Condolences

We offer prayers today for Presbyterian minister and blogger, Rev. John Shuck, and his family following the loss of his son, Zachary. Obituary and Condolences

Lectionary Ruminations for Sunday, Sunday, July 1, 2012, the Thirteenth Sunday in Ordinary Time (Year B)

Posted each Thursday, Lectionary Ruminations focuses on the Scripture Readings, taken from the New Revised Standard Version, for the following Sunday per the Revised Common Lectionary. Comments and questions are intended to encourage reflection for readers preparing to teach, preach, or hear the Word. Reader comments are invited and encouraged. All lectionary links are to the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) of the Bible via the PC(USA) Devotions and Readings website, but if you prefer another translation, feel free to use that instead. (Other references may be linked to the NRSV via the oremus Bible Browser.)  Lectionary Ruminations is also cross-posted on my personal blog, Summit to Shore. 

First Reading - 2 Samuel 1:1, 17-27

v. 1 Why Ziklag and why two days?

v. 17 Intoned?

v. 18 I believe the next Indiana Jones film will be “Cataloging the Book of Jashar”

v. 20 Why Gath and Ashkelon?

v. 24 Whom did Saul clothe with crimson?

v. 27 How many times have we now heard the refrain “How the mighty have fallen”?  Why does David (and/or the writer) keep repeating it?

Psalm - Psalm 130

v. 1 Where are the depths and how deep are they?

v. 2 How do we deal with Psalms that anthropomorphize God?

v. 3 Does God mark, or not mark, iniquities?

v. 4 Keep in mind that this “forgiveness” proceeds the ministry of Jesus.

vs. 5-6 What does it mean to “wait for the LORD”?  I am inclined to think of contemplative prayer.

v. 7 This psalm already introduced forgiveness in v. 4.  Now it introduces love and redemption.  This sounds like New Testament Christian theology.

Second Reading - 2 Corinthians 8:7-15

v. 7 What generous undertaking would that be?

v. 8 In other words, I do not have the power to command you, but I can embarrass you.

v. 9 Let’s  pour on the guilt.  Is this Paul’s idea of a Stewardship sermon?

vs. 10-11 Is Paul reminding the Corinthians of a previous but unfulfilled financial pledge.

vs. 13-14 This is beginning to sound like a sermon to the 1% about helping the 99%.

v. 15 Some inequality is ok, but not extreme wealth in the midst of extreme poverty?

Gospel - Mark 5:21-43

v. 22 Why would Jairus fall at the feet of Jesus?

v. 23 What is so special about the laying on of hands?  Why do Presbyterians not usually associate prayer for healing with the laying on of hands when it is so biblical?

vs. 25-34 Why does this account interrupt the story?

v. 25 Is there anything special about “12 years”?

v. 27 What had she heard?  Why did she touch his cloak?

v. 30 What might power going forth from oneself feel like?

v. 34 Is this not an after the fact proclamation?

v. 36 Are the words “Do not fear, only believe” mean for Jairus or for someone else?

v. 37 An example of the inner three being given an inside track.

v. 39 What is the difference between death and sleep?  I hate the euphemism “putting pets to sleep” and prefer the verb “euthanize”.

v. 41 Why take her by the hand?  Why might the gospel preserve the original Aramaic?

v. 42 When was the last time you, or anyone you know, were overcome with amazement?

v. 43 Why would Jesus order that “no one should know this”?  Know what?

ADDENDUM

In addition to serving as the half time Pastor of North Church Queens and writing Lectionary Ruminations, I also tutor part time.  If you or someone you know needs a tutor, or if you would like to be a tutor, check out my WyzAnt page and follow the appropriate links.

Look for me at the PC(USA) General Assembly in Pittsburgh. I will be posting Lectionary Ruminations for July 8 from there.  I may, or may not, also be blogging about the Assembly.

Lectionary Ruminations for Sunday, June 24, 2012, the Twelfth Sunday in Ordinary Time (Year B)

Posted each Thursday, Lectionary Ruminations focuses on the Scripture Readings, taken from the New Revised Standard Version, for the following Sunday per the Revised Common Lectionary. Comments and questions are intended to encourage reflection for readers preparing to teach, preach, or hear the Word. Reader comments are invited and encouraged. All lectionary links are to the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) of the Bible via the PC(USA) Devotions and Readings website, but if you prefer another translation, feel free to use that instead. (Other references may be linked to the NRSV via the oremus Bible Browser.)  Lectionary Ruminations is also cross-posted on my personal blog, Summit to Shore.

