Kruse Kronicle

Bill Clinton Goes 'On the Record'

Fox News - On the Record with Greta Van Susteran: Bill Clinton Goes 'On the Record' I was particularly intrested in this part of the discussion about Kiva.

VAN SUSTEREN: Well, that is a little bit like the one of the organizations you talk about in your book, in the new book "Giving," is, Kiva.org, which, incidentally, we put on our blog yesterday, because we thought it was such a great idea.

CLINTON: Unbelievable.

VAN SUSTEREN: Kiva.org is what? That lets everybody contribute, not just the fat cats.

CLINTON: Kiva.org gives you a chance to do what Muhammad Yunus won the Nobel Peace Prize for last year. And for 30 years he was one of the world's great micro-credit lenders. He made over 7 million loans, 97 percent to village women with a 98.5 percent payback rate.

And over half of the people he loaned money to worked their way above the international poverty line so that per capita income in his native Bangladesh moved from less than a dollar a day to about $570 a year, largely driven by the Grameen Bank and other projects like that in good times and bad.

So with Kiva.org, Greta Van Susteren and Bill Clinton can get on their Web site and we can see people that need money all over the world.

VAN SUSTEREN: How much money are you talking about?

CLINTON: As little as $25. You are talking about a lot of this money is loaned to people in countries with a per capita income of less than a dollar a day. You can see basket-makers and weavers in Africa. You can see a guy in Kabul, Afghanistan, who repaired radios.

VAN SUSTEREN: So if I go on Kiva.org and give $25, I can actually track to see how it changes someone's life?

CLINTON: Yes. If you go on Kiva, you can give as little as $25, almost nobody gives more than $300 or $400. And you may — let's suppose you pick a basket cooperative in Rwanda, and they want to get together after the horrible problems of a decade ago and bring people together across ethnic lines and make baskets and market them.

Let's suppose they need to borrow $400, well, you can either — you can give them $400, but you can give $25 and then eventually, let's say, 10 or 15 together will provide the $400. Then you loan them the money through a local group in Rwanda, and they report back in and pay the money back.

And every couple of weeks you can go back to Kiva and get a report as if you were their banker. They will report in, how are we doing with your money? How is our business doing? Are they repaying the loan?

Then when the loans are paid, you can take your money back or turn around and pick someone else to loan it to.

VAN SUSTEREN: It is an extraordinary program.

CLINTON: Amazing.

(CROSSTALK)

CLINTON: And it is all on the Internet. And it makes you feel like you know these people. I mean, they are — you see their picture. You know the facts of their business. You know what their lives are like.

And you know whether you are doing it alone or — and you can have like a virtual cooperative bank because you wind up — you may be joined by people all over America or all around the world in helping this particular business, whatever you pick.

Stronger China

The Economist: Stronger China

Thanks to China, an American recession need not cause the whole world to crash.

ECONOMISTS have long warned that the world economy could not fly for ever on the single engine of American demand. A one-engined plane is more likely to crash. With its housing market blighted and its consumers growing fearful, America now faces a mounting risk of recession. The good news, however, is that the world has found some powerful new engines in China and other emerging economies. Even as credit markets seize up, a world economy that is less dependent on the United States is more likely to stay aloft.

The power of this new motor is startling. For several years, emerging Asian economies have accounted for more of global GDP growth than America has. This year China alone will for the first time accomplish the same feat all on its own (at market exchange rates), even if American growth holds up. American consumer spending is roughly four times the size of China's and India's combined, but what matters for global growth is the extra dollars of spending generated each year. In the first half of 2007 the increase in consumer spending (in actual dollar terms) in China and India together contributed more to global GDP growth than the increase in America did. ...

Illegal immigrants moving out

USA Today: Illegal immigrants moving out

Illegal immigrants living in states and cities that have adopted strict immigration policies are packing up and moving back to their home countries or to neighboring states.

The exodus has been fueled by a wave of laws targeting illegal immigrants in Oklahoma, Arizona, Colorado, Georgia and elsewhere. Many were passed after congressional efforts to overhaul the immigration system collapsed in June.

Immigrants say the laws have raised fears of workplace raids and deportation....

Household: "Head" in 1 Peter 2:6-8 (Three Stones)

1 Peter 2:6-8

6 For it stands in scripture:

"See, I am laying in Zion a stone,
a cornerstone (akrogoniaios) chosen and precious;
and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame."

7 To you then who believe, he is precious; but for those who do not believe,

"The stone that the builders rejected
has become the very head of the corner (kephale gonias),"

8 and

"A stone that makes them stumble,
and a rock that makes them fall." (NRSV)

There are three stones used to signify Christ in the bible; cornerstone, capstone, and stumbling stone. The cornerstone was a large stone usually laid at the north east corner of building to begin a foundation. It was laid perfectly level and aligned in such a way that all other construction could be lined and plumbed according to it. The capstone was a large stone placed at the top of the corner of two meeting walls. Its weight and design, resting atop the juncture, held the walls together. A capstone could also be the keystone at the apex of an arch. The capstone was the final stone laid. It symbolized completeness, prominence, and glory. A stumbling stone was stone that you … well … stumbled over. I’ve searched in vain for an origin to this idea other than the occasional stone protruding from the ground that one trips over even though I seem to recall stumbling blocks were some how connected with trapping animals.

The problem is sorting out which stone is which with regard to cornerstones and capstones in biblical references. I’ve consulted several commentaries and biblical encyclopedias, and there is considerable disagreement. Here is my take on the difference.

It is my theory that following are equivalents in English, Hebrew, and Greek:

Cornerstone = eben pinnah (stone + angle/corner) = akrogoniaios [akron+gonias] (extreme/pinnacle + angle/corner)  or litho goniaios (stone corner)

Capstone/Keystone =  rosh pinnah  (head of the corner) = kephale gonias (head of the corner)

Three Old Testament passages unmistakably refer to a foundational cornerstone. (LXX means Septuagint.)

Job 38:4-7

4 "Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth?
Tell me, if you have understanding.
5 Who determined its measurements -- surely you know!
Or who stretched the line upon it?
6 On what were its bases sunk,
or who laid its cornerstone (eben pinat, LXX: litho goniaion)
7 when the morning stars sang together
and all the heavenly beings shouted for joy?  (NRSV)

Isaiah 28:16-17

16 therefore thus says the Lord GOD,
See, I am laying in Zion a foundation stone,
a tested stone,
a precious cornerstone (eben pinat, LXX: akrogoniaion), a sure foundation:
"One who trusts will not panic."
17 And I will make justice the line,
and righteousness the plummet; (NRSV)

Eben means “stone” and pinnah means “angle” or “pinnacle.” Figuratively pinnah can mean "chieftain." (Judges 20:2; 1 Samuel 14:38). The context of these two passages make it clear they are talking about a foundation. 1 Peter 2:6 is a paraphrase of this passage. (Romans 9:33 seems to be a paraphrase that combinges a Isaiah 8:14-15, 28:16.)

Then there is this passage where Jeremiah prophecies against Babylon:

Jeremiah 51:26

No stone (eben) shall be taken from you for a corner (pinnah)
and no stone (eben) for a foundation,
but you shall be a perpetual waste,
says the LORD. (NRSV)

In other words, Babylon will contribute nothing to the foundation of the new order that is coming.

In Zechariah we see the significance of the capstone or keystone. Zerubbabel lays the foundation for the new temple and this prophecy declares that no obstacle will prevent him from placing the capstone, thus signifying the temple's completion.

Zechariah 4:6-10

6 He said to me, "This is the word of the LORD to Zerubbabel: Not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit, says the LORD of hosts. 7 What are you, O great mountain? Before Zerubbabel you shall become a plain; and he shall bring out the top stone (roshah eben “head stone”) amid shouts of 'Grace, grace to it!'"

8 Moreover the word of the LORD came to me, saying, 9 "The hands of Zerubbabel have laid the foundation of this house; his hands shall also complete it. Then you will know that the LORD of hosts has sent me to you. 10 For whoever has despised the day of small things shall rejoice, and shall see the plummet in the hand of Zerubbabel. (NRSV)

Then in Psalm 118:22-23 we read:

Psalm 118:20-23

20 This is the gate of the LORD;
the righteous shall enter through it.
21 I thank you that you have answered me
and have become my salvation.
22 The stone (eben) that the builders rejected
has become the chief cornerstone (rosh pinnah, LXX kephale gonias)
23 This is the LORD's doing;
it is marvelous in our eyes. (NRSV)

As we have seen, rosh means “head.” Literally the phrase here is “head of the angle/corner.” That it is a stone (eben) head is picked up from “stone” as the subject of the sentence. The "head of the corner" is almost certainly indicating the keystone that holds an arch in place or a large stone spanning atop other stones; the most elevated part of the gate structure, its focal point, and crowning glory.

Now there is no question that Paul explicitly identifies Christ as the foundation of the church:

1 Corinthians 3:10-11

10 According to the grace of God given to me, like a skilled master builder I laid a foundation, and someone else is building on it. Each builder must choose with care how to build on it. 11 For no one can lay any foundation other than the one that has been laid; that foundation is Jesus Christ. (NRSV)

Ephesians 2:19-20

19 So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are citizens with the saints and also members of the household of God, 20 built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the cornerstone (akrogoniaios). (NRSV)

At least one commentator on Ephesians suggests that the apostles are the foundation and Jesus is the capstone, signifying a completion from top to bottom. I question that interpretation. I think in this passage Jesus is the foundational cornerstone to which the apostles are added to create a foundation upon which the rest of the structure will be built. I don’t think the capstone/keystone image is present here.

Where I think we do see the capstone image entering the New Testament picture is in multiple quotations of Psalm 118:22. We see it referenced here in 1 Peter 2:7 but it also is referred to by Peter in Acts 4:11 and it closes out Jesus’ Parable of the Wicked Tenants in all three synoptic gospels (Matt. 21:42, Mark 12:10-11, Luke 20:17-19) I find no clues to the cornerstone versus capstone/keystone question from these passages except that, like LXX in Psalm 118:22, the Greek for "cornerstone" is kephale gonias, “head of the corner.”

With all that background it seems most likely that 1 Peter 2 is giving three distinct images of Jesus the “living stone.” (v. 4)

Cornerstone (akrogoniaios) – Jesus is original stone laid in the foundation of the new living temple 1 Peter 2 is describing. Everything is built, plumbed, and aligned with him.

Capstone/Keystone (kephale gonias) – Jesus is the stone in the highest most prominent place. He is the completion of the temple. As he is exalted and put in place, like the people in Zechariah 4:7, the people shout out praises.

Stumbling Stone – For those who will not receive his word and obey, Jesus is a stone over which they keep stumbling. He frustrates their plans and is an obstacle to their agenda. This clearly alludes to Isaiah 8:14-15.

As we are about to see in a couple of posts, Jesus is both Lord and head of the church. I think we see those elements reflected in this stone imagery. I noted the pinnah in Hebrew means “angle” or “pinnacle,” but figuratively it can mean chieftain or ruler. Is there a double meaning here? I think possibly so. As the foundational cornerstone, certainly Christ is the rule or measure to which everything else must conform. In at least this sense, he is a “ruler.”

The capstone/keystone holds the structure together in a way somewhat similar to the way the Greeks perceived that the head keeps the body together. But more importantly, like the head, the capstone/keystone was the highest, most prominent, and glorious part of the structure. This is a quality that has everything to do with status and little to being "one who rules."

Series Index

Dodgy looking

The Economist: Dodgy looking

DENMARK, Finland and New Zealand are the least corrupt countries in the world, according to Transparency International's annual Corruption Perceptions Index, published on Thursday September 27th. The index uses surveys of businessmen and experts to determine the perceived level of abuse of public office for private gain in 180 countries. The poorest nations tend to be the most corrupt. Myanmar and Somalia are bottom, with conflict-ridden Afghanistan and Sudan also languishing. Several African countries, including Namibia, Seychelles and South Africa, have improved their scores since the last survey. Austria and Thailand are among those with lower scores.

USA came in 20th.

A’s played last KC game 40 years ago

Kansas City Star: A’s played last KC game 40 years ago

Forty years ago tonight, a young Jim Hunter — the fans called him Catfish — was in the zone. Bottom of the ninth, two outs. The frustrated White Sox had managed just three hits and no runs.

Was it heat? A change-up? Whatever: Chicago first baseman Tom McCraw liked what he saw and took a hack at Hunter’s offering.

Pop-up, foul territory. The game, second of a doubleheader at Municipal Stadium, 22nd and Brooklyn, was over.

McCraw and his teammates left the diamond disgusted. Losing both games to the lowly Kansas City Athletics all but eliminated them from the 1967 pennant race.

Hunter and his teammates walked from the chilly night air into a different kind of immortality: It was the last game the Kansas City A’s would ever play in Kansas City. ...

Well you know its not good when their are playoff scrambles in the last week of regular season baseball and the front story of the Star is about a game from forty years ago. I moved to KC as a little guy in the baseballless summer of '68, between the A's and the Royals. It was great the first couple of decades. Lately I just keep hoping they can win 70 games.

US students score sweeping gains on tests

Christian Science Monitor: US students score sweeping gains on tests

Elementary and middle-school students are making significant improvements in math skills, while their gains in reading are more modest, according to national test results.

Washington - American students – black, white, Hispanic, rich, poor, male, and female – are improving in math and reading, especially those at the elementary level, where most of education reform has focused.

Those are the modest but positive results from Tuesday's release of the most influential test in US education, the 2007 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). ...

Household: “Head” as Function, Representation, and Elevation, and the Centrality of Status

So what can we say about “head” as a metaphor in Greek? I think two things can be said.

