Home Rest, Wim Wenders, Sojourners and Faith in God

Home Rest
One night, the pain got so bad that accompanying the cold sweat was bile rising steadily (and illogically) in my throat, posed for a splendiferous hurl. It seemed, in the midst of curlingupanddying, that the usual no-doctors-no-drugs route wasn't going to wash this time and a visit to the friendly general practitioner was in order.

"Teeheehee," the friendly GP giggled coyly behind his long slim fingers at my distress,"it was the aerobics wasn't it?"

It most definitely was not. Richard Simmons and lyotards just aren't my style, y'know.

But, as feared, the orders were for complete rest and immobilisation: no basketball, no smell of hot grass on a weekend afternoon at ultmate frisbee, no casual rugby, no salty wakeboarding, no partying and goodnessme (cue: another fey giggle) no training for marathons and a biathlon!

So after cancelling on some rather disgruntled mates ("But we've already carbo-loaded!"), there was nothing to do but to pop fistfuls of analgesics (none of which performed), hope not to overdose, cobble together reindeer snacks and layup at home watching old Wim Wenders films.

Wim Wenders
Wim Wenders, it has been said, appeals to the undergraduate in all of us. (Together with other alliteratively-named directors: Federico Fellini, Hal Hartley, Jim Jarmusch, Krzysztof Kieslowski, Roberto Rossellini...though not Buddhist Bernardo Bertolucci, crazy Charlie Chapman, cheesy Cameron Crowe nor silly Steven Soderbergh.) Wenders introduced me to the beauty of viewer participation and to the music of my freshman days: Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds and the Buena Vista Social Club.

From wim-wenders.com

Many of Wim Wenders' movies feature a lonely principal character making a journey of hurt and longing, looking for a home, searching for a place to settle down. He is an island unto himself, unable to properly communicate with the rest of the world, even the people he loves. He yearns for what he has lost. But when he finally arrives at the right place, it is obvious that the right time is long past. There is little to salvage. Whatever reunions and reconciliations come his way are temporal.

Concurrently and unconsciously, Wim Wenders, having wandered from his Catholic upbringing (like almost every other good filmaker: Federico Fellini, Krzysztof Kieslowski, Jean Renoir, Francis Ford Coppola, Fritz Lang, Alfred Hitchcock, Martin Scorsese...), was making his own spiritual journey home, culminating in his conversion to Christianity (albeit one of rather liberal persuasions) between the making of "Paris, Texas" and "Wings of Desire".

My own spiritual journey is recorded, and can be deciphered, in my movies. ("A View from Outside: An Interview with Wim Wenders")

In the twenty years I had been absent from church, my films' main subject was alienation, being on the road, being on some sort of pilgrimage toward understanding, or realization, or fulfillment. Even though most of those characters didn't know what it was they were after, they were on the way somewhere. For twenty years, being on the road itself became the topic, as the destination was so uncertain. Looking back, I was like a pilgrim who didn't believe in the marked path anymore, but still believed that being on the road had to lead somewhere as long as I was relentless about it.

...

I had to look at the Word and forget about everything that people have added over the centuries...There was no way for me to come back to the Catholic Church, but I came back to praying and began reading the Bible. I once had been very religious. In fact, when I was fourteen or fifteen, I thought I would become a priest, but, believe it or not, I had no knowledge of the Bible. If you grow up in the Catholic Church, your belief is not based on knowing the Word. In 1989, when I started to read the New Testament, I thought, "Wait a minute, why did they conceal this from me?" They read it, of course, in a Catholic service, but it's like a formula, a ceremony, and when I heard it then, it had nothing to do with my life. I couldn't really connect it to my deepest, innermost self-it was artificial somehow. So I started reading as if I had never read it before. It was all new to me. ("Angels, Cowboys, and Christians")

Sojourners
Holed up at home, I dreamt of backpacking (ok, we did actually make some short trips to neighbouring countries, doctor's orders notwithstanding). Backpacking is a great reminder how much like sojourners Christians are to be in this world. The sojourner lives uncomfortably in strange lands not his own. He is always seen as a foreigner; he doesn't fit in. He may have a house, a family and a thriving business, but underlying all that is always the deep loneliness of being an outsider in a place to which he doesn't belong. The sojourner never forgets his homeland. He knows that he is in this foreign land only for a period and a purpose, and he waits and yearns for the day it is time to go back to his true home, a place he will never leave.