First Reading - 1Samuel 17:(1a, 4-11, 19-23) 32-49

v. 32 What is the relationship between David and Saul at this point?  Why does David refer to himself in the second person?

v. 33 Typical advice to a young pastor going up against entrenched interests of an older generation?

v. 34 Lions, (but no tigers), and bears, Oh my!

v. 36 Is the reference to “this uncircumcised Philistine” a racial slur or just trash talk before the battle?

v. 37 While David makes it sound in verses 34-36 that he deserved all the credit for defeating lions and bears, he now gives credit to God.  In this regard, you may want to take another look at last week’s Psalm.

v. 38 What is the irony that Saul clothes David with his (Saul’s) armor?

v. 39 Is this really a comment about armor or a veiled comment about political reality?

v. 40 Is there any symbolism in David choosing “five” smooth stones?  You may want to take a look at Eugene Peterson’s book Five Smooth Stones.

v. 42 Déjà vu

v. 43 Whose gods?

v. 45 Look again at last week’s Psalm.

v. 47 What might this verse say about the military doctrine of “Shock and Awe”?

v. 48 Since David ends up felling this Philistine with one smooth stone, why did David pick put five smooth stones in his bag?

Psalm - Psalm 9:9-20

v. 9 Why does this verse not fit the circumstances of the First Reading?

v. 10 While the previous verse may not fir the circumstances of the First Reading, I think this verse does.

v. 12 Who avenges blood and what does that mean?

v. 15 Can you think of any nation caught in the very trap it set for others?

v. 17 What, and where, is Shoel?

v. 20 Good advice, even, or especially, for Americans.

Second Reading - 2 Corinthians 6:1-13

v. 1 Who are “we”?

v. 2 Is this a quote from Scripture?

v. 3 What accusations is Paul defending his ministry against?

vs. 4-5 Poor Paul!

vs. 6-10 Did anyone ever argue that Paul was humble?

v. 12 Ouch!

Gospel - Mark 4:35-41

v. 35 What day? Who are “them”?

v. 36 What does the comment “just as he was” mean?  What does it add to the text and its meaning?

v. 38 How could Jesus know they were perishing if he was sleeping through the storm?  Even though this is Mark and not John, is there more than one level of meaning here?

v. 39 What point is being made?

v. 40 Again, is there more than one level of meaning here?

v. 41 When was the last time you were filled with great awe?  Is their question rhetorical?

ADDENDUM

In addition to serving as the half time Pastor of North Church Queens and writing Lectionary Ruminations, I also tutor part time.  If you or someone you know needs a tutor, or if you would like to be a tutor, check out my WyzAnt page and follow the appropriate links.

Lectionary Ruminations for Sunday, June 17, 2012, the Eleventh Sunday in Ordinary Time (Year B)

Posted each Thursday, Lectionary Ruminations focuses on the Scripture Readings, taken from the New Revised Standard Version, for the following Sunday per the Revised Common Lectionary. Comments and questions are intended to encourage reflection for readers preparing to teach, preach, or hear the Word. Reader comments are invited and encouraged. All lectionary links are to the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) of the Bible via the PC(USA) Devotions and Readings website, but if you prefer another translation, feel free to use that instead. (Other references may be linked to the NRSV via the oremus Bible Browser.)  Lectionary Ruminations is also cross-posted on my personal blog, Summit to Shore. http://summittoshore.blogspot.com/

First Reading - 1 Samuel 15:34-16:13

v. 34 Is the anything significant about Ramah or Gibeah?

v. 35 Who is “he”, the LORD or Samuel?  Imagine that, the LORD was sorry! 

v.  2 So the LORD instructs and helps Samuel construct a ruse?

v.  3 Is this why the LORD instructed Samuel to fill his horn with oil?

v.  4 Why were the elders of Bethlehem trembling?

v.  5 Was Jesse one of the elders?  Were his sons? In this context, what does it mean to be 

sanctified?

v. 6-7  Things are not always as they seem.  In both ecclesiastical and secular settings, the person who most looks the part is not always the person the God has chosen.  Nevertheless, they are still the person chosen, hired, elected or called.  In this case, however, not so! Lesson learned?

v. 10 Should we associate any symbolic significance to the number seven?

v. 12 What are the various alternate translations of this verse?

v. 13 Would the spirit of the LORD not have come upon David if Samuel had not anointed him? Note that David is not named until after he is anointed!