First, “head” is not used to signify “rule over” or “have authority over,” although it clearly is used on occasion with regard to people who rule and have authority. It is sometimes used to indicate a differential in these qualities. The one who is “head over/of” in authority has authority that is “higher,” preeminent, and of greater status or magnitude than others. The head metaphor is a statement about relative position (just as the head is relatively higher than the rest of the body) and could be used with any human quality that can be ranked. For example, Barry Bonds is head over/of all baseball players in hitting homeruns. Head indicates the magnitude of the quality is greater or higher but it is not the quality itself. The head is figuratively the summit, not a body part that controls or rules the body.

Second, I believe there are actually three ways the metaphor is employed in the New Testament based on three different ways of perceiving a physical head. We can view the physical head in terms of function, representation, and elevation.

Function – According to the Greeks, the anatomical function of the head was to provide life-giving sustenance and nurture to the rest of the body. It is the origination point from which the rest of the body springs up.

Representation – The head is the most visible and physically distinguishing part of the body. The face and head are the primary means by which we identify a whole person. The head represents the whole body to the world.

Elevation – The head is at the top, the highest point, of the body. In Greek, high elevation signifies prominence, preeminence, and importance.

I believe it is possible for any given instance of the head metaphor to have more than one of these connotations in play at the same time. We will see this as we visit the New Testament passages. Context is critical in each case. But before going to these passages I want to refresh our memories concerning the idea of status in the Greco-Roman world.

We Westerners in the twenty-first century quickly identify political power and authority as signs of status. Wealth is the other great measure of status. For the Greco-Roman world, status was everything. But status was not primarily measured in political power and wealth. It was measured in number of clients obtained through charis. Charis is a process where you did something for someone so significant they could not possibly repay you. You became the patron and the recipient of your gift became your client. You worked to expand your connections and influence so you could do things for your clients that they could not do for themselves. In response to your patronage they would do your bidding whenever you needed something of them. Whatever clients your clients might develop became your clients as well by extension. Status was measured by how big a pyramid of clients you had established for yourself. Political power and wealth could be instrumental in developing status but they were means not ends. (See Patronage and the Dance of Grace)

Charis is the word we interpret as “grace.” It is the word Paul uses to describe what God has done for us in Christ. Through his life, death, and resurrection Christ has atoned for us; made us “at-one” with God and each other. It is an extravagant gift we can not repay. God is our patron and we are his clients called to do his mission in the world. Because of what Jesus has done in laying down his very life for us, the most costly gift of all, he is elevated to the highest status. He is the firstborn son of a new creation. Yet paradoxically, what Jesus asks of us as his clients is to have his same disregard for status. The way to the right and left hand of God is by putting everyone else first. The way to high status is to treat everyone else as if their status is higher than your status.

The Emperor was considered to have the highest status in the Empire. Christians were worshiping a crucified non-Roman, the opposite end of the status spectrum. I believe this inversion of status plays prominently in some head metaphor passages in the New Testament.

Now on to the New Testament passages.

Series Index

Feline Wisdom Concerning Treadmills

Here is a pic I took today of my cat Isaac modeling the most appropriate use of a treadmill I've ever seen.

The Kevin Vanhoozer Interview

Exiled Preacher: The Kevin Vanhoozer Interview by Guy Davies

GD: Hello Kevin Vanhoozer and welcome to Exiled Preacher. Could you tell us a little about yourself?

KV: Thanks for bringing me into the Exile. I'm a middle-aged student of theology in the Reformed tradition who teaches evangelicals (at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School) and writes for catholic Christians. I'm married to Sylvie, who is French, and I have two daughters, Mary and Emma, who are both in college. I've spent most of my adult life trying to answer the question, 'What does it mean to be biblical?' and half my adult life in Europe and the UK.

GD: What do you enjoy most about being a systematic theologian? ...

The Fictive "rosh to kephale" Exceptions in the Septuagint (Part 2)

We continue with a summary of Andrew Perriman's analysis of translations from the Hebrew rosh into the Greek kephale in the Spetuagint, presented in Speaking of Women: Interpreting Paul.

1 Kings 8:1 (3 Kings 8:1 in the LXX) (17)

1 Kings 8:1

Then Solomon assembled the elders of Israel and all the heads (rosh) of the tribes (mattah), the leaders of the ancestral houses of the Israelites, before King Solomon in Jerusalem, to bring up the ark of the covenant of the LORD out of the city of David, which is Zion. (NRSV)

This passage has a Hebrew metaphor hidden within it. The Hebrew matteh is the typically translated literally as a “rod” or “staff,” and figuratively as “tribe.” When the word matteh is used literally to mean “rod” or “staff” it is always translated as rhabdos in the Septuagint. Rhabdos is never used for matteh when it figuratively signifies a tribe except here. The choice of the literal equivalent in translation for matteh (staff) would necessitate the literal translation of rosh (head) as well. Literally we are talking about the “head of a staff,” as in that part of the staff which occupies the highest point. Since a “head of a staff” does not rule the rest of the staff but it is the most prominent feature at the end of the staff we are talking about prominence, not authority or rule.

Judges 10:18, 11:8-9 (15-16)

Judges  10:18

18 The commanders of the people of Gilead said to one another, "Who will begin the fight against the Ammonites? He shall be head over all the inhabitants of Gilead." (NRSV)

Judges 11:4-11

4 After a time the Ammonites made war against Israel. 5 And when the Ammonites made war against Israel, the elders of Gilead went to bring Jephthah from the land of Tob. 6 They said to Jephthah, "Come and be our commander, so that we may fight with the Ammonites." 7 But Jephthah said to the elders of Gilead, "Are you not the very ones who rejected me and drove me out of my father's house? So why do you come to me now when you are in trouble?" 8 The elders of Gilead said to Jephthah, "Nevertheless, we have now turned back to you, so that you may go with us and fight with the Ammonites, and become head over us, over all the inhabitants of Gilead." 9 Jephthah said to the elders of Gilead, "If you bring me home again to fight with the Ammonites, and the LORD gives them over to me, I will be your head." 10 And the elders of Gilead said to Jephthah, "The LORD will be witness between us; we will surely do as you say." 11 So Jephthah went with the elders of Gilead, and the people made him head and commander over them; and Jephthah spoke all his words before the LORD at Mizpah. (NRSV)

Of all the passages that Perriman considers this one might seem to actually support the idea of “head” as “ruler.” Rather than trying to summarize Perriman, I will quote him at length.

In the Hebrew text of Judges 10:18; 11:8-9, the word rosh is used to describe the man (Jephthah) who would lead the Israelites to fight against the ‘sons of Ammon’: ‘He shall be head over all the people of Gilead.’

There are three main manuscripts of the Septuagint: Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus (both fourth century AD), and Codex Alexandrinus (fifth century AD). In the Alexandrian text of these verses rosh is translated by kephale, whereas the Vatican text, in conformity with the general pattern, has archon (‘ruler’). From this it has been inferred, not unreasonably, that in the view of the translator of the Alexandrian version, kephale carried the same metaphorical meaning as rosh and was essentially synonymous with archon.

It would be wrong, however, to assume that the relationship between the two texts at this point is explicable only in terms of synonymy – particularly in view of what will emerge about the metaphorical sense of kephale from the study of other texts. So we might ask whether the use of kephale in the Alexandrian text of Judges 10:18; 11:8-9 and in both versions of 11:11 is not in fact meant to suggest prominence or precedence rather than the exercise of authority. What the people of Israel needed at the moment was not so much a ruler (someone to have authority over them) as someone to represent them before king Ammon (11:12) and if necessary to lead them into battle – someone to ‘begin to fight against the sons of Ammon’ (10:18; cf 11:8). As ‘head’, Jephthah would be the one to go first in the fight. If this explains the use of kephale in 10:18, it would also account for the use of the word in the later verses.

The force of this nuance may also be reflected in the fact that 10:18 and 11:8-9, kephale is followed by the dative (‘for all the inhabitants of Gilead’), not epi (‘over all the inhabitants of Gilead’). The preposition eis is found in 11:11 but in this case in both translations kephale is in direct apposition to a word meaning ‘ruler’ or ‘leader’: ‘the people placed him over them as head and ruler [eis kephalen kai eis archegon]’ (Vatican). This apposition, moreover is found in the Hebrew text, and in itself neither accounts for the unexpected use of kephale nor elicits from it the sense of ‘one who has authority over’.

As we examine the other passages, we may find that the apparent synonymy suggested by the two translations of the Hebrew tests is illusory, perhaps not more than a scribal idiosyncrasy. The fact remains that whereas the use of rosh in the Hebrew text here is perfectly consistent with its usage throughout the Old Testament, the appearance of kephale in the Alexandrian text at this point is exceptional. If kephale in these verse does not have the same sense of ‘one who goes first or most prominent’, then it should probably be regarded as a traditional anomaly.

This concludes the analysis of the handful of cases in the Septuagint where rosh was not directly translated as kephale. The evidence that kephale means "to rule over" is weak to nonexistant." These translation exceptions seem to cluster around the ideas of preemince and prominance, metaphors for head that is shared by both Hebrew and Greek.

So in light of what we have reviewed what can we say about what we might expect to find in New Testmant instances of the head metaphor?

Series Index

Entrepreneurship - new data, new research

World Bank - Private Sector Development Blog: Entrepreneurship - new data, new research

What drives entrepreneurship across countries? What is the effect of entrepreneurship on economic development? Important questions, but up to now little data to answer them.

The 2007 World Bank Group Entrepreneurship Survey helps fill this gap with data for 84 developing and industrial countries. A first analysis of the data shows that countries with better governance and fewer licensing procedures have more entrepreneurs. Political turmoil seems to hurt entrepreneurship.

Which institutions matter for economic growth?

Vox: Which institutions matter for economic growth?

So which institutions matter for economic growth? South African institutional development suggests that government efforts to stimulate growth by revising the institutional framework (such as labour laws and marketing regulations) are largely ineffective in the long run. Nor is it important whether legal disputes are resolved in the context of a civil or common law régime. By contrast, firmly establishing private property rights has very positive effects. This result is perhaps not surprising. Changing particular institutions is really only tinkering at the economic margins. But establishing clear property rights facilitates an almost infinite variety of economic interactions – most of them unforeseen and unforeseeable ex ante – that is limited only by the imagination of economic agents to dream up new types of contracts that permit them to more efficiently exploit the available resources. It is the firm establishment of private property rights that unleashes the full potential of the economy. Several developing economies – such as Vietnam and China – have recently been moving down this road and history suggests that the economic gains are likely to be large.

Chile: well on the way to eradicating poverty

MacLeans.ca: Chile: well on the way to eradicating poverty

Capitalism and globalization used to be dirty words for Latin American leftists, who in the past were quick to blame the region's poverty on what they saw as these largely destabilizing and outside factors. But after a decade in which savvy leftist legislators in Chile pursued a bold economic program to embrace the free market, while at the same time creating public policy measures to address the needs of the most impoverished in the country, poverty is rapidly becoming an anachronism in Chile, one of the world's fastest-growing economies.

Poverty has fallen faster in Chile than anywhere else in Latin America, according to figures recently published by the Chilean government. Statistics collected by the Caracterización Socioeconómica Nacional (CASEN) survey carried out by the country's planning ministry showed that poverty fell from 18.7 per cent in 2003 to 13.7 per cent in 2006. In 1990, when dictator Augusto Pinochet left office, more than 38.6 per cent of people in this Andean country of 16 million lived below the poverty line.

For the country's president, Michelle Bachelet, the breakthrough is due entirely to the steady rule of several centre-left Concertación administrations. The party, an alliance of centre-left political parties founded in 1988, has won every presidential race since Pinochet's departure. "The social achievements are obvious," said Bachelet, a former political prisoner under Pinochet's rule, in a recent public statement following the release of the CASEN statistics. "Our priorities have never varied and we stick to them: a social safety net as never before, quality education, better health care, decent homes, pensions for the most vulnerable."

..........

...The Chilean government has invested in public infrastructure and telecommunications while maintaining a strong export-led approach to development, he says. Chile has 54 free-trade agreements with countries all over the world, including Canada. Since 1990, the country has increased exports from US$9 billion a year to US$60 billion in 2006, Heine says. As a result, Chile's economy has grown at a yearly average of 5.6 per cent, the highest anywhere outside Asia. Since 1990, per capita income has soared from US$2,500 to US$9,000 today....

The Fictive "rosh to kephale" Exceptions in the Septuagint (Part 1)

The Hebrew Bible was translated into Greek during the period from the third through first centuries B.C.E. This translation became known as the Septuagint (LXX). As we saw earlier, in the vast majority of cases where the Hebrew word rosh (head) was used metaphorically it was not translated as kephale (head) in Greek. Rosh usually indicated “chief” or “ruler” when used metaphorically. The Greek translators usually chose to translate this metaphor into the non-metaphorical expression of archon, which was the term used to indicate “leader” or “ruler.” But what about the handful of cases where the Greek translators did translate metaphorical uses of rosh into kephale? Andrew Perriman in Speaking of Women: Interpreting Paul identifies eleven instances of this. What follows is an attempt to summarize his analysis of these passages though not necessarily in the order he considered them.