Living in this world like a sojourner is not an arbitrary cultish mechanism to keep the Christian sect intact, but a natural outworking of our faith in God:

These all died in faith, not having received the things promised, but having seen them and greeted them from afar, and having acknowledged that they were strangers and exiles on the earth. For people who speak thus make it clear that they are seeking a homeland. If they had been thinking of that land from which they had gone out, they would have had opportunity to return. But as it is, they desire a better country, that is, a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared for them a city. (Hebrews 11:13-16)

Sojourning as Outworking of Faith in God
Faith in God means that we trust that he has the will and the ability to carry out what he has promised. And he has promised this: a new heaven and a new earth, a homeland, where there will be no warfare, no conflict, no tears nor pain (Revelation 21:4). This city will be perfect, because God himself will dwell with man with nothing to separate us. He will walk and talk with us in it. And our faces will shine with increasing joy at the peace and trust and contentment and satisfaction of being with our Creator. We will, without fear or distrust, rest completely in him whose glory and majesty and power will fill the entire place for a wonderful eternity.

If faith trusts that this picture of our ultimate home is true, then faith acts in ways that show that it desires, longs and waits for this home to be given to it. It acts differently from people who do not trust God and have made this world their home.

Sojourning
If we see in the promises of God our real home, if we have tasted it and found it to be good (Hebrews 6:5; 1 Peter 2:3), then we are restless and discontented with the here-and-now. The solution to our unease (or the current catchword, "urban malaise") is not to, Murakami-ishly, merely accept it and find what little dredges of joy and shreds of meaning we can in the present (cue: The Mountain Goats' soppy "Get Lonely") or to point an accusing finger at the authorities for causing our misery (cue: The Thermals' "A Pillar of Salt"). Rather, because we know of a better place and the road to it, we do everything in our ability to get home and into the arms of God.

Our goals, our values and our thinking must be infused with this homeward obsession. We must let nothing stand in our way or distract us, we are to cast off everything that hinders us (Hebrews 12:1). And if we are just passing through on earth, we should pay scarce attention to the acquisition of possessions or property or honour, the things of this world that will soon pass away. We should handle them loosely.

As aliens, we have our eyes fixed on home, and we must get our directions and instructions from the mothership God, who will lead us there. We are not to listen to the taxi touts world, nor advertisments, nor persuasively moving movies, nor hotshot academics, nor the best investment/business strategies, nor well-meaning passersby, nor clueless friends, nor emotionally-blackmaily family members, nor our own sinful hearts.

Doubled-up in pain and puking blood, the part of my brain that isn't on a desparate search for endorphines gratefully thanks God for this reminder not to be deceived into thinking that this world is all there is, even when things are going well, even when we are promoted at work, draw a good salary, have a lovely spouse and wonderful kids and great health. At the end of the day, at the end of our lives, when Christ comes again, what we desire is for God to say,"I am not ashamed to be called your God, for you have desired a better country, and I have prepared for you a city where you will dwell with me forever".

*************

When He Returns (Mark Peterson)
We await a better place, where God is on the throne
And the knowledge of the Lord will fill the earth.
The heavens and the earth renewed, a city built by God:
Descended from the sky, prepared for us.

When He returns, the people of the kingdom will rejoice
When He returns, Creation will bow down.
When He returns, He'll gather His people to Him
And take us to the city of our God.
And we'll enter His courts with praise.

We await a better place, where there is no more fear
And God has wiped the tears from our eyes
The One who sits upon the throne is making all things new
The people of God will worship Him.


Blessed Be Your Name (Matt Redman originally, but the Newsboys version is rockier)
Blessed Be Your Name
In the land that is plentiful
Where Your streams of abundance flow
Blessed be Your name

Blessed Be Your name
When I'm found in the desert place
Though I walk through the wilderness
Blessed Be Your name

Every blessing You pour out
I'll turn back to praise
When the darkness closes in, Lord
Still I will say

Blessed be the name of the Lord
Blessed be Your name
Blessed be the name of the Lord
Blessed be Your glorious name

Blessed be Your name
When the sun's shining down on me
When the world's 'all as it should be'
Blessed be Your name

Blessed be Your name
On the road marked with suffering
Though there's pain in the offering
Blessed be Your name

Every blessing You pour out
I'll turn back to praise
When the darkness closes in, Lord
Still I will say

Blessed be the name of the Lord
Blessed be Your name
Blessed be the name of the Lord
Blessed be Your glorious name

Blessed be the name of the Lord
Blessed be Your name
Blessed be the name of the Lord
Blessed be Your glorious name

You give and take away
You give and take away
My heart will choose to say
Lord, blessed be Your name
Not so much the specific lyrics but the sentiment. "My heart will choose to say" is quite true. Sometimes, in our sin, it is not a feeling but a choice.

