesting and relevant to the congregation. But you can’t please everyone. I know an older lady who left our church because she couldn’t take an adapted version of “When I Survey”.

I suspect that Matt Redman, with “Amazing”, has ripped off not so much the original hymn as Philip Yancey’s book title What’s So Amazing About Grace?

Todd Agnew’s “Grace like rain” is a beautiful song, much more so in the version I know from a friend’s CD than in the versions (all the same recording I think) which Lingalinga links to, sung by someone who sounds like he has gravel in his mouth. Of the Youtube selection, I prefer this version, even though it is just one guy with an acoustic guitar. As for the theological correctness of likening grace to rain, see Hebrews 6:7 where the rain surely symbolises “the heavenly gift” (verse 4), God’s grace which is not irresistible but shows his love for sinners. Anyway, if poets and songwriters are not allowed to introduce their own imagery, their poetry will never rise above the kind of doggerel which I write.

Now for the part which Lingalinga wanted me to post, a comment on his post, starting with an example of my doggerel:

Emerging “Grace”? How sour the sound
That stirred a wretch like me.
I once knew one, but now I’ve found
A hundred songs there be.

When I’ve sung them ten thousand times,
10.30 every Sun.,
I’ve no less times to sing these lines
Than when I first begun.

(Yes, “times” and “lines” is a bad rhyme, but the original rhymes are worse.)

Have I earned myself a free trip to the bottom of the sea?

In a follow-up comment I wrote:

My previous comment was not inspired by this description of worship from Dave Walker, but it could have been. Actually three quarters of an hour of worship sounds like a taste of heaven to me, if it’s done well (e.g. by Matt Redman) and preferably without the dancers and flag wavers. But I can understand the reaction of people who don’t understand what’s going on, similar to 1 Corinthians 14:23.

This is of course the same Spring Harvest and the same Steve Chalke that caused such a stir on my blog, and on Dave’s other one, nearly a year ago.

Tony Blair, a good person?

Ruth Gledhill nominates Tony Blair as her ‘Good Person’ for today – and this is not the good joke she refers to in her title. If you haven’t seen that joke, also available internationally and probably permanently here, you really must – and don’t miss this explanation of how it was done. But back to Tony Blair …

Last year I reported on how some people were effectively calling Blair the Antichrist. At the time I suggested that the newly appointed Gordon Brown might have

been waiting in the wings for his chance to undo much of the damage caused by Blair.

Now, nine months into Brown’s government, I see little sign of this. True, Brown has almost ended British involvement in Iraq and partly backed down on identity cards. But in other ways, especially on moral issues, his government is causing even more concern than Blair’s did. So perhaps I should retract any suggestion that Blair was personally to blame for the mistakes of his government, and be prepared to look more favourably on him as a person.

And the same Ruth Gledhill, this time in an article today in The Times, has given me good reason to do so. She reports how he is setting up the Tony Blair Faith Foundation

to contribute to better understanding of the different faiths [and] to bring people of faith together to deliver the Millennium Development Goals … “Tony Blair believes that the capacity of faith organisations to do good is immense and that their reach is unparalleled,” an adviser said.

If Blair is really committed to what he is aiming for here, and can deliver it, he is certainly a “good person” not just for today but hopefully for decades to come.

How gentle is my wisdom?

Lingamish, on his updated links page, has pigeon-holed this blog as “Un-pigeon-hole-able” and described it, or me, as:

Gentle Wisdom: Occasionally gentle. Somewhat wise. A teddy bear with teeth.

It’s a good thing you’re my friend, David, so these teeth will only rend you in a friendly way.

But this description did get me thinking. Am I being presumptuous to call my blog “Gentle Wisdom”? Indeed I am not always as gentle as I might be, as I have confessed before – although I never intended to be gentle in a soft and cuddly teddy bear sort of way. But I hope I am really gentle more than occasionally.

Anyway, right from when I first changed the blog name to “Gentle Wisdom” the wisdom I intended to present has not been my own wisdom, which is not always even “somewhat wise” and not always gentle, but the God-given “wisdom from above [which] is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, willing to yield, full of mercy and good fruits, without a trace of partiality or hypocrisy” (James 3:17, NRSV). This is what I aim to live up to. If I fail, please rebuke me, gently, in comments here, or by e-mail to peter AT qaya DOT org.