DECEMBER 2011

A warm Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukkah, and Happy New Year from The Eclectic Kasper. We hope you have a great December and that your holiday season is enriched by reading a few articles from the December 2011 edition of The Eclectic Kasper.

This month we will give some Biblical background on the infamous “wise men” of the nativity story, and we will continue to consider some more “Emergent Concerns.” We will do some “Review and Preview” of our The Eclectic Kasper year, and I think that you will enjoy our article on “Two Words That Separate Liberals and Conservatives.”

BIBLE HISTORY: The Truths and Myths of the Magi

    There is much fact and myth surrounding the mysterious magi who grace the Christmas story. Though they take such a prominent place in Christmas displays, they are only mentioned in Matthew 2:1-12 in the Bible, which makes it difficult to know much about them.

    Here are some truths about the magi:

    While there are still many gaps in our understanding of the magi, here's a bit of educated speculation about them:

     There are also many myths that have been created about the magi:

    Perhaps the most poignant truth about the endeavor of the magi is that they knew exactly who they were going to see. They did not come to just pay homage to a king, or kneel before a prince. They came to “worship” God incarnate (Matt 2:2, 11). How exactly they understood the deity of Christ from the texts available to them or from the stars is difficult to discern. However, they knew for certain that this child was truly and uniquely Immanuel, "God With Us" (Matt 1:23).

Sources:

    D. A. Carson, "Matthew," Expositors Bible Commentary, Vol. 8 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984), pp. 82-89.

    R. E. Nixon, "Matthew," The New Bible Commentary, Third Edition (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans), pp. 818-819.

    Daniel N. Schowalter, "Magi," The Oxford Companion to the Bible (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), p. 483.

    This article is adapted from a piece originally written for the Genesis Bible Church E-nnouncements, December 2009 edition.  The above picture is The Journey of the Magi (1894) by James Jacques Joseph Tissot.

THE QUEST FOR THE IDEAL MEDIEVAL FANTASY SERIES: Part 1, The Essential Ingredients

    I have spend many marvelous moments in my life in Middle-Earth, Mimbre, Osten Ard, or Narnia. More so than the distractions of movies, TV shows, and sports, books in the medieval fantasy genre have been for me a rewarding escape. In this series of articles we will explore different medieval fantasy series and investigate more general issues of why some medieval fantasy books are so enjoyable and enduring. I hope that this will give the reader some direction regarding good reading selections, but also provide some tools for appreciating meaningful literature in general.

    The ideal medieval-fantasy series is a delicate combination cliché and innovation. That is, a book or series of books in the medieval fantasy genre (a.k.a., “high fantasy”; either moniker will do) must have enough of the typical, or cliché, ingredients to identify it with the medieval fantasy genre but should contribute something unique that few, or no, other fantasy series has.

    So what essential ingredients does a good medieval fantasy series need to have? First, it needs to have the two elements hardwired into the genre’s name; there must be a medieval backdrop with a fantasy foreground. For instance, if it is an action fantasy series that uses guns, lasers, or anything remotely resembling modern tech, is cannot be medieval. But there must be some fantasy, magic, or supernatural ingredients also; otherwise, it’s just historical fiction in a medieval setting (and there are many of those, too, if you’re not into the magical elements).

    Given these two essentials, there are several other typical ingredients. There is usually a young person (usually male) who is coming of age. There is often an older mentor (a wizard, mage, or a washed-up dragon rider) and a powerful antagonist (a dark lord, a cruel demigod, an evil enchanter, or a cranky sorcerer who is just having a bad era). As with many modern dramas, there is usually a young woman, sometimes of noble birth, whether she is aware of that at the time or not, who sometimes serves in an antagonistic role initially to the coming-of-age male, but then becomes a love interest. A third layer of fantasy elements rounds off the high fantasy genre: throw in a magical sword (or swords), ring, or stones; add a pinch of dragons; sprinkle in different sentient non-human races, such as elves, dwarves, gnomes or fairies; pour in a cosmic crisis, and voilà! . . . you have yourself some medieval fantasy.

