The Wizards of Washington

The last time I posted, I asked, "Which fairytale character does our Chief Executive imitate?" This week I would like to ask, "Which fairytale figures do too many of our representatives in Washington fail to emulate?

I believe the answer lies in the American fairytale classic, The Wizard of Oz. I reread Frank Baum's book this past week, and for those of you who have never read it a first time, I will say this is one of the few cases where a movie not only lives up to the book, but possibly exceeds it—depending upon the strength of one's own imagination to visualize the story. The 1939 movie captured all of the book's original corniness. The short chapters make it a good read-aloud as a bedtime story, but great literature it is not, except for the message. As a character-building fable, The Wizard of Oz is very good indeed. 
 

The Scarecrow, as you may remember, wanted brains. The book resorts to a very bad pun, for in the end he receives "bran" new brains as the cereal grain is substituted for his straw, along with a few pins and needles to keep him "sharp." If only getting a brain was that simple! In Isaiah 3:4, Jerusalem and Judah were to lose their supply of brainpower when the Lord of Hosts proclaims, "I will make mere lads their princes, And capricious children will rule over them." Many of the behaviors we see in Washington are synonymous with childish: irresponsible and self-indulgent.

The Tin Woodsman, who had once been a flesh and blood human before his body parts were replaced with tin, wanted a heart. While he was rusting away in the woods before Dorothy found him, he realized that the greatest loss he had known was the loss of his heart. Matthew 24:12 says, "because lawlessness will be increased, the love of many will grow cold." Many who are under oath to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States" have become lawless and seek their own agendas instead.  Their love for people has grown cold.

The Cowardly Lion enters the story in a high-action scene. With one blow of his paw he sent the straw man spinning over and over to the edge of the road. He looked tough, but as soon as he met with some resistance his true nature came out. Revelation 21:8 lists the cowardly as those whose "part is in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death."  The faint-hearted who will not stand up to champion what is right are allowing political correctness to turn them away from the solid brick road and put the country on the pathway to destruction.

Brains. Heart. Courage. All are lacking among our leadership. But wait, there's more.

Dorothy had a virtuous quest too.  Her dream was to return to America's heartland. Kansas was her connection to home and family.  Too many of our officials and too many members of the media that represent them have no roots to the heartland. They have been called the "Inside the Beltway Crowd," but it is not just a geographical location. It is an idolatrous worldview on which they get drunk. They become sorry sorcerers of manipulation, lawless abusers of power who deconstruct rather than defend the Constitution.  

No root. No courage. No heart. No brain.  Weenie Wizards of Washington.  

Which Fairytale is Figure is Obama? Gunning for Answers.

The really old fairy tales have come down through oral traditions. What most of the stories have in common are archetypal characters. By the end of the tale, love and virtue has conquered, and a moral lesson has been, if not learned, at least taught. If one reads enough fairytales, most human conditions common to man will be addressed, and most people will identify with one of the characterizations. So, which fairytale character is Barak Obama?

Since his reelection, he has most definitely become Sleeping Beauty's father. The story goes back centuries with roots in both France and Germany. Although the details vary, the core of the story remains intact. After many childless years, (some accounts portray consultations with a frog during this interval,) a long-awaited child is born. The king, in his joy, throws a grand feast. Among the guests, the numbers vary somewhat, but between 7 and 13 fairies bestow gifts of beauty, cheerfulness, song, charity, and such. One of the fairies was affronted, however, and either as a curse or a prophecy, declares that the princess will prick her finger on a spindle for spinning thread on her 16th (or 15th) birthday and die.

Different versions have varied explanations of how death is ameliorated into a hundred-year slumber, but all agree on the king's aggressive course of action: A national spindle ban! Not only does he outlaw spindles, spinning wheels are banned as well. Of course, this overly extreme and irrational act solves nothing. The kingdom's textile manufacturing tanks. Thread has to be imported from foreign markets, and the economy suffers from balance of trade issues. Shortages ensue while thread prices rise and quality drops. When the princess hits sweet sixteen, the inevitable happens. The castle is overtaken with brambles, thorns, and briers. The king becomes essentially irrelevant.