Deuteronomy 28:14, 44, Isaiah 9:14-15 (19-20)

Deteronomy 28:12-13

… You will lend to many nations, but you will not borrow. 13 The LORD will make you the head, and not the tail; you shall be only at the top, and not at the bottom -- if you obey the commandments of the LORD your God, which I am commanding you today, by diligently observing them, …

Deuteronomy 28:43-44

43 Aliens residing among you shall ascend above you higher and higher, while you shall descend lower and lower. 44 They shall lend to you but you shall not lend to them; they shall be the head and you shall be the tail. (NRSV)

Isaiah 9:14-16

14 So the LORD cut off from Israel head and tail,
palm branch and reed in one day -- 
15 elders and dignitaries are the head,
and prophets who teach lies are the tail;
16 for those who led this people led them astray,
and those who were led by them were left in confusion. (NRSV)

These passages are “head and tail” parings. The Deuteronomy passages appear to use head to signify honor and tail to indicate shame. To be able to lend would mean one was of high status but to borrow would be shameful. The contrast is about honor and shame, not ruler and subject.

The Isaiah passage uses the metaphor to indicate a totality, much like we would say “from start to finish” for from “head to toe.” Nothing is said here about ruling over others.

1 Kings 21:12 (3 Kings 20:12 in the LXX) (17-18)

1 Kings 21:11-12

11 The men of his city, the elders and the nobles who lived in his city, did as Jezebel had sent word to them. Just as it was written in the letters that she had sent to them, 12 they proclaimed a fast and seated Naboth at the head of the assembly. (NRSV)

This is referring to the prominent physical location given Naboth at the assembly, much like we would talk about someone being at the head of the table.

Isaiah 7:8-9 (17)

Isaiah 7:7-9

8 For the head of Aram is Damascus,
and the head of Damascus is Rezin.
(Within sixty-five years Ephraim will be shattered, no longer a people.)
9 The head of Ephraim is Samaria,
and the head of Samaria is the son of Remaliah.
If you do not stand firm in faith,
you shall not stand at all. (NRSV)

The context is Isaiah reassuring King Ahaz of Judah that an alliance between Syria (Aram) and Ephraim (Israel) will not prevail against Judah. The capital of Syria was Damascus with Rezin as king, and the capital of Israel was Samaria with Rehaliah as king. According to Perriman, “…nowhere else in the Hebrew Bible is a man said to be ‘head’ of a city or a city ‘head’ of a country: rosh always refers to status of individuals with regard to groups of people – families, tribes, armies, priests, and so on.” (17) The idea that Damascus is the prominent representation of Aram in which Aram is summed up, and that the people of Syria and Damascus are symbolically summed up in Rezin seems to be the connotation intended. The same for the second triad.

Verse 8, with its declaration that Ephraim will “be shattered, no longer a people” may provide a clue to the rather cryptic phrasing. When the body is decapitated it loses its head and therefore its identity. Not only will Israel be defeated but “lose their head” and thus their identity as a people. As we know, the Assyrians cart of the Israelites, leaving only a remnant, and they indeed vanish as people with an identity. The precise connotation of these passages is not clear but the idea of chief or ruler is not easily sustained.

Jeremiah 31:7 (Jeremiah 38:7 in the LXX) (18)

Jeremiah 31:7-9

7 For thus says the LORD:
Sing aloud with gladness for Jacob,
and raise shouts for the chief of the nations;
proclaim, give praise, and say,
"Save, O LORD, your people,
the remnant of Israel."
8 See, I am going to bring them from the land of the north,
and gather them from the farthest parts of the earth,
among them the blind and the lame,
those with child and those in labor, together;
a great company, they shall return here.
9 With weeping they shall come,
and with consolations I will lead them back,
I will let them walk by brooks of water,
in a straight path in which they shall not stumble;
for I have become a father to Israel,
and Ephraim is my firstborn. (NRSV)

The New International Version says “foremost” in verse 7 while the Amplified Bible says “head.” The underlying Hebrew is rosh.

There is nothing said about Israel ruling the other nations. The connotation appears to be that Israel has become preeminent above all other nations. It ranks higher in the status. Perriman believes that verse 9 provides the clue when it says “…for I have become a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn.” The metaphorical image is of Israel as the first born son and therefore preeminent among his “brother” nations in status.

More in the next post.

Series Index

A better alternative to One Laptop per Child?

Fortune: A better alternative to One Laptop per Child?

For those interested in bridging the digital divide, two seemingly-unrelated headlines in today’s news together tell a fascinating story. The first headline topped the tech news: Nicholas Negraponte’s One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) initiative will start selling their laptops to buyers in rich countries. But there’s a wrinkle: Rich-country buyers must buy their machines in lots of two, one they get to keep, while the other goes to a needy child overseas. Why the 2-for-1 charity promo?

“I have to some degree underestimated the difference between shaking the hand of a head of state and having a cheque written,” said Negraponte to the New York Times recently. In short, weak demand.

The second item appeared on the front of a special section in today’s Wall Street Journal: N-Computing, a Redwood City-based start-up, has won the Journal’s 7th annual technology innovation award in the category “Computing Systems.” What’s the connection? Well, N-Computing essentially brings “thin client computing” from the Western enterprise to the developing world. That is, the company makes low cost hardware devices that turn regular PCs into servers. (Think VMWare (VMW) or Citrix (CTXS) for poor people.)

Equipped with the $11 N-Computing device, a garden-variety PC can host up to seven simultaneous users. Each user requires only a screen, keyboard, and a mouse, but they get a full Windows (MSFT) desktop experience.

While Negraponte and OLPC have generated most of the buzz in recent years, N-Computing and its CEO Stephen Dukker represent a different approach to solving the same problem: how to get computing power into the hands of the world’s neediest students. And while not-for-profit OLPC has faced nothing but headwinds, for profit N-Computing appears to be getting real market traction. Last week, for example, the company closed a deal to outfit most of the school children in Macedonia with “desktops.” Yes, it’s Macedonia, but that’s upwards of 100,000 “seats.” And, the reseller that is doing the installation is China’s Haier Group, which clearly expects to make a buck on the deal. So there’s a real business model here, beneath the altruism. ....

Rapeseed biofuel ‘produces more greenhouse gas than oil or petrol’

Times Online: Rapeseed biofuel ‘produces more greenhouse gas than oil or petrol’

A renewable energy source designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is contributing more to global warming than fossil fuels, a study suggests.

Measurements of emissions from the burning of biofuels derived from rapeseed and maize have been found to produce more greenhouse gas emissions than they save.

Other biofuels, especially those likely to see greater use over the next decade, performed better than fossil fuels but the study raises serious questions about some of the most commonly produced varieties. ...

What Pastors Get Paid

Christianity Today: What Pastors Get Paid

Our annual compilation of ministry salaries is out, and this year’s tally produced a few surprises:

• If you want to make more money, switch denominations.
• Female solo pastors make more.
• The extra degree is worth the money.

Kevin Miller has a report below.

Our research team here at Christianity Today International just finished surveying more than 2,000 churches, and next month, we’ll be releasing the most comprehensive, up-to-date church salary survey we’ve ever done. While The 2008 Compensation Handbook for Church Staff is at the printer, here is a sneak peek at some results: ...

Reflections on the General Assembly Council of the PCUSA

Last Friday night I returned from a week of meetings with Presbyterian Church, USA (PCUSA), leaders in Louisville, KY. It was a joint meeting of middle governing bodies (MGB) and the General Assembly Council (GAC). I thought I’d offer some reflections but for those of you not familiar with Presbyspeak, which includes most Presbyterians when we start talking about the national church, I’ll spell this out more.

Overview

We start with the General Assembly. The General Assembly (GA) is a nationally representative body of pastors and elders that meets every two years to make policy decisions for the national church. The General Assembly Council (GAC), of which I have been a member for three years, is the “mission board” of the denomination. It doubles as the board of directors. It meets three times in years with a GA meeting and twice in off years. If it helps, think of the GA as the annual shareholders meeting and the GAC as the board of directors. “Middle governing body” refers to synods and presbyteries. There are nearly 11,000 congregations grouped in more than 170 presbyteries grouped in 16 synods.

My Schedule Last Week

I arrived in Louisville Monday morning for some pre-meeting work with the Restricted Funds Oversight Committee, the entity responsible for reviewing applications for grants from restricted donations people have made to the denomination. Tuesday afternoon kicked off the start of the joint meeting of the MGB executives and the GAC. The Presbyterian Center, the denomination’s national office, had an open house for a couple of hours. Then we met jointly until Wednesday afternoon. Wednesday afternoon until Friday afternoon was the meeting of the GAC.

Middle Governing Bodies

Last September was the first ever joint meeting of the MGBs with the GAC and up to that point the relationships between the two groups has not been ideal. There was (is?) animosity toward the GAC because it has been perceived as an unresponsive and imperialist institution. There has been frustration by the GAC over a perceived lack of support and loyalty to the work of national church. Through a visioning process culminating in early 2006 the GAC concluded, with input from MGB executives, that the path to vitality for denominational mission is vital congregations. Presbyteries and synods exist primarily to nurture congregations and do work which best be at its level of coordination. The GAC exist primarily to nurture MGBs and to do the work that cannot best be done by more localized entities of the denomination. Everything must be done in partnership. That means actually talking to each other and having a collaborative relationship.

The first meeting was a little rocky. I felt this second meeting was more cordial and substantive. What I find encouraging is that I don’t think the MGB executives and the GAC members are that far apart in their perceptions of basic problems. I wouldn’t describe the situation as warm fuzzies between the two entities but the trajectory of the relationships is good and improving.

General Assembly Council Past

When the GAC was formed in the 1980s the vision was that it would develop into a full-service ministry center offering an extensive smorgasbord of services to the broader church. The result was a bloated and unfocused entity in era of declining income and increasing anxiety. By the late 1990s the GAC experienced a series of significant staff cutbacks and service retrenchments.

During this time the GAC became a factional body consisting of more than 70 elected representatives. The elected officials were divided up into committees where they extensively reviewed the work of one division of the operations but heard only reports back from committees reviewing other divisions. The effect was to create competing factions or “silos” where elected members tended to advocate for their area of oversight to the exclusion of discerning the needs of the whole GAC. Furthermore, it was not uncommon to see elected members inserting themselves into operational matters that were none of their business.

The momentum had shifted toward correcting these issues just before I arrived on the GAC in the summer of 2004. While I confess I still often find the work at the GAC very frustrating it is nothing like it was even three years ago and the general trajectory of change is good. The GAC created its first ever mission work plan for the calendar 2005-2006. I was a part of the 2007-2008 mission work plan group and I’m currently part of the 2009-2010 mission work plan group.

The 2007-2008 mission work plan, for the first time, identified broad goals and objectives for the entire work of the GAC. The plan was largely complete by the end of 2005. The next step was for staff to create measurable outcomes for the programmatic work they do and then bring these back to the GAC for prioritization. The goal was to create an environment where there is broad latitude in operational decisions but accountability to agreed upon outcomes.

Unfortunately, just as we reached the end of 2005 it became clear that there was going to be an income shortfall upwards of 10 million dollars (Nearly 10% of the budget). Staff attention was diverted from thinking about outcomes to figuring out how to cut the budget. The mission work plan was then pressed into service as programmatic priority setting tool for budget cuts. One quarter of the staff was let go, all of the senior management resigned their positions, and the operational structure was greatly altered. The new executive director, Linda Valentine, come on board in June of last year and spent the next several months hiring senior staff for the newly configured operations.

Meanwhile, a governance task force meeting in 2005 recommended significant changes that paralleled many of the changes the mission work plan had sought to address. The council would be reduced from 70+ voting members to less than 40. Narrow division into subcommittee “silos” would be eliminated. The GAC is currently in transition. It now has 50+ voting members but will be at its new streamlined level starting in 2008.

General Assembly Council Present

So where are we now? First, the most of the senior staff are now in place and the Center is returning to fully staffed operational status. The leadership exhibited so far is very encouraging. Valentine sums up the core commitments of staff with the acronym C.A.R.E.: collaborative, accountable, responsive, excellence. There is evidence of these values in the climate of the work being done. There is now more forward looking energy and less present oriented anxiety.

Second, we are still without outcomes and priorities. The budget cut crisis of early 2006 and the subsequent staff turnover/reconfiguration have knocked the mission work plan process of the tracks. Only now are we beginning to get back on track toward developing a process for creating outcomes and prioritizing them. So now having staff in place, the elected leadership must return to establishing healthy priority setting and oversight mechanisms.

Third, there are positive signs. It appears that giving has stabilized after years of annual decline, at least that is the case through August. Special offerings as of August are up 5%. Shared mission support and directed mission support combined are also up more than 5%. Ongoing responses in dollars and volunteerism to the Katrina disaster are making quite a reputation for Presbyterians. The international missions office had set a goal of intenerating missionaries in about 122 presbyteries with an average of 4 visits per presbytery. They presently have more than 140 presbyteries signed up with an average of 5 visits per presbytery, thus virtually maxing out their ability to meet the demand. I had a wonderful conversation with the new church development folks where I learned about new strategies that are being promoted that are less costly and with a higher likelihood of success.

Furthermore, under the able leadership of Karen Schmidt, Deputy Executive Director of Communications, the communication of the GAC is about to make major leaps forward. Starting next month you are going to see a well integrated campaign called “Mission Challenge 2007.” It will educate the entire church on the mission work done collaboratively by the GAC. For a taste of just one aspect of this project visit www.pcusa.org/mission, or click on the logo to see the pilot site that allows you to contribute directly to global mission, to mission in a region of the world, or even to a particular missionary. An option for recurring giving will be up within a week.