    These, however, are just the bare ingredients of the medieval-fantasy recipe. The master chef can mix these ingredients in a way that is typical enough to remain true to the genre, but innovative enough to create a uniquely compelling story that rises above the generic offerings in the genre.

    In the next article of this series, we will evaluate several different medieval-fantasy books based on this criteria and we’ll see if those series are both true to the medieval fantasy genre but also innovative and compelling in their approach.

POLITICS: Two Words that Separate Liberals and Conservatives

     Many divergent opinions form a growing chasm between liberals and conservatives in this country.  However, I recently re-read a significant document and recognized two words that seem to embody this philosophical divide.  The two words that separate liberals from conservatives are “pursuit of.”

     These words are taken directly from our country’s initial statement of autonomy, namely the Declaration of Independence of the thirteen American Colonies signed by 56 delegates to the Continental Congress on July 4, 1776. 

     Conservatives affirm that all U. S. citizens should have the right to the “pursuit of” happiness.  But happiness usually doesn’t fall into one’s lap; it can be freely pursued by individuals or by a group of individuals who seek it lawfully and ethically.  Generally, one’s happiness and satisfaction from life is proportional to the effort that one devotes to that pursuit. 

     Conservatives acknowledge that everyone has barriers to their aspirations of happiness, and some certainly have more than others.  Obstacles may be race, gender, socio-economic status, intellect, or physical setbacks.  However, conservatives affirm that government should not be one of those barriers.  The more that government interferes with an individual’s rights and goals, the less likely the individual will be to attain his own happiness.  A conservative tends to feel that it is the government’s obligation to get out of the way of allowing citizens to exercise their rights and to pursue their own interests.

     The difference between the presence and absence of these two words is monumental.  To remove the words “pursuit of” from the Declaration of Independence, as liberals seem interested in doing, renders the notion that government owes its citizens “life, liberty, and happiness.”  That is, liberal policies suggest that citizens deserve from their government not merely the ability to pursue their own happiness, but rather, they deserve happiness itself.     I doubt that any liberal would concede that his or her position can be encapsulated by the sentiment that government is obligated to dole out happiness to everyone.  However, the Occupy Movement, for instance, appears to want from its government exactly that: the right to happiness minus the efforts that accompany the “pursuit of.”

     The government should do what it can to allow citizens to pursue their own dreams, but it does not and should not fulfill wishes like a magic genie.  Whether one’s dreams include getting rich, starting a business or non-profit, having a measure of religious freedom, or running for office, citizens should not expect government to hand them their aspirations.  They should rather expect government to prevent impediments to achieving these aspirations.  Therefore, the smaller the government, the better for pursuing our happiness and freedom.

     The idea of equality among citizenry is not that all people are equally educated, equally talented, nor equally well-off.  Rather the idea of social equality is that all people are equally unfettered by American government to strive for their own goals and aspirations for themselves, their families and their community.  It is not government’s responsibility to hand out happiness, job satisfaction, educational opportunities or vocational ambition.  People have the freedom to chose these things on their own and government has no right to interfere with these pursuits as long as they are legal. 

    Society and government is responsible, constitutionally, for making sure that the pursuit of happiness is available to all, but according to our founding document, government has no obligation to make sure that “happiness” itself is available to all.  As long as any individual has the ability to find success out of the worst socio-economic station in life, to become a CEO, an entertainer, or a civic leader, despite the hurdles and vicissitudes of life, then government has done its job by making that pursuit available to all.

     Extracting the words “pursuit of” from our American conscious breeds an entitlement mentality.  Many believe that all people (which evidently includes non-citizens, illegal aliens, and criminals) are automatically entitled to be given no-strings-attached “happiness” (welfare, insurance, exemption from taxes, etc.) from its government.  However, there is always someone who has to pay for the government to hand someone else these economic benefits.  Those who are attempting to lawfully pursue their own freedom and economic pursuits are increasingly enslaved to those segments of the population who are not willing to pursue their own happiness on their own dime or through their own efforts.  This entitlement mentality is unsustainable and will eventually crush this country.