Psalm- Psalm 20

v. 1 To whom is the Psalmist writing?  Does the reference to God’s name serving as protection suggest that God’s name was understood by some as having magical properties?

v. 2 What sort help and support might be imagined?

v. 3 What is the difference between an offering and a sacrifice?

v. 4 What if the heart’s desire and plans are not according to God’s will?

v. 5 I wonder what these banners looked like.  I doubt if they looked like the liturgical 

banners some churches display.

v. 6  What does God ever do with the left hand, if anything?

vs. 7-8 Let this verse be a warning to those advocating for increased spending on defense and who claim that a nation’s security is directly related to the size of its armed forces.

v. 9 Who is “us”?

SecondReading - 2 Corinthians 5:6-10 (11-13) 14-17

v. 6 Why must we be away from the Lord while at home in the body?  Can modern Christians read this without help from Descartes?  How can we read it as first Century Christians would have read it?

v. 10 Does this suggest a work’s righteousness?

v. 11 What is the fear of the Lord and who does one know it?

v. 12 What is this verse about?

v. 13 What is Paul’s logic?

v. 17 Even though I agree with it, this is a pretty bold statement.  Does it logically flow from what precedes it?

Gospel- Mark 4:26-34

v. 26 I love the kingdom sayings (parables), even though I do not fully understand them, sort of like the person who does not know how seeds that were scattered take root and grow.

v. 29 This sounds as though reaping is a good, not a grim, undertaking.

v. 30 Not just any seed, but a mustard seed.

vs. 30-32 So, don’t judge a book by its cover, or a seed by its size, or a son of Jesse by his age.

v. 33 “The Word”?  How able are we to hear it?

v. 34 So why did the disciples often appear not to get it?

ADDENDUM

In addition to serving as the half time Pastor of North Church Queens and writing Lectionary Ruminations, I also tutor part time.  If you or someone you know needs a tutor, or if you would like to be a tutor, check out my WyzAnt page and follow the appropriate links.

Lectionary Ruminations for Sunday, June 10, 2012, the Tenth Sunday in Ordinary Time (Year B)

Posted each Thursday, Lectionary Ruminations focuses on the Scripture Readings, taken from the New Revised Standard Version, for the following Sunday per the Revised Common Lectionary. Comments and questions are intended to encourage reflection for readers preparing to teach, preach, or hear the Word. Reader comments are invited and encouraged. All lectionary links are to the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) of the Bible via the PC(USA) Devotions and Readings website, but if you prefer another translation, feel free to use that instead. (Other references may be linked to the NRSV via the oremus Bible Browser.)  Lectionary Ruminations is also cross-posted on my personal blog, Summit to Shore. 

FirstReading - 1 Samuel 8:4-11 (12-15) 16-20 (11:14-15)

My ruminations focus on 8:4-20.

v. 4 Why was Samuel at Ramah?

v. 5 What did the elders mean by saying ”your sons do not follow in your ways”?  Were the 

elders experiencing Kingness envy?

v. 6 Why did the elder’s request displease Samuel?

v. 8 Some peoples just do not change.

v. 9 Is this foresight or hindsight?

v. 11 The first military draft?

v. 13 Forget military conscription, this is sounding like slavery.

v. 14 Eminent domain?

v. 19 Of course the people did not listen to Samuel. People hardly ever listen to a prophet.

vs.  11-20 How do American Christians hear these verses in the midst of a presidential election year and the rhetoric of both The Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street?

Psalm- Psalm 138:1-8

v. 1 What “gods”?

v. 2 What direction do you face when you give thanks to the LORD?

v. 4 All the kings of the earth shall praise the LORD?  Who is this psalmist kidding?

v. 7 What is the symbolic meaning of God’s right hand (other than discrimination against left handed people)?

v. 8 To whom is this verse addressed?

SecondReading - 2 Corinthians 4:13-5:1

v. 13 Where is this quote from?

v. 15 Does this “your” refer to only Christians in Corinth or to a larger group?

v. 16 What is the outer nature and what is the inner nature?

v. 17 What is the “slight momentary affliction” to which Paul refers?

v. 18 How do we look at things that cannot be seen?  I want to default to Plato’s forms here.

v. 1 If Paul had been of a trade other than tentmaker, would he have employed a different metaphor?

Gospel- Mark 3:20-35

v. 20 When was the crown together before now?  Who could not eat?v. 21 Whose family?

v. 22 Who, or what, is Beelzebul?

v. 23 How did we get from Beelzebul to Satan?

v. 25 Who does Jesus think he is, Abraham Lincoln?

v. 29 What is “blasphemy” against the Holy Spirit and why does Jesus day this? Theologically speaking, can there really be an unforgivable, eternal sin if God chooses to forgive it?

v. 31 What bothers?

v. 32 What sisters?

v. 33 Is this a rhetorical question?

vs.  34-35 What sort of family values are being demonstrated here?