Do not miss the irony that Sleeping Beauty is rescued by a prince and his hunting party who are armed to the teeth with sharp objects.

Spindle photo from the Spinning Fishwife blog.

Self-evident Truths

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..." so said the 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence.  Two hundred and thirty-six years later, I am not seeing much anecdotal evidence that the citizenry appreciates the significance of this statement. To the contrary, I have experienced jolting irreverence.

A young man recently told me that if history did not have any applicable benefits, then there wasn't any point in studying it. I would agree with him if he had meant what he said, but he didn't. What he meant was that because he found studying history tedious and because doing so would not result in a pay raise, he considered it a waste of his time. He believed that any potential payoff in insight or wisdom is not worth his investment; there are more efficient ways to gain understanding.  I am thinking that this guy is an evolutionist. His attitude does not express a biblical worldview wherein memorials are important so that mistakes will not be repeated.

Then on the eve of Independence Day, a member of the entertainment press flippantly made a comment that program schedules were changed because of a "silly" national holiday. I will be generous and say that perhaps it was an attempt at levity. Apparently the concept that this "silly" holiday commemorates the founding of a government that is constitutionally restricted from interfering with freedom of the press went right over her head; otherwise she'd have known it wasn't funny.  I am thinking that this reporter is an evolutionist. Her attitude does not respect the Creator's approach to national feast days.

Worst of all was the government employee who thought that she knew American history, but proved that she is as clueless as they come. I am convinced that she is an evolutionist who has no fear of God. In her mind, the 56 founding fathers signed a declaration of war. According to her, they had not yet evolved to the level of being able to "take a time-out" when they became frustrated with tyranny. (The bulk of the Declaration of Independence is actually a well-reasoned list of grounds for separation from England.)

Today, the majority of people trained in America's public education system believe that evolution is a self-evident truth. Our founding fathers did not. They believed that men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights. Their new government made revolutionary advancements in human rights and freedoms, but not as a result of holding evolutionary paradigms. Today, in a morass of circular reasoning, many who are ignorant of history choose to believe that it was an evolutionary advancement, not a reclamation of the Creator's endowment.  

Years ago when I made this wreath that I hang near the door during the Memorial Day, Flag Day, and 4th of July arc of the year, I thought it was simply a cute bit of folk art. It did not evolve, but was my special creation. It was a very fun and thrifty project because all the parts were free, left over, or recycled from other things. I liked the theme of a down-to-earth farmer rabbit holding a flag.  This year it acquired a new symbolism for me: Our national heritage is being taken over by dumb bunnies.  

Happy Earth Day!

As part of the Celebration of Earth, I am blogging about Conjectures about Earth's Origins! 

An article by Dr. Werner Gitt made the point that "evolution" is not a "theory" in the strictest sense of scientific theory.  It is, he says, a philosophical doctrine. 

I tend to agree with him, and if he is right, it is a philosophy that has evolved via intelligent design. When I say evolved, I mean that simple little patterns that were documented and then interpreted by Darwin and others have become far more complex. The philosophy now extends far beyond biology and even beyond the earth sciences into the social sciences. As soon as a concept is organized enough to intentionally promulgate it, it is no longer entirely random. In other words, evolution is disseminated by intelligent design.

How dare they! 

Watch out because the folks who believe in the doctrine of evolution are poised to win the pennant for Best Hypocrite!

If evolution is true, then

• Why haven't timed tests been banned?

• Shouldn't we embrace pollution as a new challenge for adaptation?

• Why are schools developing anti-bullying programs that care for the survival of the unfit?

• Why do we risk diminishing the gene pool by allowing abortion?  

• Why don't we legalize drugs that could enhance mutation rates?

• How can we take Hollywood's pro-gay agenda seriously?