     As we approach multiple elections in 2012, I would encourage you to vote for candidates who are cognizant of that phrase “pursuit of.”  Support those potential officials who seek to reduce government intrusion and maximize each citizen’s pursuit of freedom, gratification and happiness; reject candidates who intend to use government to hand out “happiness” to some citizens at the expense of others.  

ON MY BOOKSHELF: Radical, Dante and Green Angel

    I doubt it will surprise you that my bookshelf overflows with eclectic-ness!  So, every once in a while, I want to share with you what I’ve been reading.

    I recently finished two books. David Platt’s Radical: Taking Back Your Faith From the American Dream is a very appropriate book for believers today. He argues that modern American Evangelicalism is merely an amalgam of casual Christianity and the American Dream. The obsession with material prosperity by modern Christians has hamstrung the effectiveness of the Church, and turned it into a feeble factory for beautiful buildings and religious platitudes. Platt tracks through the Gospels and demonstrates that true faith in Christ is, instead, a life of radical discipleship whereby we are willing to forfeit the riches of this world for the spread of God’s glory throughout the earth.

    I also recently finished Elaine Tyler May’s Homeward Bound: American Families in the Cold War Era. This was a fascinating study about how Cold War fears in the 1940s and 1950s drove the American public to place greater emphasis on traditional domestic gender roles. After World War II families coped with international threats and social insecurities by reasserting the role of males as wage earners and by limiting women’s roles to the domestic sphere. May appeals primarily to popular culture, public policy and the Kelly Longitudinal Survey (KLS) to trace the juxtaposition of American anti-communist ideology and the reassertion of domesticity. Though this book is not without its faults, such as too much reliance on the KLS study, May’s research is a thorough and satisfying interweaving of political and gender concerns, and how those drove and were driven by popular culture.

    During the holiday break, I am reading the following:

     So, have you read any interesting books lately that you would like to share? Send the name, author, and a two or three sentence summary to feedback@eclectickasper.com and we may print it in a future edition.

EMERGENT CONCERNS: Emerging Into World Religions

    Emergent authors and writers make disturbing statements that lean toward universalism and that blur the distinctions between Biblical Christianity and other world religions. We have already mentioned this troubling tendency in our series of articles regarding “Emergent Concerns” (see the August 2011 article The Difficulty with Diversity), but we’ve found many more quotes that illustrate this.

    Christians can and should interact with people of other world religions or members of cults. I would even encourage believers to be more familiar with other faith systems and better equipped to share Christian truth with them. Inter-religious interaction shouldn’t threaten the well-grounded Christian. Confrontation with those of other religious systems should be about truth and not just religious opinion, and in these conversations, believers should exemplify gentleness, winsomeness, and humility (Col 4:6; 2 Timothy 2:25; Titus 3:2; James 3:13; 1 Peter 3:15).

    Some individuals in Scripture broadly acknowledge a basic commonality of religious sentiment with those of other faith systems, specifically, a belief in and need to worship divine beings (see Joshua 24:15; Acts 17:28, for example). However, these statements never lend legitimacy to any other religion, god, or faith system. You don’t see Biblical figures saying, “My belief in God is very similar to your belief in Molech/ Ba’al/ Chemosh/ Asharah/ Dagon/ Zeus!” All other faith systems are based on false deities (Ps 97:9; Is 41:29; 44:9; Jer 10:14; 16:19; Zech 10:2). While modern culture may chaff against this exclusive-ness, it is, nevertheless, very at home in Scripture (see the end of this article) and should not be uncomfortable for Biblical Christians. Believers have a Biblical basis to firmly deny that anyone can have salvation from and a genuine relationship with God apart from believing in Christ as the only savior and redeemer.

