//Here is a verse dear to all strands of Christianity. Regardless of how you imagine God to be love, Christians agree that He is love.

It turns out that this manner of picturing God is common to many religions. The following quotes are taken from J. C. Tefft’s new book, The Christ is Not a Person:

Buddhism: He that loveth not, knoweth not God. For God is love.

Confucius: Love belongs to the highest Heaven and is the quiet home where man should dwell.

Hinduism: The entire universe is in the glory of God … the God of love.

Jewish: Love is the beginning and the end of the Torah.

Sufism: For God is the God of Love, and Love calls from all these, each one His home.

John tells how this white horseman was given a crown, and how he rode out as a conqueror. David Aune, author of three scholarly tomes on Revelation, suggests that a more accurate interpretation of today’s verse may be “the conquering one left to conquer even more.” As history buffs already know, Vespasian did just that. Bolstered by Josephus’ vision of him as Messiah, Vespasian broke off the attack on Jerusalem (handing it over to his son, Titus) and returned to Rome, to claim by force an even greater place. He was crowned king over the entire Empire.

More about Vespasian’s role in Revelation can be found in my book, Revelation: The Way It Happened.

And they heard the sound of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God among the trees of the garden.

//Many times I’ve mentioned, always a bit tongue-in-cheek, that I miss the God who used to play hide-and-seek with his humans in his garden. But what do you really picture as you read this verse? Although I’ve never polled anyone, I suspect every Christian has a little different image in their head when they think of “the sound of God walking.”

Martin Luther, for example, thought it ridiculous to imagine that God actually walked around on feet. Something else must be meant. Adam and Eve heard the sound of wind and animals, which before had seemed benign, but now, because of their fallen state, had become something to be afraid of.

Has Luther gone too far in de-personifying God? Are we still taking the Bible seriously when we don’t take it literally? More on this topic tomorrow.

★★★★★

We have just enough religion to make us hate but not enough to make us love one another. –Jonathan Swift

What does it mean to be a Christian in a multi-faith world? In a world that keeps shrinking, McLaren draws us back to Christian neighborly principles, encouraging respect and interfaith understanding, but without sacrificing our allegiance to Christ. While it may be true that fostering an us-versus-them atmosphere strengthens the walls and adds purpose to our lives, this does not mean it’s the only (or proper) way to remain strong in our faith. McLaren teaches a Christian identity that moves us toward people of other faiths in wholehearted love, not in spite of their non-Christianity identity and not in spite of our own Christianity identity, but because of our identity as a follower of God in the way of Jesus.

Anne Rice once proclaimed, “In the name of Christ … I quit Christianity and being Christian.” Many of us have felt the same frustration as we outgrew our oppositional tendencies and pondered what it really means to be Christian. McLaren calls it “Conflicted Religious Identity Syndrome,” this matter of opposing opposition, for it is opposition—standing not only for something but against something—which stabilizes our identity.

But if we jettison our strong/hostile Christian training, will we drift toward its opposite, a weak/benign faith? Yes, if we don’t direct our efforts! Weak faith is weak faith! So McLaren calls for strong/benevolent Christians. Contrary to the arguments of aggressive atheists today, the antidote to bad religion is not no religion, but good religion.

As I read back over my review, I see that I’ve used too many big words; I haven’t been very true to the flavor of the book. It actually is quite readable and satisfying, and I loved it.

//Urim and Thummim were objects used as an ancient Israelite means of divination. Ever wonder what these objects looked like? We have no idea. They trace back to at least the 8th century BC, referenced in the book of Hosea. Their use seems to have disappeared prior to Babylonian captivity. The Talmud explains that they were lost when Jerusalem was sacked by Babylon.

1 Samuel chapter 14 finds God giving Saul the silent treatment, and Saul finally decides God must be miffed about a sin committed by Israel. He gathers the leaders of his army and stands them together, while he and his son Jonathan stand apart. Then he inquires of God “by lot” to determine the innocent party. He and Jonathan are selected. He inquires again between he and Jonathan, and finds his son to be guilty. (Jonathan was supposed to be fasting, and snuck a taste of honey).

We assume this “casting of lots” referred again to Urim and Thummim. They appear to have been small objects belonging to the high priest, worn on the breastplate, or perhaps in a pouch or pocket inside the breastplate. Some picture them to have been tiny tablets of bone or wood. Textual scholars believe the name Thummim derives from the root word meaning innocent, while Urim derives from a root meaning cursed. Most likely, the high priest put his hand into the pocket, swirled it around a bit, and randomly chose one of the two, determining the party’s innocence or guilt. To determine a sinner from a group of people, the priest could divide the crowd in two, use his U&T to determine the side with the guilty party, and repeat the process until God had singled out one person.

//I saw a beggar in Las Vegas a while back holding an open hat and a sign that read, “Why lie? I need a beer.” Honesty intrigues me, so I stopped and asked him if he was perishing. He said yep, if he didn’t get a beer he’d die, and I said alrighty, you qualify. I’ll see what I can do.

As I entered the casino I was met by drunken laughter. Someone at the 3-card poker table had hit it big, and was dancing around with three kings in his hand.

It is not for kings, O Lemuel—not for kings to drink wine, not for rulers to crave beer, lest they drink and forget what the law decrees, and deprive all the oppressed of their rights.  –verses 4-5

… so I stole his beer while he was celebrating and took it out to the beggar where it belongs.

(editor’s note: This doesn’t quite sound like Lee … I suspect this didn’t really happen!)