I recently had a student tell me that evolution is not in the Bible.  It was an attempt to reason that because it is not mentioned in the Bible, God has not condemned evolution. The term "structural engineering" is not used in the story of the Three Little Pigs either, but that does not mean that the house of straw should not have been condemned. The premise was wrong. There is a story about evolution in the Bible.

Lucifer was created with the title son of the morning. Ezekiel 28:13-15 goes into detail, summarized here:

"You were in Eden, the garden of God; Every precious stone was your covering... You were the anointed cherub who covers... You were on the holy mountain of God; You walked in the midst of the stones of fire. You were blameless in your ways from the day you were created..."

He was a created being who decided to evolve. Verses 16 and 17 explain further: "By the abundance of your trade you were internally filled with violence, And you sinned; Therefore I have cast you as profane From the mountain of God. And I have destroyed you, O covering cherub, From the midst of the stones of fire. Your heart was lifted up because of your beauty; You corrupted your wisdom by reason of your splendor."

Isaiah 14:13,14 explains: You said in your heart, 'I will ascend to heaven; above the stars of God I will set my throne on high; I will sit on the mount of assembly in the far reaches of the north; I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High.'

Satan decided he would become the fundamental equivalent of God. This is evolution.

And he used evolution to entice Eve in the Garden; Genesis 3:4,5:  But the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die.  For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God... 

Beware the Ides of March & the pollen it brings

Beware the Ides of March, and, of course, the beginning of pine pollen season.

Southern yellow pine is a collective name that actually embraces four separate pine species. Every spring for millennia past, pine trees have been producing and releasing billions of pollen grains into the air. Overcompensation has proven to be an effective fertilization process for the southern pine, and in this biome, the world is covered with fine yellow dust.

Scientific literature commonly uses the term prolific to describe pine pollen production. It is a nice opportunity to toss in some alliteration, but it does not quite capture the copious fecundity of it all. When the wind direction and speed cooperate with the sultry humidity, one can trace his name on the windshield within minutes after washing the glass. Some years pine pollen swirls in yellow clouds like a dust storm.

Pollination season is as ancient as old as the hills. Literally. Ancient pollen was trapped and preserved in sedimentary rock records. Aside from the entombed-in-stone thing, I find that comforting. There is a measure of reassurance in knowing that the processes instituted long ago still work today.

Our church is in a season of change. During this interstitial period where the former pastor has left and the next one has yet to take the helm, there has been a tremendous amount of onstage talk about "something new." That is fine. I do get it. But quite frankly, a lot of people have been running around saying that God is doing something new for many years now. The promise of new is growing old.

Personally, I am ready for some immutability. I would like to see God as the Ancient of Days (Daniel 7:9, 13, 22). I would like to know that the counsel of the Lord stands forever (Psalm 33:11). I would like to hear about the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shifting shadow (James 1:17).

Do we really want an endless treadmill of new beginnings? That takes pollen. Pollen is the dust of reproduction. And it is messy. It is carried by flighty winds. It is transported by creepy bugs. And there is so very much pollen, so full of new beginnings, that settles uselessly on my windshields and windowsills. So very many false starts, it wearies the heart.

Perhaps we would not need so many new beginnings if we paid more heed to the ancient truths.

Thus says the LORD, "Stand by the ways and see and ask for the ancient paths, where the good way is, and walk in it; and you will find rest for your souls. But they said, `We will not walk in it.' (Jeremiah 6:16) ...the other route happens to be a toll road, you know.