    Leonard Sweet’s Quantum Spirituality (1991), written in the primitive stages of the emergent movement, is a storehouse of religious toleration gone awry. In an attempt to appeal to a broad post-modern audience this work minimizes the essential distinctives of Biblical Christianity and gives legitimacy to other world religions. Drawing more from the New Age Movement’s playbook rather than from the pages of Scripture, Sweet comments: “Through the synergy of the divine-human exchange of energies, an unbelievable field of healing and transforming energy is rounded up and released in the universe. Humans are constructed out of mutually attracting energy particles with positive and negative charges. Negative or neutral charges too often dominate human contacts. Positive charges in the church are about as rare as ‘strange matter’--positively charged lumps of quarks know as ‘quarknuggets’--is in the quantum world. . . . Destructive, negative, constricting states of consciousness are caught as readily as creative, positive, expanding states of consciousness. All energy states are contagious” (Quantum Spirituality, p. 83). By the way, I don’t make the tie between this quote and New Ageism lightly; I have read a great deal of New Age literature, and much of it sounds exactly like this.    Similarly, Donald Miller begins his enormously popular 2003 book Blue Like Jazz: Nonreligious Thoughts on Christian Spirituality (which they may even make into a movie) with an odd nod to pantheism: “I once listened to an Indian on television say that God was in the wind and the water, and I wondered at how beautiful that was because it meant you could swim in Him or have Him brush your face in a breeze” (p. 1).  A detractor may retort that we are taking some of these passages out of context;  I would counter, however, that I'm not sure that any of these kinds of sentiments should be in a “Christian” book to begin with!

    Other statements of emergent writers imply or state that God works through other world religions to provide revelation, Gospel truth, or, as in the next quote by Sweet, “light”: “A surprisingly central feature of all the world’s religions is the language of light in communicating the divine and symbolizing the union of the human with the divine: Muhammed’s light-filled cave, Moses’ burning bush, Paul’s blinding light, Fox’s ‘inner light,’ Krishna’s Lord of Light, Böhme’s light-filled cobbler shop, Plotinus’ fire experiences, Bodhisattvas with the flow of Kundalini’s fire erupting from their fontanelles, and so on” (Quantum Spirituality, p. 236). One emergent author queries: “Can it be that the teachings of the gospel are embedded and can be found in reality itself rather than being exclusively isolated in sacred texts and our interpretations of those texts? If the answer is yes, can it be that they are embedded in other stories, other peoples’ histories, and even other religions” (Samir Selmanovic, An Emergent Manifesto of Hope, edited by Doug Pagitt and Tony Jones [2008], p. 192, emphasis mine).

    Again, Sweet: “One can be a faithful disciple of Jesus Christ without denying the flickers of the sacred in followers of Yahweh, or Kali, or Krishna. A globalization of evangelism ‘in connection’ with others, and a globally ‘in-formed’ gospel, is capable of talking across the fence with Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh, Muslim--people from other so called ‘new’ religious traditions (‘new’ only to us)--without assumption of superiority and power” (Leonard Sweet, Quantum Spirituality, pp. 130-131). My only reaction is, I don’t just “assume” Christianity is superior to any other religion; I believe fully that it is superior on account of being the only valid religion providing the only legitimate form of salvation.

    Emergent granddaddy, Brian McLaren, strikingly, lends legitimacy to Islam by equating the religious experiences of Muhammad to those of Abraham, Moses, and even Jesus: “And during his lifetime, Abraham—like Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad—had an encounter with God that distinguished him from his contemporaries and propelled him into a mission, introducing a new way of life that changed the world… How appropriate that the three Abrahamic religions begin with a journey into the unknown” (Finding Our Way Again [2008], pp. 22-23).

    Too much friendliness with other religions and too little emphasize on the distinctive doctrines and practices of Christianity is a recipe for universalism. In Spencer Burke and Barry Taylor’s aptly titled 2008 book A Heretic’s Guide to Eternity one of the authors claims: “I’m attracted to universalism insofar as it acknowledges that many of the world’s religions contain true and valuable insights” (p. 196). McLaren, again, a bit too comfortable with other world religions, suggests that “universalism is not as bankrupt of biblical support as some suggest” (The Last Word and the Word After That [2003], p. 103, see also pp. 182-183).