As this site goes fully operational in October, missionaries will be visiting presbyteries. High quality DVD’s explaining the mission work of the GAC in the US and internationally will be distributed throughout the denomination. (I’ve seem ‘em. They’re great! The one highlighting domestic mission efforts has a clip about Hot Metal Bridge.) Bulletin inserts are going to be mailed out to every church that explains the mission work of the GAC and how congregants can contribute to the mission work of the PCUSA. It starts by encouraging Presbyterians to get personally involved and increase their contribution to their local congregation. It suggests that elders consider increasing or redirecting mission funds to the mission work of the denomination. Communication and joint fund development is finally coming together.

There are other good things happening in various arms of the GAC. I’ve highlighted just a few. There are still lots of problems and organizational challenges. Collaborative integration with MGBs and other entities is starting but has far to go. My overall assessment is that the trajectory has changed and at this meeting we are beginning to see the first solid evidence of that.

What does the future hold? Who knows? For the first time I have a sense we are turning a corner but I just can’t see around the bend. There is still much work to do but there are hopeful signs beginning to emerge.

Pics and Links

Here are two pics from our meeting. Tuesday night we honored Clifton Kirkpatrick, Gary Torrens, and Elenora Giddings-Ivory, who all have impending departures. Here is Clifton Kirkpatrick addressing the folks.

We heard an update Thursday on the financial situation at Stony Point Camp and Conference Center. You see Carolyn Knight and Frank Adams on the left, vice-moderator and moderator respecitvely of the Stewardship and Shared Services committee on which I serve. Continuing to the right are Deputy Executive Director for Shared Services Joey Bailey, GAC member Mary Lynn Walters, Executive Director of the GAC Linda Valentine, Deputy Executive Director for Mission Tom Taylor, Program Director for Racial Ethnic and Women's Ministries/Presbyterian Women Rhashell Hunter, GAC members Dale Lindsay Morgan, Dave Van Arsdale, Linda Toth, and Tom Gillespie.

For more pics see the ones I posted on Tuesday. Here are links to some news reports about a few of our deliberations.

PNS: Consensus sought on communication strategy

PNS: Mission Funding Task Force outlines final report

PNS: Church as Family

PNS: Sea Change (New PC(USA) staff transform evangelism and world mission efforts)

PNS: GAC takes action on 126 mission positions

PNS: GAC takes steps to create a separate Presbyterian Disaster Assistance corporation

PNS: Presbyterians Today to remain under GAC

Christian Post: 'Tsunami' Hits Presbyterians; Dramatic Changes Ahead

Postmodern Youth Ministry Conference

I got back from PCUSA General Assembly Council meetings last night and then rushed out to Mid-America Nazarene University in Olathe, KS, for a worship service that was part of the Postmodern Youth Ministry conference being led their by Tony Jones of Emergent Village. The worship team from Jacob’s Well did the music and Mike King of YouthFront gave the message.

Here is a shot of Mike Crawford leading the worship team. He tells me they have finished the recording studio in the basement of the building and Jacob’s Well in July and are already booked up until April.

Here is Mike King delivering the message.

Here is a shot of Tony Jones with Kansas City Emergent Cohort diva, and fellow PCUSAer, Tera Yakel.

Tim Keel was there but he saw me coming and scooted out the door before I could snap him (Actually I think he had some little ones to get home to bed.) Don't forget to buy his first book just being released Intuitive Leadership: Embracing a Paradigm of Narrative, Metaphor, and Chaos. It was a great time and King seemed to think the conference was going well.

Household: "Head" as "Symbol of the Whole" and "Preeminence in Status"

I live in the American Midwest where agriculture is still a significant part of the culture. You occasionally run into cattle owners and when you do the conversation eventually turns to the question of how many “head” of cattle they own. Now we are not talking about cow heads. We are talking about how many complete cattle are owned. The head is the most visible and distinguishing feature for most mammals. We use the head to symbolize and identify the whole being. We use this language all the time about human beings. When a caterer prepares for an event she wants to know what the “head” count will be. The word for “head” in Latin is caput. We often speak of “per capita,” literally meaning “per head,” by which we mean “per person.”

“Head” can symbolically stand for the whole body. Therefore, metaphorically, whatever status is given to the head is symbolically true of the whole body. A body attached to a head with high status means the body also has high status. If the head’s status is diminished, then the body’s status is diminished as well. But it is also true that because the head is attached to the body, that if the body does something to affect status, then that change of status will be applied to the head as well. A person is an inseparable unity of parts but because the head is the most prominent and distinctive part of the body, it best symbolizes the whole person’s distinctiveness. Thus, to speak metaphorically in Greek culture of a person being the “head” of others, can refer to that person’s emblematic quality with regard to the rest of the people.

But there are at least two continuums we can use to measure someone’s prominence, or the degree to which someone “sticks out” above others: power and status. They often parallel each other in our culture but they are not the same. We say that Bill Gates is the “head” of Microsoft Corporation. We mean that A) Gates is the CEO/authority that “rules” Microsoft and that B) Gates is the most visible person at Microsoft and symbolizes the company. Therefore, we might ask, “I wonder what new operating system Bill Gates will develop next?” We know that Bill Gates will not literally develop the new system. The corporation will. Gates is emblematic of the corporation. Bill Gates “rules” Microsoft and he is the “head” of Microsoft because he symbolically represents and distinguishes the entire corporate entity to the world in a way no one else does.

But Bill Gates is emblematic because he “sticks out above” others on the dimensions of power and status. Power and status are so tightly wedded together for us that we find it hard to distinguish between the two. That creates a cross-cultural difficulty for us because in an honor and shame culture like the Greco-Roman world the two concepts are more distinct. (see earlier post on status). The top household slave of a Roman senator’s villa had considerable power. He would “stick out” above others he came into contact with. But the free Roman citizen artisan with little power would have had a higher status than this powerful slave. Deference would have been given to the slave because of his master’s status but the slave himself was of low status. Therefore, the slave might wield considerable power without status. The artisan would have little power but have higher status.

The Greeks appear to have used different language when they talked about prominence in terms of power and status. Prominence in power/authority seems to be indicated by the word arche. The word connoted the starting point, the point of origination, or point of commencement. It signifies the first item in an ordinal, chronological, or ranking sequence. Though anachronistic to say so, it seems to me that it has a mechanistic quality to it.

Prominence in status was indicated by the metaphor kephale (head). Kephale has a more organic, positional, and functional quality. The head is the visible and distinguishing part of the body that stands for the rest of the body but it is also atop the body, and therefore highest in elevation with regard to the rest of the body; it is preeminent. But the head also is the source of life (according to Greek anthropology) that sustains the body and from which the rest of the body emanates. It is an origin in an organic sustaining sense, not so much a mechanistic command and control sense.

The terms arche and kephale do overlap. Catherine Kroeger points out a line from Orphic poetry repeated by seven different Greek authors spanning a period of 1,600 years from 6oo B.C.E. to 1000 C.E. On four occasions it reads:

Zeus was born first, Zeus last, god of the bright bolt;
Zeus is the head [kephale], Zeus the middle, from Zeus all things are made.

On three occasions it reads:

Zeus is the beginning [arche], Zeus the middle, from Zeus all things are made.

Zeus is both first in a sequence and he is the source of life. Therefore, both arche and kephale are descriptive of him. Yet when the Greeks wished to talk narrowly about first in rank with authority and power, they seem predisposed to use words from the root arche. It seems when they wanted to indicate preeminence in status, first/highest in position of status, that which sticks out above the rest, and/or that from which qualities emanate as part of a functional organic whole, they used kephale.

I wrote earlier that there are a at least 180 instances of the Hebrew word rosh (head) being used metaphorically and frequently for “leader” or “chief” in the Hebrew Bible. There are only a handful of references where the Hebrew was used metaphorically and translated as its literal equivalent kephale in the Septuagint, the ancient Greek translation of the Hebrew bible. Let us take a look at those exceptions in light of what we have just said about arche and kephale.

Series Index

Great span in China's economic development over 5 years

People's Daily: Great span in China's economic development over 5 years (HT: PanAsianBiz)

Meanwhile, China went from having the sixth largest economy in the world, to the fourth, within four years. In 2002, China's GDP reached 12 trillion yuan (1.6 trillion US dollars); while in 2006, the GDP reached 21.1 trillion yuan (2.8 trillion US dollars), with an average increase of 2.3 trillion yuan every year.

With the increase in total quantity, China's GDP surpassed France and Britain in 2005 to rank the fourth in the world. In 2006, the Chinese economy maintained fourth place; while gaps between the US, Japan, and Germany became smaller.

In 2002, China's GDP was just 13.9% of that of the US, 37% of that of Japan, and 71.8% of that of Germany. However, in 2006, it was 20% of that of the US, 60.6% of that of Japan and 91.3% of that of Germany. China's GDP accounted for 4.4% of the world's total in 2002; while in 2006 it accounted for 5.5%.

China's per capita income has doubled and entered the middle income level internationally. In 2002, China's per capita income surpassed 1,000 US dollars for the first time to 1,100 dollars; while in 2006, the per capita income increased to 2,010 dollars – with an increase in ranking to 129th in the world, from 132nd position in 2002. According to World Bank standards, China is one of the middle income countries in the world. This indicates that China has made a solid step forward in the process of building an all-round healthy and wealthy society.

With regard to per capita income, it seems that when it reaches somewhere between $3,000-4,000 a year that demand for political reform picks up steam. People have more and more financial resources at risk and begin to institutionalize mechanisms that protect their wealth. Hold on to your seat. A bumpy ride may be on the horizon.

KC Emergent Cohort Location Change

From Tera Yakel

We are making a location change for our gathering on Friday night. We will now be meeting at Oklahoma Joe's BBQ in Olathe KS (map).

We are gathering at 6:00pm Friday, September 21st to have a conversation with Tony Jones (National Coordinator for Emergent Village) about what is happening and the future of Emergent. Following our dinner conversation many of us are planning on making the short trip over to Mid-America Nazarene University for a 8:00pm worship service that will be lead by the folks at Jacob's Well.

Houeshold: "Head" as "Origin" or "Source"

I wrote in my previous post that the head was not the bodily organ responsible for intellect and control in Greek. But what, then, is the function of the head with regard to the body? The head was the life giving source that animated the rest of the body. The body was understood to grow out of the body. If you think about the fact that food and water enter the mouth, air enters the nose, sight enters the eyes, and sound enters the ears, then this actually makes a lot of sense.

To give some historical examples of this notion of head I will quote at length an article by Katherine Kroeger published last year, Toward an Understanding of Ancient Conceptions of “Head” (Priscilla Papers, Vol. 20, no. 3, Summer 2006). Leading up to this passage she has pointed out that head can refer to the beginning point of something like the "headwaters" of a river.

Not only with respect to flowing water was the head considered the place of beginning. [headwaters] Aristotle himself declared that the head was the source of beginning of life, with human sperm being created in the head, traveling down the spinal cord, flowing into the genitals, and so procreating the human race. Thus, the ancient writers sometimes referred to sexual intercourse as “diminishing one’s head.” Artemidorus of Ephesus maintained that the head was the source of light and life for the whole body, so a father was the source of life for his son. “The head [kephale] is like one’s parents because it is the source or cause of one’s having life.” Shortly after the New Testament period, Plutarch told of those who thought the brain “to be the source of generation.” Philo, a Jewish contemporary of Jesus and Paul wrote, “As though he were the head of a living being. Esau is the progenitor of all those members who have been mentioned.”

Among other values, the head as the source of paternity was understood by the early Christian fathers. Irenaeus equates “head” with “source” when he writes of the head “head and source of his own being.” Hippolytus emphasized the productivity of this bodily member when he designated the head as the characteristic substance from which all people were made. He noted, “In the head is said to be the brain, formulating the being from which all fatherhood is produced.” Cosmas Indicopleustes (sixth century A.D.) called Adam the “head” of all people in this world because he was their source and father.

Photius, a ninth century Byzantine scholar, was renowned for his vast knowledge of classical authors and his preservation of numerous quotations from works that are now lost to us. He drew upon earlier scholars passionately committed to preserving classical Greek and promoting a continued knowledge of its words and forms. These works Photius edited and incorporated into a formidable lexicon intended as a reference book to aid later writers in understanding the vocabulary of classical and sacred authors. He quite specifically stated that “head” (kephale) was considered to be a synonym for procreator or progenitor. (p. 5)

Kroeger also presents this interesting quote from Augustine’s commentary on Galatians 5:22-23:

The Apostle Paul, when he wishes to commend the fruit of the spirit against the works of the flesh, puts them at the head: “The fruit of the spirit is love,” he said; and then the rest, as springing up from the head, are twined together. There are joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faith, perseverance, self-control and charity. (Translated from the Latin text in Ralph McInerny, Let’s Read Latin: Introduction to the Language of the Church (South Bend, Ind.: Dumb Ox Books), 99.)

She also writes:

The myth of Athena springing from the head of Zeus is known in story form, mosaics, frescoes, and vase paintings. Ancient Orphic burials sometimes contained figurines of the soul reemerging into the world after remaining nine years under the bosom of Persephone, Queen of the dead. From the head of the goddess sprout up new little heads, some surrounded by leaf buds as they grow to full reincarnation status. The theme of the head as the starting point for growth is unmistakable. (5)

Two of the eleven New Testament instances of fictive head appear to be exemplifying this metaphor for head.

Eph 4:15-16

15 But speaking the truth in love, we must grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, 16 from whom the whole body,  joined and knit together by every ligament with which it is equipped, as each part is working properly, promotes the body's growth in building itself up in love.

Col 2:18-19

18 Do not let anyone disqualify you, insisting on self-abasement and worship of angels, dwelling on visions, puffed up without cause by a human way of thinking, 19 and not holding fast to the head, from whom the whole body, nourished and held together by its ligaments and sinews, grows with a growth that is from God.