ADDENDUM

In addition to serving as the half time Pastor of North Church Queens and writing Lectionary Ruminations, I also tutor part time.  If you or someone you know needs a tutor, or if you would like to be a tutor, check out my WyzAnt page and follow the appropriate links.

The Elephant in our Brains

English: Elephant (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Intuitions come first, strategic reasoning second. Moral intuitions arise automatically and almost instantaneously, long before moral reasoning has a chance to set started, and those first intuitions tend to drive our later reasoning. If you think that moral reasoning is something we do to figure out the truth, you'll be constantly frustrated by how foolish, biased, and illogical people become when they disagree with you. But if you think about moral reasoning as a skill we humans evolved to further our social agendas- to justify our own actions and to defend the teams we belong to- then things will make a lot more sense. Keep your eye on the intuitions, and don't take people's moral arguments at face value.
The central metaphor of these four chapters is that the mind is divided, like a rider on an elephant, and the rider's job is to serve the elephant. The rider is our conscious reasoning- the stream of words and images of which we are fully aware. The elephant is the other 99 percent of mental processes- the ones that occur outside of awareness but that actually govern most of our behaviors. (Haidt, xiv)

So says moral psychologist Jonathan Haidt in his very interesting book, The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion. The book is divided into three sections and the quote above is about the first section.+  There are lots of quite interesting ideas in this first section. Haidt says that we have two kinds of cognition -ways we know things-intuition and reasoning (45). He also claims most of our knowing is intuition and our reasoning primarily exists to explain and support our intuition. He makes the case that we are not as interested in "truth" as we are interested with having people agree with us.

Some people find the idea that most of what we do is governed by unconscious and intuitive processes disconcerting. Haidt suggests we might not be the autonomous individuals western society glorifies. It seems we are much more interested in belonging. And we might be much more affected by biology than we previously believed. We're comfortable with the idea that cats, robins, bees, and wildebeests are governed for the most part by instinct. The idea that we might be governed to a significant degree by instinct is a less comfortable thought. Never the less, our behavior does appear to be significantly affected by instinct and intuition.

The idea that we are not as different from other animals as we previously thought can be unsettling for some people. Traditionally, one of the ways Christians have thought about what it means to be human is to believe humans are distinct, and substantially so, from animals. Being created in the image of God has often been understood to mean we bear little in common with animals. But biologists and ethologists tell us otherwise. Is there anything special about humans? *

I think our "specialness" is not because we are significantly different than animals but that we have been given a particular vocation. God gives humans a particular and unique responsibility to care for the rest of creation and we have some particular abilities which allow us to fulfill our vocation. To recognize how much of our behavior is influenced by biology doesn't change our vocation. In fact, understanding our selves better, may allow us to fulfill our vocation with greater care and skill.

Haidt also makes the case that one of our most important concerns ( all thought often unrecognized by us) is to be accepted as part of a group. This need to belong and the need to have others agree with us is a major driver of our behavior. Theologians are fond of talking about the importance of community. It is difficult, some would say impossible, to be a Christian- in the fullest sense of the word- by ones self. It seems that biologists and psychologists would agree; we are made for community, not just spiritually but also biologically. The need to belong to a group is deeply embedded in humans, just as it is in horses and lions.

We are not completely illogical or irrational.We are not solely driven by instinct and intuition. It is not that the truth doesn't matter to us. But neither are we the rational, evidence driven, truth seekers we believe ourselves to be. The reality about us is more complex and more interesting. 

What do you think about Haidt's ideas? Do they make sense to you? Do they describe reality? Or do they make you uncomfortable? I'd like to know, what do you think?

*********

+ Each section has a "principle" and a central metaphor. Part one: Intuitions come first, strategic reasoning second. Central Metaphor:The mind is divided, like a rider on an elephant, and the rider's job is to serve the elephant.  Part Two: There's more to morality than harm and fairness. Central Metaphor: The righteous mind is like a tongue with six taste receptors. Part Three: Morality binds and blinds. Central Metaphor: Human beings are 90 percent chimp and 10 percent bee.

* Thinking about what it means to be human and what it means to be created in God's image has been a frequent topic in this blog. (And too often to list comprehensively here.) If you search the archives under "human", "Genesis", "animal", and "God" you will find several posts. You might want to begin with my first post on this subject, here.

+++++

Cross posted at Conversation in Faith.