Grape Hyacinths

It has been a week with no shortage of topics to blog about. I have always thought that half the work of writing was done in the head before fingers ever touch the keyboard or reach for the pen.
On Monday I thought about Presidents Day and the 50th anniversary of John Glenn's earth orbit.
On Fat Tuesday I thought about pancakes, colored beads, and the end to Mardi Gras, a holiday I have never celebrated.
On Ash Wednesday I thought about the Lenten countdown to Easter. And when I thought about it being George Washington's real birthday date, I started craving a cherry flavored dessert, but had to axe that idea.
By Thursday I was thinking that I really should have followed through with updating my blog. So I went in search of 'this date in history' and found that the siege of the Alamo began in 1836, the Tootsie Roll was introduced in 1896, the U.S. flag was raised on Iwo Jima in 1945, and the first school children received the Salk polio vaccine in 1954. Those events all seemed rather removed from life on this showery, windswept day. I will think of another topic.
It is Friday, February 24, 2012. I am celebrating the grape hyacinth that grows at the edge along the rabbit trail.

When I was a kid, we had grape hyacinths that were naturalized along the edge of our woods. I really believed that they were wildflowers; after all, in my memory they had always been there and always came back every year. It was the year that I was 12 that I learned their bulbs had first been planted on purpose. I actually felt a touch of betrayal in learning that they had been masquerading as natives all my life.

The grape hyacinth's flower spikes usually do not show up until mid-spring. Unlike the crocus and daffodils that would only tease that spring had come—it was not uncommon to see daffodils buried in snow—when the grape hyacinths bloomed, it was springtime for good. That is why I was so amazed to see them blooming now, with nearly a week of February left to go!

The picture was taken on my average iQphone. It looks Photoshopped for color, but it is not. As you can see, the grape hyacinth is blooming for all its worth.

Yes, it has been a mild winter. Yes, the jonquils began blooming a month ago, but really, that was barely three weeks ahead of an average year, surely unusual, but not unheard of. The grape hyacinths, by contrast, are nearly six weeks early. The bees are not out and about yet. Should I be worried about pollination?

²⁵ And which of you by worrying can add a single hour to his life's span? ²⁶ If then you cannot do even a very little thing, why do you worry about other matters?
Luke 12

No, I will delight that winter is not so harsh as it might be. I will enjoy the blooms of today.

The Search for Love

My adult life would have been very different if search engines had been around when I was a kid. I am not sure how it would have been different, but different it would have been.

With the approach of Valentine's Day, I decided to pop 'love' into a Bible search tool just to see what I would find. Today's blog is all about the results of my search for love.

♥ ♥ ♥

In the Authorized King James Version, the word love was matched 334 times. Then I wondered if love grows over time, so I tried the New King James Version. I expected a higher number because I knew that in Chapter 13 of 1 Corinthians, the new version used love, whereas the original used charity. That would account for about 9 more loves right there, but NO! Even with those extra nine, the New King James has a love loss of 13! The word love was found only 321 in the updated version. Where did the love go?

I don't know who made this "law," and I do not suppose that there is any agency around to enforce it, but I have been told that one of the laws of Bible interpretation is called the "Law of First Mention." According to the Law of First Mention, the first time a concept appears in scripture it is used in its foundational meaning. If there is any ambiguity in later scripture passages, the foundation laid at First Mention is supposedly the most reliable meaning for the interpretation.

This presents a bit of a problem.

First Mention of love in the New King James is in Genesis 22:2.

Then He said, "Take now your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I shall tell you."

First Mention is literally sacrificial.

First Mention of love in the Authorized King James is in Genesis 27:4.

And make me savoury meat, such as I love, and bring it to me, that I may eat; that my soul may bless thee before I die.

First Mention is about sating the appetite.

I do not see any way to reconcile these—short of cannibalism, which I will rule out on both the basis of sketchy theology and for its Eww factor.

The translation that I usually prefer for study is the English Standard, so my next search for love was in that version. It produced a whopping tally of 503 mentions of love. I am not sure what that means, but it seems rather unloving to go around bragging that my preferred translation touts love 150% more often than yours! Besides, at the end of the day, love is work, commitment, self-surrender, and sacrifice.

Of course, Valentine's Day is not about love so much as it is about romance! So my next search was for the word "romance."

It would seem that the only times romance is found in the English translations are when it is embedded in the word necromancer. So there we have it: romance is a dead end.