It seems likely that the Epheisans passage has this idea of head in mind. The idea of "growing up into the head" is very similar to our notion of "sinking our roots down." The Colossians passage seems to be a very close match. So at least in some cases and in some sense, New Testament fictive references to head appear to be related to the Greek anthropology of head as "life-giving source." But this metaphor does not seem to apply in other New Testament passages. We need to dig a little deeper.

(Also see Heads, you Win by Suzanne McCarthy and Heart and Soul by J. K. Gayle.)

Series Index

Colleges and Universities Fail at Teaching American Civics

Acton PowerBlog (Ray Nothstine): Colleges and Universities Fail at Teaching American Civics

“Is American higher education doing its duty to prepare the next generation to keep America free?” Apparently not, according to researchers at the University of Connecticut’s Department of Public Policy (UConnDPP), in a study commissioned by the Intercollegiate Studies Institute’s (ISI) National Civic Literacy Program.

In a survey of 14,000 freshman and seniors at 50 colleges and universities across the country, every school scored poorly. Also, college seniors, sadly, scored little better than freshman. The average senior score was a failing 53.2%; the average freshman score was 51.7%. In fact, no school scored higher than a D+. The top ten school are listed below:

1. Harvard University 69.56%
2. Grove City College (PA) 67.26
3. Washington & Lee University (VA) 66.98
4. Yale University 65.85
5. Brown University 65.64
6. University of Virginia 65.28
7. Wheaton College (IL) 64.98
8. University of Pennsylvania 63.49
9. Duke University 63.41
10. Bowdoin College (ME) 62.86

..........

You can take the quiz here, and see how you measure up against American college students.

I took the test. Got a 96.67%. I wonder how students in earlier generations would have don on such a test? How much has changed and how much of it is that fact that social science geeks like me have always only been the ones who focus on this stuff?

Sept. KC Emergent Cohort

KC Emergent Cohort: Sept. KC Emergent Cohort

We will be gathering on Friday, September 21st at 6:00pm with Tony Jones, National Coordinator for Emergent Village. Tony is in town speaking at the Postmodern Youth Ministry conference.

We will be having dinner (or whatever you want to order) at Perkins restaurant on Santa Fe Street in Olathe. Take exit #218 from I-35 and the Perkins is located about 2 blocks east. See map here.

We are looking forward to a good discussion with Tony about what is happening with Emergent now and what the future looks like.

Hope to see you all there. If you have any questions, just let me know.

My flight gets in from Louisville at 6:00. I might see if I can get there but it ain't looking promising.

"Compassion, Justice, and Christian Life" Book Review

Yogi Berra once said, “To say a player has potential means he hasn’t done it yet.” There are lots of folks offering ideas about Christian community development they say have potential for transforming communities. Bob Lupton doesn’t just have potential ideas. He has done it for more than thirty years in Atlanta. I’ve been following his work since I first became aware of him at Eastern University twenty years ago.

Last spring he published Compassion, Justice, and Christian Life: Rethinking Ministry to the Poor, a short but powerful book reflecting on the essentials of Christian Community development. Unlike so many activists, Lupton understands basic economic realities and incorporates them into his development strategies. Bottom line, Lupton sees people as the image of God. We are all called to stewardship and the poor have been excluded from that call. They must be reintegrated into the world of markets and exchange to become restored stewards and images of God. True transformation of the poor, in economic terms, occurs when people become responsible for themselves, not when they are made objects of romanticism and pity as is so frequently happens with many social justice advocates. Lupton writes:

Remember your last garage sale? Or the last antique bargain you purchased at a flea market? Or the last car you traded? How is it that when a transaction is done well both purchaser and seller come away with a sense of gain? It’s the magic of exchange. And it transcends the boundaries of age and gender, race and class. Whether the find is a rare Babe Ruth baseball card, a silk blouse reduced for quick sale or the perfect piece of land at the right price, the ecstasy of exchange is for all to enjoy.

Exchange is remarkably invigorating process. The very thought of acquiring a new treasure motivates us to calculate value, rearrange priorities, juggle finances, analyze past performance and make predictions about the future. And ultimately, it pushes us to the risky edge of letting go of something valued in the hopes of gaining that which will be of greater worth to us.

However, when the labor you offer is unneeded in the marketplace of when your abilities area worth less to employers than the amount of your welfare check, you are exchange-less. Indeed, poverty may be defined as having little of value to exchange. And when society subsidizes you for being a noncontributor, it has added insult to your already injured self-esteem. (43-44)

Later he writes:

…the time has finally arrived when we can venture out from behind our timidity and admit to ourselves that inequities are not necessarily the same as injustices – which is in no way to minimize the damaging effects of injustice. To be sure, many inequities are created by human malevolence, but many more, perhaps most, are not.

To pretend that, given equal opportunity, all people could do equally well is a romantic and altogether unhelpful notion. Our hearts may desire it to be so and political correctness may keep us from publicly saying otherwise, but kindhearted denial is hardly a kindness. We are equal neither in capacity nor potential. We are equal only in responsibility.

Of course, there will always be those among us who must rely on the responsibility of others – infants, Alzheimer’s patients, the severely brain-damaged. But for the rest of us we are responsible to do the best with the uneven hands we have been dealt. Remove the personal accountability and atrophy of the spirit sets in. (71-72)

Then there are his great little one-liners that I have enjoyed reading over the years:

Good neighbors are preferable to good programs any day. And they’re a whole lot cheaper. (93)

In the next to last section of the book he writes:

The marketplace gifts, often unappreciated by the softer sciences, are essential to the transformation suggested in the preceding pages. Thus, my parting words are directed specifically to those who make their living in the marketplace. (111) [Unappreciated? Kind of like Darth Vader was "unppreciated" by the rebel alliance. J]

Chapter Seven's story about a clothes closet ministry that degenerated into a power struggle between providers and clients until a group of Methodist businessmen got involved and evolved markets is priceless.

Lupton is an exceptionally engaging and lucid writer. At 140 pages this is a very quick read but there is enough here to set your brain spinning for days. It gives a window into what Christian community development could like based on tried and true methods. I highly recommend this book.

You can learn more about Robert Lupton and Family Consultation Services (FCS) Urban Ministries. You can also sign up for his monthly Urban Perspectives newsletters and read issues dating back to 1993. 

From the book’s back cover:

ROBERT D. LUPTON has invested more than 34 years in inner city Atlanta. He is a Christian community developer, an entrepreneur who brings together communities of resource with communities of need. Through Family Consultation Service Urban Ministries, which he directs, he has developed three mixed-income subdivisions, organized two multiracial congregations, started many businesses, created housing for hundreds of families and initiated a wide variety of human services. He earned a Ph.D. in psychology from the University of Georgia. He speaks at conferences and churches across the nation, and consults with similar missions.

GAC/MGB Joint Meeting Underway

We kicked off the General Assembly Council and Middle Governing Body joint meeting today at the Presbyterian Church, USA, offices in Louisville, KY. I don't know that exact number of MGB executives that are here but they are many.

There was an open house from 1-3 at the Center and then some business from 3-5. We broke for supper and then went back to work from 6-9:30. I'll have more to say about content later but I thought I would share a few picks I took this afternoon.

Here is view of the PCUSA Center at 100 Witherspoon Place.

The lobby area had folks coming and going. Here is Curtis Kearns, Executive Administrator, in conversation.

... and here is Charles Wiley of Theology, Worship and Education in conversation with a visiting exec. ...

... and Tom Taylor, Deputy Executive Director for Mission (on the Right).

I finally ventured out of the lobby to visit the various displays. Here are a just a couple of pics. First is the folks at Racial, Ethnic, and Women's Ministry.

This is Dianna Ott and her team for Internet Services in conversation with visitors.

Then I managed to capture Director for Theology, Worship and Education, Joe Small, in his natural habitat.

In my estimation, Joe won the award for the best display. He had this on the top of his bookshelf.

On the left we have a John Calvin Bobblehead and on the right a bottle of Calvinus beer, two essentials for doing Reformed theology.

Finally, here we were, all together, in our business meeting in the chapel area late in the afternoon.

More later...

Social business enterprises can alleviate poverty

Business Daily Africa: Social business enterprises can alleviate poverty

18-September-2007: Despite many advances global poverty persists. Models that rely on government action or capitalism narrowly defined as maximization of financial profit are limited in their ability to put poverty where it belongs – in a museum.

The key missing links are grassroots, private sector approaches that focus on the poorest of the poor, but in a way that is businesslike and allows for preservation of investor capital and financial sustainability over time.

The potential of ‘social business enterprises’ formed along these lines can make a major impact on the global poverty crisis. ...

"Proposals for Health Care Stasis" Arnold Kling

EconLog: Proposals for Health Care Stasis by Arnold Kling

Now that Hillary Clinton has released her health care plan, it occurs to me that "health care reform" has become an Orwellian term. Her proposal, like those of other Democrats, would take our existing form of health insurance--what I call insulation --and try to extend it to everyone.

Consider three ways that medical decisions can be made:

1. Put bureaucrats in charge of spending the money and making the decisions.

2. Put consumers in charge of spending the money and making the decisions.

3. Use insurance to try to separate the issue of spending the money from the process of making medical choices.

Our current approach is to use (3). This means that we spend lots of money, with Hansonian consequences.

What I would like to see is different states experiment with (1) and (2). My own preference is for (2), but it is possible that (1) would work out better than (3). In any case, the "reform" plans would foreclose any experimentation of any sort. They should be called stasis plans.

The Future of Space Exploration

Scientific American: The Future of Space Exploration

The launch of the Soviet Sputnik satellite half a century ago inaugurated the Space Age. What comes next?

When people talk about a moment being burned into memory, they usually mean it in a negative way: President John F. Kennedy’s assassination, Princess Diana’s fatal car crash, 9/11. The launch of Sputnik 50 years ago this month was different. It certainly had its negative side: no one likes to wake up to find that your nuclear adversary has thrown a shiny ball over your head and that you can’t do a thing about it. But the dawn of the Space Age was also a hopeful event. Visionaries celebrated humanity’s long-awaited climb out of its cradle, and pragmatists soon savored the benefits of communications and weather satellites. Many of today’s scientists and engineers trace their life’s passions to that fast-moving dot in the night sky.

“In his millennia of looking at the stars, man has never faced so exciting a challenge as the year 1957 has suddenly thrust upon him,” astronomers Fred L. Whipple and J. Allen Hynek wrote in the December 1957 issue of Scientific American.

The evolution of the space program continues to be dramatic. In a decade or so, it will be hardly recognizable. The shuttle, which for all its faults is the most sophisticated flying machine ever built, will be a thing of the past. NASA is moving to the Constellation system, which is basically a high-tech dusting off of the Apollo rockets and capsules. Whereas the shuttle is an ambitious spacecraft with modest goals (providing regular delivery-van service to orbit), Constellation is a modest spacecraft with ambitious goals: building a moon base, visiting an asteroid and eventually establishing human settlements on Mars. NASA Administrator Michael Griffin is steering a slow but steady course that he argues can be sustained on a limited budget—an approach that many commentators wish his predecessors had pursued 30 years ago. ...

Household: Household Code Lost in Translation: Kephale

We have now examined the household codes in 1 Peter and in Titus. It’s now time to turn to the household codes presented in Ephesians and Colossians. These codes present a major challenge because of one word metaphor: kephale, meaning “head.” The word is used several times in the New Testament and the majority of instances are referring to a literal head. But there are eleven instances where head is used metaphorically and two are in the Ephesians’ household code (Ephesians 5:23).

A whole theology of “headship” has built up around this metaphor. Husbands are told to be in authority because Ephesians says they are to be the “head” of the house and women are to submit to their husband's “headship.” In other words, head is synonymous with “rule” or “authority.” Now many who hold to this understanding insist on what is called “soft patriarchy.” There is to be leadership by the husband but it is of servant-leadership variety, not domination.

This is not an unreasonable reading of the passage if we rely upon our Western English metaphors for the word “head.” The human head is where the brain resides and it directs the functioning of the body. The “head” of a corporation or government is the one with the power to call the shots just like a physical head controls the body. Therefore, when we read Ephesians 5:23 and see, “For the husband is the head of the wife just as Christ is the head of the church, the body of which he is the Savior,” the teaching is clear. The husband is to be in authority over his wife as Christ is in authority over the church. But please note the “if” in the first sentence of this paragraph: …if we rely upon our Western English metaphors for the word “head.”

This raises a critical question: Would Greek speaking people have had the same understanding of “head” metaphors that we do? While there is overlap the answer is no.

Let's start with physical anthropology. We routinely contrast “head” and “heart” as “rational” and “emotional” respectively. But in the Greek world, rational thought, emotions and will metaphorically came from the heart. In fact, borrowing from Hebrew anthropology, Jesus suggests that he will metaphorically investigate another bodily organ to learn our innermost character:

And all the churches will know that I am the one who searches minds (nephros) and hearts (kardias), … Rev 2:23

Nephros is literally “kidneys” and figuratively “innermost thoughts.”

Search all you want to in the New Testament, you will not find one instance of “head” as a metaphor for reason or bodily control. Search for “heart/hearts” and you will find it used metaphorically for actions we view as coming from heart and head. Luke 2:19 says “But Mary treasured all these words and pondered them in her …” Head? No. “…heart.” Scot McKnight, in his book about Mary, points out that “pondered in the heart” is precisely the language that would be used to describe the work of Rabbis and teachers as they reflected on events and tried to make coherent sense of them. This was not Mary sentimentally emoting about what had happened to her.