    A broader attempt to justify universalism theologically comes from Dallas Willard: “What Paul is clearly saying [in Romans 2:6-10] is that if anyone is worthy of being saved, they will be saved. At that point many Christians get very anxious, saying that absolutely no one is worthy of being saved. The implication of that is that a person can be almost totally good, but miss the message about Jesus, and be sent to hell. What kind of a God would do that? I am not going to stand in the way of anyone whom God wants to save. I am not going to say ‘he can't save them.’ I am happy for God to save anyone he wants in any way he can. It is possible for someone who does not know Jesus to be saved. But anyone who is going to be saved is going to be saved by Jesus: ‘There is no other name given under heaven by which men can be saved’” (Dallas Willard, Cutting Edge, Winter 2001). Willard contradictorily states that salvation is only found through faith in Christ but indicates that God may also save people by some other way.

    Scripture is clear regarding the exclusivity of the worship of God (Ex 22:2; Deut 6:13; Ps 86:10; Is 37:16) and of faith in Christ for salvation (John 14:6; Acts 4:12; 1 Tim 2:5). As the Emergent movement strays farther from these theological moorings, it floats so much closer to the mushy milieu of other world religions or to a generic global heresy that it can scarcely continue to be considered Christianity.

    Have you read any other bizarre quotes from Emergent authors? Send them to feedback@eclectckasper.com (with author, book title, and page number) and we’ll reprint them in future The Eclectic Kasper editions.

THE ECLECTIC KASPER: Review and Preview

    Here at the end of 2011, we wanted to take a few moments to both review our Eclectic Year and preview what you can look forward to from The Eclectic Kasper in 2012.

    Review. Over the last year, The Eclectic Kasper predicted a growing discrepancy between Obama and the American people especially as he continued to demonstrate his indecision regarding significant political issues. We predicted that NBC’s The Cape wouldn’t last much longer, and they didn’t even air the last few episodes. I also urged Sarah Palin not to run for the GOP nomination in my “Open Letter to Sarah Palin” – she obviously read our article and consequently decided not to!

    A list of favorite or most-commented-upon The Eclectic Kasper articles from 2011 include:

    Preview: Over the next year our dialog regarding politics will to heat up as we glide (or stagger?) toward the 2012 elections. We’ll continue to give you our evaluations of the current administration and assessments of potential GOP candidates. We’ll also continue installments of “Jefferson vs. Hamilton” and their profound insights regarding the founding principles of this country.

    In 2012 we’ll continue our series on “The Quest for the Ideal Medieval Fantasy Series,” “Emergent Concerns,” “Soundtrack Reviews,” “Dimensions of Worship” and “Movie/ TV Implausibility.” We will also launch a series on “Insights on Islam” where we explore some of the truths and doctrines about Islam that they just don’t tell you about in the popular media. Another series we will begin is called “You Are Mark 17,” investigating the abrupt ending of Mark’s gospel in chapter 16 and the literary and rhetorical impact that this is intended to have on the reader. Browncoats will enjoy a new series called, “Making Tracks,” which will discuss some of the musical selections associated with the Firefly and Serenity soundtracks and why they are so meaningful in their context. We'll also feature “Figures of Speech in Amos,” which is fairly self-explanatory, and “Show Within A Show,” which . . . well, you'll find out about when we get there!

    If you have any other ideas for potential articles or series, feel free to send those in to feedback@eclectickasper.com.  

CONCLUDING THOUGHTS: An Eclectic Year and An Eclectic Archive

    At the end of our first full year of writing on a variety of topics we have an eclectic mix of almost 80 articles in our “Eclectic Archive.” These are arranged by topics and series so it is easier to follow a string of articles that span several months.    We hope that you enjoy and benefit from at least some of our articles in The Eclectic Kasper. As always, feel free to send us your thoughts and input at feedback@eclectickasper.com.  Also, come and give our The Eclectic Kasper Facebook page a “like” and you can post comments and thoughts on our wall!

    And again . . .

MERRY CHRISTMAS!!