Greek anthropology does not match ours. “Head” was not the controlling organ of the body. But could head still have meant "one who exercises authority or rules?" Yes. In fact, we know that it had this metaphorical connotation in both Hebrew and Latin, just as it does in English. Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and English seem to have some metaphorical similarities. Head can mean the beginning point: “The headwaters of a river.” It can mean preeminence: “The valedictorian was at the head of her class.” It can mean first in position: “He raced to the ticket window so he could be at the head of the line.” It can mean prominence: “The theater attendant took a head count.” (“Head” symbolically representing the whole person but being the most visible and distinguishing characteristic of a person.) So what about “ruler” or “authority?”

Gordon Fee writes:

The clearest evidence for the real differences between the Jewish and Greek metaphorical uses is to be found in the Septuagint (LXX). In the hundreds of places where the Hebrew rosh is used for the literal head on a body, the translators invariably used the only word in Greek that means the same thing, kephale. But in the approximately 180 times it appears as a metaphor for the leader or chieftain, they almost always [six exceptions] eliminate the metaphor altogether and translate it arche (“leader”), which is evidence that they were uncomfortable with (unfamiliar with?) the Jewish metaphor and simply translated it out. (“Praying and Prophesying in the Assemblies” in Discovering Biblical Equality. 150, fn 28)

In a similar analysis, Andrew Perriman finds eleven cases where a metaphorical us of rosh was translated kephale in the Septuagint but none of the examples carry the connotation of authority or ruler. More on that later. Further evidence comes from the language surrounding the “ruler of the synagogue” in first century Judaism. The Hebrew title is rosh ha-keneset or "head" (rosh) "of the assembly" (ha-keneset). If kephale carried the same metaphorical meaning in Greek, then we would expect to find a title that combined  kephale and synagoge (the gathering). But instead we find archisynagogos, or "leader/ruler" (arche) of "the assembly" (synagogos).

Therefore, if we are to truly understand the household code in Ephesians 5 and 6, we must wrestle a bit with the “head” metaphor. A look at the use of the “head” metaphor in Greek outside the New Testament will help us bettre understand the biblical metaphor. There are two predominate views among those who reject the head=ruler metaphor. One sees “head” used to symbolize "origin" and "source." The other believes it is "preeminence" and "prominence." Either or both of these interpretations is at work in the Biblical metaphors but I suspect that the preeminence and prominence metaphor is the primary image. I will unfold this in coming posts but first I have cataloged the fictive head references in the New Testament. Ten are used by Paul and one by Peter (assuming traditional authorship.)

1 Cor 11:3

But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the husband is the head of his wife, and God is the head of Christ.

Eph 1:22-23

22 And he has put all things under his feet and has made him the head over all things for the church, 23 which is his body, the fullness of him who fills all in all.

Eph 4:15-16

15 But speaking the truth in love, we must grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, 16 from whom the whole body,  joined and knit together by every ligament with which it is equipped, as each part is working properly, promotes the body's growth in building itself up in love.

Eph 5:22-23

22 Wives, be subject to your husbands as you are to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife just as Christ is the head of the church, the body of which he is the Savior.

Col 1:18

He is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that he might come to have first place in everything.

Col 2:9-10

9 For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily, 10 and you have come to fullness in him, who is the head of every ruler and authority.

Col 2:18-19

18 Do not let anyone disqualify you, insisting on self-abasement and worship of angels, dwelling on visions, puffed up without cause by a human way of thinking, 19 and not holding fast to the head, from whom the whole body, nourished and held together by its ligaments and sinews, grows with a growth that is from God.

1 Peter 2:6-7

6 For it stands in scripture:

"See, I am laying in Zion a stone,
a cornerstone chosen and precious;
and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame."

7 To you then who believe, he is precious; but for those who do not believe,

"The stone that the builders rejected
has become the very head of the corner, ..."

Series Index

Amazon Farmers Grow Grain and Save the Forest

Christian Science Monitor: Amazon Farmers Grow Grain and Save the Forest

McDonald's, Cargill, and The Nature Conservancy create a 'responsible' soy program.

Santarem, Brazil - You might call it the greening of Chicken McNuggets.

At first glance, there seems little common ground between fast-food giant McDonald's, US commodities multinational Cargill, and The Nature Conservancy, an environmental group.

But here in the Brazilian Amazon, all three are working together to help soy farmers produce grains without cutting down the forest.

In fact, under the Responsible Soy Project, farmers in two municipalities in the northern Amazon can only sell soy to Cargill if they promise to plant trees on denuded land. McDonald's, which buys chicken fed with Brazilian soy, set that condition after pressure from environmental groups and consumers. The Nature Conservancy, with $390,000 from Cargill, assists all sides and oversees compliance.

It is, conservationists say, a potential model for sustainable development not just in the Amazon but all over Brazil, home to the world's largest rain forest. ...

eHarmony does what tech ought to do

Fortune: eHarmony does what tech ought to do

This matchmaking dotcom succeeds with its aim of creating happy marriages. Software for soft stuff - it would be nice if there was more.

(Fortune) -- Most dotcoms don't arise from anything so touchy-feely as a desire to lower America's divorce rate. But eHarmony is a singular Internet company - one that shows how many great business opportunities remain for those who can creatively apply technology to basic societal challenges.

This 7-year-old online matchmaking startup has revenues of almost $200 million annually, and is "very, very profitable," according to its CEO Greg Waldorf, with whom I spent a fascinating lunch recently.

eHarmony was started by Dr. Neil Warren, a psychologist who, after counseling thousands of married couples, came to the less-than-earth-shaking conclusion that the single biggest factor that determines a marriage's success is picking the right partner. And he thought of something he could do about it. So he started the company with that unconventional corporate purpose. He found a bunch of programmers and went to work.

So now, for $59 a month or $251 for a full year, members can take advantage of eHarmony's sophisticated matching algorithms. The software analyzes your answers to 250 questions, which all members tackle when they join, to figure out who you might work well with. About 15,000 people submit their answers on an average day.

But you won't necessarily be matched with someone who answered the same way you did. eHarmony employs five Ph.D. researchers who are constantly tweaking the software based on their latest findings .They work with the couples and individuals and publish some of their research in scientific journals. The company hopes that its matches get people into the top quartile of marital satisfaction. ....

I'm Off to Louisville and the GAC Meeting

I’m in Louisville, KY, all this week for a joint meeting of the Middle Governing Body executives and the General Assembly Council of the Presbyterian Church, USA. I expect I will have some reports for you along the way. Today is pre-gathering work with the Restricted Funds Oversight Committee where we will be reviewing applications for allocation of restricted funds. MGB stuff starts on Tuesday.

Anyway, responses to comments may be a little more erratic than usual and their may be fewer posts. I have already written a post for each day this week, four on the “Household of God” and one book review. We will see how it goes with additional posts.

Prayers are welcomed!

Household: Household Code in Titus

Another household code passage in the New Testament is Titus Chapter 2. Titus 1:1-4 says the letter is written by Paul to Titus who is working in Crete. (I’m very much aware that many scholars believe this letter was from the late first century and pseudographical but for the sake of simplicity I will simply refer to the author as Paul.) The people of Crete were known for their licentious unruly behavior. The central focus of the letter is errant doctrine taught by some Jewish teachers . The letter is to instruct Titus on to lead the community with sound instruction into holy living that is beyond reproach. The second chapter is where we find the household code:

1 But as for you, teach what is consistent with sound doctrine. 2 Tell the older men to be temperate, serious, prudent, and sound in faith, in love, and in endurance.

3 Likewise, tell the older women to be reverent in behavior, not to be slanderers or slaves to drink; they are to teach what is good, 4 so that they may encourage the young women to love their husbands, to love their children, 5 to be self-controlled, chaste, good managers of the household, kind, being submissive to their husbands, so that the word of God may not be discredited.

6 Likewise, urge the younger men to be self-controlled. 7 Show yourself in all respects a model of good works, and in your teaching show integrity, gravity, 8 and sound speech that cannot be censured; then any opponent will be put to shame, having nothing evil to say of us.

9 Tell slaves to be submissive to their masters and to give satisfaction in every respect; they are not to talk back, 10 not to pilfer, but to show complete and perfect fidelity, so that in everything they may be an ornament to the doctrine of God our Savior.

11 For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all,  12 training us to renounce impiety and worldly passions, and in the present age to live lives that are self-controlled, upright, and godly, 13 while we wait for the blessed hope and the manifestation of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ. 14 He it is who gave himself for us that he might redeem us from all iniquity and purify for himself a people of his own who are zealous for good deeds.

15 Declare these things; exhort and reprove with all authority. Let no one look down on you. (NRSV)

Because we are not of this culture, must of us overlook a very important cultural issue at play here. Titus is the teacher. He has four groups of (free) people he must teach. They're listed in this order: older men, older women, younger women, younger men. It was socially taboo for a man to teach young women, especially unmarried women. Titus would have been seen as a womanizer. (According to Kenneth Bailey, it is still true throughout much of the Middle East today.) Therefore, instruction for younger women fell upon elder women. There is no prohibition of women teaching men implied at all in this passage. The implied prohibition is on men teaching young women and thus bringing scandal upon the church. The passage is about four teacher-to-student relationships:

Teacher: Titus
Student: older men (v. 2)

Teacher: Titus
Student: older women (v.3)

Teacher: older women
Student: younger women (vs. 4-5)

Teacher: Titus
Student: younger men (v. 6)

The desire to avoid scandal and licentious behavior is apparent in the instruction on what the older women should teach the younger women:

… 4 so that they may encourage the young women to love their husbands, to love their children, 5 to be self-controlled, chaste, good managers of the household, kind, being submissive to their husbands, ….

Why? Because Eve was created second and to be Adam’s helper? Because women are more easily deceived and need to be under the authority of a man? No!

… so that the word of God may not be discredited.

Paul is similarly concerned about that the young men behave well because:

…then any opponent will be put to shame, having nothing evil to say of us.

There is a strong missional component to these instructions. We see the same emphasis with the instruction to the slaves.

Tell slaves to be submissive to their masters and to give satisfaction in every respect; they are not to talk back, not to pilfer, but to show complete and perfect fidelity, …

Why?

….so that in everything they may be an ornament to the doctrine of God our Savior.

In other words, their behavior will ornament and give validity to sound teaching and the new creation.

It is interesting that the word hupotassesthai (be submissive) is used here, as well as in verse 5. (Forms of huppotasso are used in 1 Peter to reflect the attitude toward government (2:13), of slaves toward masters (2:18) and of wives toward husbands (3:1, 5)) This word indicates a person who chooses of their own volition to place them self lower in rank to someone else. According to Greco-Roman household codes, women and slaves did not choose to be lower in rank, they were lower in rank. Thus, it was not necessary to address women and salves, but it was necessary in Christian community where all are siblings in Christ and of the same status.

This household code in Titus differs from others in the Bible in that it is instruction to an instructor on how to teach the household code. Still, the same three contrasts we made between 1 Peter’s code and the Greco-Roman code apply here:

1. The code is not based on a desire to protect the social order or gain conformity to some ordained order of the world.
2. Nowhere is the paterfamilias told to rule his household.
3. Members of the household, like women and slaves, are treated as free moral agents who have the ability to choose how to behave within the household.

The call is to abandon the host culture’s obsession with status seeking in other-centered missional love, so that “the word of God may not be discredited,” “any opponent will be put to shame, having nothing evil to say of us,” and “in everything they may be an ornament to the doctrine of God our Savior.” The household code is missional.

Series Index

64111: Danny Edward's Blvd. Barbecue

For decades Danny Edwards Famous Kansas City Barbecue has been in business at 1227 Grand in downtown Kansas City, MO, but with the advent of the new Sprint Center all that has changed. The joint has now moved out to Southwest Blvd. at the intersection of 29th and Southwest Blvd., just south of Ponak's (another favorite of mine.) Melissa and I know the Edwards from church and went to eat lunch at the new place on this their opening day. We were one of the first ten people served.

The food is great (the meat is wonderfully tender) and the new place eating space is a lot of fun. The place is just to the north of 64111 but with a nice breeze from the north I'm counting on the wonderful aroma of barbecue wafting up the hill to my house for years to come.

64111: New Kruse Kronicle Feature

I love where I live. I live in Zip Code area 64111, Kansas City, MO. Starting this week I plan to include a post (weekly?) about events, places, or people in or near my zip code. So if you see a post that begins with 64111, you'll now know what it is.

Below is a map of 64111 I took off of Google Earth. It forms an aproximate rectangle with 31st on the north, 46th St  on the south, the state line on the west, and Oak St. on the east. That is me in my house hiding under the red dot near the top of the map.

Magical Thinking and Management

Wally Bock's Three Star Leadership Blog: Magical Thinking and Management

Jerry was one of our best salespeople, even if he was a little strange.

Before he went in to a customer's office he went through an elaborate ritual that involved rolling his shoulders, touching his toes and wiggling his fingers. "It looks weird," he would say, "but it helps me sell."

Jerry was doing what lots of people do. He was connecting some practice, routine, or ritual to his success even though there was no actual, causal connection between them. Some scientists, such as Pascal Boyer, a professor of psychology and anthropology at Washington University in St. Louis, think that our brains may actually be wired to make connections like this.

It's called magical thinking. Magical thinking is non-scientific causal reasoning. Magical thinking connects the dots between action and result without worrying overmuch if the action and result are actually connected in some kind of causal way.

That's not always a bad thing. The confidence that Jerry got from doing his ritual probably contributed to his stellar sales record. The high school coach who won't change his clothes while his team is winning probably feels that he's doing absolutely everything he can for them.

But in management, magical thinking can be dangerous. Making decisions and committing resources without checking the facts can put you on the slippery slope to failure. Here are three kinds of magical thinking that are especially common. ....

Russia creates environmentally friendly WMD

Magic Statistics (Scott Gilbreath): Russia creates environmentally friendly WMD

Russia claims to have developed the world’s most effective vacuum bomb.  It’s said to be as deadly as a nuclear bomb but, unlike nukes, it causes minimal damage to the environment.

From the second item in today’s Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty Newsline Russia:

Colonel General Aleksandr Rukshin, the deputy chief of the Russian Armed Forces General Staff, said in Moscow on September 11 that Russia has created the world's most powerful vacuum bomb, as lethal as a nuclear weapon, Russian state-run television reported. Rukshin said the bomb causes widespread devastation but does not contaminate the environment. He described it as "environmentally friendly, compared to a nuclear bomb.”

Is it just me or does it feel like we are living a Federico Fellini movie?

Should Christians Give Markets Another Chance?

The Other Journal: Should Christians Give Markets Another Chance? Kathryn Blanchard. (HT: Jordan Ballor)

This is an exceptional article. Here is a Professor of Religious Studies who has clearly wrestled with basic economic concepts and learned the language of economics talking to other academics from a theological perspective. (Be still my racing heart.) I'm not sure I'm with her on every point but the overall thrust and many of the specific points are just wonderful. And here is the kicker. She is a Presbyterian!

You know, having seen the work that people like Joe Small and Marcia Clark Myers are doing on vocation at the General Assembly Council, learning more about what PCUSAers David Miller and Miroslav Volf are saying about markets, work, and vocation at Yale, and after reading an article like this one by a Presbyterian Religious Studies professor, it is enough to make me want to become Presbyterian ... oh ... wait .....   J Anyway, here are a few excerpts.

Markets, like guns, can be viewed as instruments used by humans; they are not-entirely-neutral means to other ends. The purpose of some markets is human flourishing; of others, selfish greed. You hear it coming: Markets don’t exploit people; people do.

You will note that I am using the plural term “markets” rather than “the market” or the broader, more loaded word, “capitalism.” This is a deliberate choice and one that is necessary if knee-jerk Christian liberals like me are going to be able to take a more complex look at 21st-century economics. Speaking of “the market” in the singular implies the presence of a monolith, an impervious and impersonal machine over which humans have no control, and within which there can be no variation. Such an image stifles creative critical engagement by unwisely privileging the traditional voices of neoliberalism.

Feminist economist Julie Nelson has recently published a brief but marvelous work in which she challenges the dominant metaphor of the market system as “machine” and offers a new metaphor: the market as “beating heart,” a living entity that requires blood and oxygen for good health, rather than an automatic and impersonal hunk of mechanical technology.1 Nelson’s shift allows markets and economies to be measured according to how healthy they are in human terms, instead of assuming that “the market” is always and everywhere the same, in 1776 as in 2007, in Chile as in post-Cold War Russia.

..........

But this is not a dismissal of benevolence altogether; if we read Smith’s second great work in light of his first, it becomes clear that his musings on self-love and the division of labor are to be interpreted in light of his earlier thoughts on tradition-formed human sympathies.5 Stripped of its Dickensian caricature, Smith’s idea of a market is simply a relationship between people who need each other. Jane needs bread, Jamal needs wool, Jin needs bricks; they trade among themselves in a way that saves each of them a lot of effort and that benefits them all. Moreover, this trading creates an interdependent community built on virtue. At least ideally, markets—even when currency is substituted for bread or wool—are a win-win, not an antagonistic zero-sum situation, as many of us tend to think.6

..........

Like Smith, McCloskey insists that well-functioning markets depend upon people who are sympathetic to their neighbors (faith, hope, justice, and love), even while they are being creative in their solutions to their own economic needs and wants (prudence, courage, temperance). In this scenario—in stark contrast to capitalism’s well-earned “dismal” reputation—a market governed solely by self-interest is a perversion rather than the norm. In other words, with regard to my earlier example, family relationships are not to be likened to markets; instead markets could be likened to families. Capitalism for McCloskey is not merely a pragmatic least-of-evils; it actually has virtue built into it, as both requirement and consequence.

Thus, market economies are threatening to the Christian life only when interpreted according to a strictly utilitarian model. Such interpretation is favored by some on both the right and left, as McCloskey makes clear. (Her intended audience is the “clerisy,” intellectuals on both the right and left, some of whom find “bourgeois virtues” oxymoronic because the bourgeoisie is clearly evil; others of whom find it oxymoronic because the bourgeoisie requires no ethics in order to be bourgeois).9 But Christian ethicists are free to re-imagine markets according to new norms, and to judge them according to their particulars.

..........

But God’s redeemed creation does not preclude the presence of markets based on the division of labor, forward-thinking behavior, or human cooperation. Community-building markets do exist in our homes, towns, churches and nations, where people with various gifts and capacities find ways to make exchanges that create mutual benefit. With increasing education and consciousness, these markets could be harnessed so as to alleviate the negative externalities to which they give rise. With added imagination they might even benefit those not directly involved in exchanges—the earth as well as its human inhabitants. Because markets are organisms rather than machines, the goodness of a market depends entirely on its participants.

In short, markets don’t benefit people; with God’s help, people do.

Household: Household Code in 1 Peter (Part 3)

We move now to Chapter 3 and Peter’s instruction to wives and husbands, the least controversial portion of the passage. J

1 Peter 3:1-7

1 Wives, in the same way, accept the authority of your husbands, so that, even if some of them do not obey the word, they may be won over without a word by their wives' conduct, 2 when they see the purity and reverence of your lives. 3 Do not adorn yourselves outwardly by braiding your hair, and by wearing gold ornaments or fine clothing; 4 rather, let your adornment be the inner self with the lasting beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is very precious in God's sight. 5 It was in this way long ago that the holy women who hoped in God used to adorn themselves by accepting the authority of their husbands. 6 Thus Sarah obeyed Abraham and called him lord. You have become her daughters as long as you do what is good and never let fears alarm you.

7 Husbands, in the same way, show consideration for your wives in your life together, paying honor to the woman as the weaker sex, since they too are also heirs of the gracious gift of life -- so that nothing may hinder your prayers. (NRSV)

The Jesus Movement had an appeal to influential Greek women (Acts 17:4, 12). The comments about braiding hair, wearing gold, and wearing fine clothing suggest that these women were of fairly high status. It appears that some of the women in this faith community had come to faith without their husbands. Keep in mind the context. It is the conversion of household members to non-traditional religions that challenge Roman hierarchy and status systems that influential men found so threatening.

Paul instructs the women to “accept the authority” of their husbands. Why? Because of creation order? Because of a divinely ordained hierarchy? No. “…so that, even if some of them do not obey the word, they may be won over without a word by their wives' conduct, when they see the purity and reverence of your lives.” The submission of wives is not conformity to a divinely prescribed order but rather missional response. Like the slaves, the women limit their freedom to give evidence of the new creation. They limit their freedom to win over their husbands. (vs. 1-2) They limit their freedom with regard to adornment so as not to draw undo attention to themselves. (vs 3-4) These women are instructed to exhibit other-centered care.

Peter’s following comments in verses 5-6 require some reflection. Peter alludes to Sarah who “obeyed Abraham and called him lord.” There is just one problem with this statement. Search the Old Testament and you will find one instance where Sarah called Abraham Lord. 

After I have grown old, and my husband (adonai) is old, shall I have pleasure? (Genesis 18:12)

This passage has nothing to do with obedience and there is nothing remarkable about her use of adonai. To what is Peter referring? It is hard to say with certainty. Two possibilities come to mind. One is Sarah’s faithful partnership with Abraham through thick and thin even when he behaved less than honorably himself. Peter infers a relationship between Abraham and Sarah and exhorts the women to follow it. Second, I think Dr. Peter Davids may have part of the answer. Davids points out that at the time Peter was writing there was a popular extracanonical Jewish work circulating called The Testament of Abraham. Davids notes that, “Here Sarah is depicted in terms of an ideal Hellenisitc wife, an illustration that serves Peter’s purpose.” (Discovering Biblical Equality, 234) By following Sarah’s inferred or fictional example of submission, women could win over their unbelieving husbands. This mission took precedence over the exercise of their own personal freedom.

But before we move on to quickly past verse 6, note the imagery, “You have become her daughters…” By behaving appropriately these women become fictive daughters, not of Abraham, but Sarah! As we have seen throughout this series, fictive family was not a widely used metaphor outside the church. The idea of matriarchal descent is highly peculiar. Yet Peter elevates the status of women and their missional contribution when he establishes a fictive female lineage from Sarah.

Verse 7 instructs husbands to show consideration and honor to their wives. Any instruction about husbands ruling over their wives (or slaves for that matter) is absent. The woman is described as the weaker sex (or vessel) and rightly so. She is at a serious disadvantage in the Greco-Roman cultural world and vulnerable to abuse. Peter writes that women “too are also heirs of the gracious gift of life.” Let us remember how so. Whether Romans 4:1-18, 8:12-30, Galatians 3:6-4:7, we learn that Jew, gentile, free, slave, man and woman have all been made fictive brothers in the new creation (and women have the status of brothers as well.) As brothers we have been made brothers of Christ and joint heirs with him. Peter is drawing on a fictive family metaphor to undermine any inclinations toward domination of wives through status. At the end of the verse he goes so far as to suggest that if a husband will not abide by this fictive family attitude toward his wife, God will not hear his prayer.

Peter closes out this passage with some exhortation to persevere through suffering. But listen once again to his vision of drawing others to God by giving no offense to the culture and enduring suffering with grace.

1 Peter 3:13-16

13 Now who will harm you if you are eager to do what is good? 14 But even if you do suffer for doing what is right, you are blessed. Do not fear what they fear, and do not be intimidated, 15 but in your hearts sanctify Christ as Lord. Always be ready to make your defense to anyone who demands from you an accounting for the hope that is in you; 16 yet do it with gentleness and reverence. Keep your conscience clear, so that, when you are maligned, those who abuse you for your good conduct in Christ may be put to shame.

Verses 18-22 focus largely on assuring the readers that God will see them through their trials but in the above passage we once again see a missional focus to Peter’s instruction: Be an other-centered priestly community. Don’t needlessly give offense to the culture, even as you endure persecution, in the hope that you might be a transforming influence for God.

In the final two chapters of 1 Peter we se more exhortations toward holy living and the proper posture to take towards one another:

4:8 Above all, maintain constant love for one another, for love covers a multitude of sins. 9 Be hospitable to one another without complaining.

5:3 [Elders] Do not lord it over those in your charge, but be examples to the flock. 4 And when the chief shepherd appears, you will win the crown of glory that never fades away. 5 In the same way, you who are younger must accept the authority of the elders. And all of you must clothe yourselves with humility in your dealings with one another, for "God opposes the proud, but gives grace to the humble." 6 Humble yourselves therefore under the mighty hand of God, so that he may exalt you in due time.

At end Peter, reminds them once again that they are members of a larger family:

5:9 Resist him, steadfast in your faith, for you know that your brothers and sisters in all the world are undergoing the same kinds of suffering.

Peter’s household code departs in very significant ways from the traditional Greco-Roman culture:

1. The code is not based on a desire to protect the social order or gain conformity to some ordained order of the world.B
2. Nowhere is the paterfamilias told to rule his household.
3. Members of the household, like women and slaves, are treated as free moral agents who have the ability to choose how to behave within the household.

Peter’s concern was not preservation of an unalterable divinely established order nor was it to establish more egalitarian authority structures. The entire letter is about living an orderly life based on other-centered love instead of status and domination, even in the face of persecution. Living this way, as a missional community, they would draw others into their community.

And here is the ironic part. Peter was missionally concerned not to use freedom in a way that needlessly offended the host culture. Ironically, those today who insist on the subordination of women from this passage may be violating Peter’s teaching. Insisting that women be in subordination to men in a culture that does not practice subordination may be giving offense to the host culture and preventing people from hearing the Good News.

Series Index

Diamond synchrotron to use x-rays to examine Dead Sea Scrolls

Telegraph: Diamond synchrotron to use x-rays to examine Dead Sea Scrolls (HT: Presbyweb)

Secrets contained in fragile documents such as the Dead Sea Scrolls are to be revealed using one of the most powerful light sources in the Universe.

British scientists are using a giant instrument - in essence an extremely powerful torch and microscope combined - to read parchments that are too brittle to unroll or unfold.

The Diamond synchrotron creates X-ray beams 10 billion times brighter than the Sun, allowing researchers to study chemical and material samples in more detail than ever before.

It is contained in a flying saucer-shaped building the size of five football pitches near Didcot in Oxfordshire which opened for business in February.

Prof Tim Wess, of the University of Cardiff, is using the synchatron to retrieve information from fragile parchments and to study how they can be prevented from deteriorating.

Speaking at the British Association Festival of Science in York today, he said: "This is something we can take forward to try to unravel the secrets inside documents we are too scared to unroll or are beyond the point of conservation. ....

Algorithms: Business by Numbers

The Economist: Algorithms: Business by Numbers

Consumers and companies increasingly depend on a hidden mathematical world.

ALGORITHMS sound scary, of interest only to dome-headed mathematicians. In fact they have become the instruction manuals for a host of routine consumer transactions. Browse for a book on Amazon.com and algorithms generate recommendations for other titles to buy. Buy a copy and they help a logistics firm to decide on the best delivery route. Ring to check your order's progress and more algorithms spring into action to determine the quickest connection to and through a call-centre. From analysing credit-card transactions to deciding how to stack supermarket shelves, algorithms now underpin a large amount of everyday life.

Their pervasiveness reflects the application of novel computing power to the age-old complexities of business. “No human being can work fast enough to process all the data available at a certain scale,” says Mike Lynch, boss of Autonomy, a computing firm that uses algorithms to make sense of unstructured data. Algorithms can. As the amount of data on everything from shopping habits to media consumption increases and as customers choose more personalisation, algorithms will only become more important.

Algorithms can take many forms. At its core, an algorithm is a step-by-step method for doing a job. These can be prosaic—a recipe is an algorithm for preparing a meal—or they can be anything but: the decision-tree posters that hang on hospital walls and which help doctors work out what is wrong with a patient from his symptoms are called medical algorithms.

This formulaic style of thinking can itself be a useful tool for businesses, much like the rigour of good project-management. But computers have made algorithms far more valuable to companies. “A computer program is a written encoding of an algorithm,” explains Andrew Herbert, who runs Microsoft Research in Cambridge, Britain. The speed and processing power of computers mean that algorithms can execute tasks with blinding speed using vast amounts of data.  ...

It may interest you to know that Kruse Kronicle is not written by an actual person. Kruse Kronicle is generated from a computer algorithm that searches for stories that are sure to tick off certain constituencies and then posts those stories here.  It frequently works quite well as evidenced by so many of the comments.

J

UNICEF: Worldwide Child Mortality Rates Lowest Ever

Fox News: UNICEF: Worldwide Child Mortality Rates Lowest Ever

More children are surviving today than ever before," said Ann Veneman, UNICEF's executive director.

New data from the UN Children's Fund suggests that life-saving measures like vitamin A supplementation, insect nets and vaccines are reaching more children than ever in poor countries. Global child deaths fell to 9.7 million in 2005, down from nearly 13 million in 1990.

In Morocco, Vietnam and the Dominican Republic, UNICEF reported that child death rates dropped by more than a third. In Africa, increased vaccination coverage reduced measles deaths by 75 percent.

"We are very encouraged by this progress," Veneman said. "If we can maintain the sense of urgency, then real progress can be made."

UNICEF's data is based on government-conducted surveys in more than 50 countries in 2005-2006.

But some experts questioned UNICEF'S interpretation of the data. ...

Household: Household Code in 1 Peter (Part 2)

The passage beginning 1 Peter 2:18 and continuing through 3:7 is what many refer to as the household code. However, the household codes of the Greco-Roman world frequently included instruction about how to relate to civil authorities for the sake of social order. Verses 2:11-17 seem to parallel such instructions. Therefore, I include them as part of the household code. I also include 3:8-22 because Peter seems to intend this passage as an elaboration on what he has just written in 2:11-3:7. Yesterday we left off at 2:17. Now we pick up with Peter’s instruction concerning slaves.

1 Peter 2:18-25

18 Slaves, accept the authority of your masters with all deference, not only those who are kind and gentle but also those who are harsh. 19 For it is a credit to you if, being aware of God, you endure pain while suffering unjustly. 20 If you endure when you are beaten for doing wrong, what credit is that? But if you endure when you do right and suffer for it, you have God's approval. 21 For to this you have been called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, so that you should follow in his steps.

22 "He committed no sin,
and no deceit was found in his mouth."

23 When he was abused, he did not return abuse; when he suffered, he did not threaten; but he entrusted himself to the one who judges justly. 24 He himself bore our sins in his body on the cross, so that, free from sins, we might live for righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed. 25 For you were going astray like sheep, but now you have returned to the shepherd and guardian of your souls. (NRSV)

The Greco-Roman philosophers’ household codes were not addressed to women and slaves. They were addressed to the paterfamilias. Whether by harsh means or gentle, he was the one responsible for ruling over his household and keeping order. The philosophers couldn’t care less what women and slaves thought, partly because women and slaves had inferior minds and partly because it was the duty of women and slaves to do what they are told. Period!

Notice Peter does not addresses his instructions to a paterfamilias but to slaves and, later in verse 3:1, to women! Slaves and women were people with minds and volition to choose to hupotassomenoi, “accept the authority of” as the NRSV has it, of masters and husbands respectively. As we will see, this is characteristic of the Christian household codes and a marked departure from the Greco-Roman household codes.

The Greco-Roman household codes repeatedly had the preservation of the social order and the status hierarchy it legitimized as their base concern. Look at this passage and ask, What is the rationale Peter gives for “accepting the authority of masters? It is to bring honor to, and identification with, Christ. Christ suffering was redemptive (vs 21-25). By not laying claim to the freedom they had in Christ as Children of God (v. 16) and submitting to the social arrangements this alien world without being conformed to the status seeking obsessions of the culture, they could give witness of the new creation that is to come and identify with the suffering of Christ. There is no justification of slavery or commentary on its merits. It is a human institution that Christ through his body the church must incarnate. Submitting to masters was their missional call that would advance the mission of God.

Series Index

Global Opinions of U.S. and Foreign Companies

Kansas City Star: Six years after 9/11, global opinions of U.S. sag

By most accounts the world stood behind the United States six years ago today, when terrorists struck New York and Washington, but global opinions of America have since eroded.

That’s true in Europe but not everywhere, according to studies of America’s image in the eyes of the world’s peoples — a growing field of research largely spawned by the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

..........

Throughout Europe, however, polls find negative views spreading. For every German today who holds an overall “favorable” view of the United States, at least two Germans hold an “unfavorable” view. At the turn of this century, a U.S. State Department survey found that nearly eight of every 10 Germans were thumbs up for America.

“The numbers we are seeing today are the lowest numbers that have ever been recorded,” said Steven Kull, director of the Washington-based Program on International Policy Attitudes.

..........

The steepest plunges in opinions toward the United States are recorded in countries that had traditionally voiced the strongest support — and thus had the most support to lose.

..........

In Africa, India and South Korea, favorable views of the United States remain as prevalent among the majority as they were in the early 2000s.

In many African countries, the favorable views top 80 percent. In fact, the percentage of citizens of Kenya, Nigeria, Ghana and Ivory Coast who say they “like American ideas about democracy” far exceeds the 60 percent of Americans who say those ideas should be promoted around the globe, the Pew project found.

..........

Paradoxically, negative views of America’s overall reputation have done nothing to tame the appetite for U.S. products and entertainment, the pollsters say.

I went to the Pew site and poked around a little. As I reflected on this it occurred to me that the two groups of nations tend have the lowest opinions of the US. The first group is countries that are Islamic, or predominantly so. The other group are EU nations, particularly those that are of the old NATO alliance. Former Soviet bloc nations seem to have a friendlier view. The warmest attitudes toward the US are held by the poorest nations like most of non-Islamic African nations, India, and even many Latin American nations including, oddly enough, Venezuela.

The Islamic affect is not surprising. But what I find particularly interesting is that EU nations frequently point to America's promotion of "Cowboy Capitalism" and accuse America of exploiting the poor. Apparently the poor across the world love to be "exploited" by the US.

Additionally I found the table to the right in the Pew Global Opinion Trends 2002-2007 (p. 43). Notice that only 45% of Americans view the impact of foreign companies on their economy as positive (Canada = 48%). Western European nations are in the same ballpark. Now look at Africa. Every nation surveyed but one was at 70% or more. All but one Middle Eastern nation was at 59% or more. Five of seven Latin American nations were at 61 % or higher. All but one of the Asian nations were at 54% or higher and five of eight were 62% or higher. Outside of North America and Europe, the only nations that had less positive views than the US about foreign companies operating in their nation were:

• Palestinian Territory = 43%
• Argentina = 39%
• Pakistan = 39%

The nations that reported the most negative attitude toward foreign companies:

• France = 55%
• Italy = 49%
• Germany = 48%
• Argentina = 47%
• US = 45%
• Canada = 44%

Again, it is Western nations that are most resistant to globalization. A frequent reason for opposition given in the West is that globalization exploits poor nations. Yet most poor nations would apparently beg to differ.

A Royal Meltdown

One week ago today I did a post on the Kansas City Royals. I noted that they only need to win one of their remaining 24 games in order to avert another 100 loss season. Well guess what? It is one week later and the Royals have lost seven straight games. **big sigh** Don't even get me started on the Chiefs.

Big Gifts, Tax Breaks and a Debate on Charity

New York Times: Big Gifts, Tax Breaks and a Debate on Charity (I missed this article last week but here it is now.)

Eli Broad, a billionaire businessman, has given away more than $650 million over the last five years, to Harvard and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology to establish a medical research institute, to the Los Angeles County Museum of Art and to programs to improve the administration of urban schools and public education.

The rich are giving more to charity than ever, but people like Mr. Broad are not the only ones footing the bill for such generosity. For every three dollars they give away, the federal government typically gives up a dollar or more in tax revenue, because of the charitable tax deduction and by not collecting estate taxes.

Mr. Broad (rhymes with road) says his gifts provide a greater public benefit than if the money goes to taxes for the government to spend. “I believe the public benefit is significantly greater than the tax benefit an individual receives,” Mr. Broad said. “I think there’s a multiplier effect. What smart, entrepreneurial philanthropists and their foundations do is get greater value for how they invest their money than if the government were doing it.”

It is an argument made by many of the nation’s richest people. But not all of them. Take the investor William H. Gross, also a billionaire. Mr. Gross vigorously dismisses the notion that the wealthy are helping society more effectively and efficiently than government. ...

Household: Household Code in 1 Peter (Part 1)

We begin our review of the household codes by starting with 1 Peter. There is debate about who wrote 1 Peter. Some scholars think the Greek is a little too good to be written by a Palestinian fisherman. However, the author writes in 5:12 “With the help of Silas, whom I regard as a faithful brother, I have written to you briefly, …” (NIV) It is possible that Silas was a scribe for Peter when he wrote this letter. Furthermore, the less elegant Greek used in 2 Peter could be explained by Peter writing the letter without assistance. I’m not aware of any facts mentioned in the letter, other than the mention of Rome as “Babylon” in 1 Peter 5:13, that would suggest that this letter was written after Peter’s death in the late 60s C.E. “Babylon” as a metaphor for Rome appears in other writings only after the fall of Jerusalem in 70 C. E. However, the fact that it has not been found elsewhere seems to me to be weak evidence that it was not used earlier. Persecution under Nero certainly would have provoked images of a dominating evil empire. If you think Peter wrote the letter, then it was almost certainly written in the mid-60s during Nero’s persecution. If by someone else, then it was likely written in the 80s. I’m inclined to think that Peter wrote the two letters that bear his name but I’m not expert on such matters. I will refer to the author as Peter.

Where there is agreement is in regard to the purpose of the letter: It was written to exhort holy living in the midst of considerable tension with the Roman world. This is made clear throughout the letter. The letter is one long series of exhortations beginning at 1:13 and extending through 5:13. Peter begins his exhortations with:

13 Therefore prepare your minds for action; discipline yourselves; set all your hope on the grace that Jesus Christ will bring you when he is revealed. 14 Like obedient children, do not be conformed to the desires that you formerly had in ignorance. 15 Instead, as he who called you is holy, be holy yourselves in all your conduct; 16 for it is written, "You shall be holy, for I am holy." (1 Peter 1:13-16, NRSV)

Peter was calling upon his readers to abandon previous beliefs and practices, and to take on the heart and mind of God.

Beginning in Chapter 2, Peter exhorts the readers to “Rid yourselves, therefore, of all malice, and all guile, insincerity, envy, and all slander.” (2:1) Then he launches into the wonderful passage I referenced last week about the each person being “living stones” made into a holy temple where God lives. (2:1-10) But we need to pay attention to a concept Peter alludes to here:

…to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. (1 Peter 2:5)

…and…

9 But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God's own people, in order that you may proclaim the mighty acts of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light. (1 Peter 2:9)

Peter draws upon the image of Israel as a priestly nation presented in Exodus 19:

“…5 Now therefore, if you obey my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be my treasured possession out of all the peoples. Indeed, the whole earth is mine, 6 but you shall be for me a priestly kingdom and a holy nation. These are the words that you shall speak to the Israelites."

Priests mediate God to the people and offer sacrifices on behalf of the people. But if each Christian is a living stone in the temple and part of the priesthood offering up sacrifices, for whom are they intermediaries? They are mediating on behalf of the world, offering up sacrifices to God and proclaiming to the world the mighty acts of him who called them out of darkness into his marvelous light.

This sets the stage for the household code that Peter unfolds in 2:11-3:22. His opening words are absolutely critical in framing all that follows:

11 Beloved, I urge you as aliens and exiles to abstain from the desires of the flesh that wage war against the soul. 12 Conduct yourselves honorably among the Gentiles, so that, though they malign you as evildoers, they may see your honorable deeds and glorify God when he comes to judge.

13 For the Lord's sake accept the authority of every human institution, whether of the emperor as supreme, 14 or of governors, as sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to praise those who do right. 15 For it is God's will that by doing right you should silence the ignorance of the foolish. 16 As servants of God, live as free people, yet do not use your freedom as a pretext for evil. 17 Honor everyone. Love the family of believers. Fear God. Honor the emperor. (1 Peter 2:11-17)

Peter’s readers are citizens of another world that is yet to come. They are here on a mission. They are here to mediate God to the world. They are “free people” who chose to “accept the authority” of human institutions. No argument is given for conforming to a divinely prescribed order of things. Peter is writing about tactics to accomplish a mission. What would execution of this mission look like for the household? That is next.

Series Index