1 Samuel 17: David and Goliath

Despite promising beginnings (being anointed as king, confirming his position by victory in battle and acknowledging God's hand in his victory), Saul failed to fulfil his kingly responsibilities of fighting battles for his people, of restraining them from doing evil and of obeying God (1 Samuel 13-16). God rejects him just as he has rejected God by his disobedience and will give the kingdom to David.

In 1 Samuel 17, we get our first peek at David in battle. This is an article reproduced from beginningwithmoses.

"Not by Spear or Sword: Reflections on David and Goliath in Biblical Theology. 1 Samuel 17" (David McDonald. Crossroads Christian Church, Canberra)

1. Introduction
My first exposure to the issue of how or how not to preach from the Old Testament came from reading Graeme Goldsworthy's book, Gospel & Kingdom. He begins his book by offering a 'typical' exposition of the David and Goliath story. In this fictitious account David is said to take up the sling of 'faith' and gather the five stones of 'obedience', 'service' and so on. The application involves the listeners applying these weapons to the Goliath 'sins' in their lives. Goldsworthy’s critique of this approach inspired me to learn how to handle God’s Word more carefully and how to honour Christ in preaching the Old Testament. Even more so, when shortly afterwards I endured a prominent preacher giving almost a carbon copy of the allegorical Goldsworthy critiqued!

1 Samuel 17 is without doubt one of the most treasured stories from the Old Testament. The story’s 'folkloric' [1] nature has given it life membership to any children’s Bible or Sunday School curriculum. The David and Goliath story of 'right versus might' and of 'faith overcoming fear' has enriched the lives of many for centuries. However, it is also true that such familiarity has led to unbridled allegorisation and a failure to come to terms with the text in its context. This paper will seek to examine the narrative of 1 Samuel 17 in its literary context as Christian Scripture.

2. Some critical concerns
This passage has some contextual and textual difficulties that have confounded commentators. Firstly, it is difficult to reconcile Saul's previous love of David (16:21-22) and his later ignorance of David's identity (17:55-58). Two separate sources or traditions are commonly postulated to explain these and other discrepancies. However, the question remains as to why the final redactor has not done a better job of ironing out the difficulties. Alter suggests that chapters 16 and 17 demonstrate 'the writer's binocular vision of David', providing different perspectives on David’s fitness for the throne. [2] He argues that this is an important narrative technique, used also in the twin accounts of creation in Genesis 1 and 2. Brueggemann, similarly, claims that these chapters offer a threefold introduction of David as shepherd boy, musician and warrior. [3] The question of historical credibility takes a backseat to the literary function of the passages in these interpretations. We will consider some of these contextual difficulties in the course of our exegesis, while allowing chapter 16 to provide the 'background' that shapes our understanding of chapter 17.

Secondly, there is considerable debate about the text of 1 Samuel 17. The Septuagint omits many verses that are included in the Masoretic Text. Verses 12-31, 41, 50, and 55-58 (also 18:1-5) are removed, leaving a neater and more consistent account. While accepting the harmonising difficulties created by the MT account, Gordon argues that the abridged account has problems of its own. [4] It is most likely that the omissions indicate an 'unimaginative approach to the business of story telling' by a scribe or translator. [5] We will examine all the verses of the MT as they are translated in our English Bibles and seek to explain the text in its context.

3. 1 Samuel 1-15 as background
1 Samuel introduces the reader to the origins of Israel's king. Throughout the book of Judges God had preserved his people without the need of a king (Judges 21:25). This theme is continued throughout 1 Samuel 1-7, where the hand of the LORD delivers his people from their enemies, the Philistines. Hannah's song (2:1-10) is important in establishing the paradigm for God’s anointed king. He will win victory and rule, not through his own strength, but in weakness, according to the might of the LORD. However, throughout chapters 8 to 12 there is a tension between the people's sinful desire for a king like all the nations and God's plans to install his monarch. Saul is anointed as king and confirms his reign through victory in battle. Throughout chapters 13 to 15 Saul is involved in conflict with the Philistines, but he fails to remain faithful as God’s anointed, and God rejects him as king.

4. 1 Samuel 16 as background
In chapter 16 we meet God’s choice of king to replace Saul. David is anointed by Samuel and receives the Spirit of the LORD, who had departed from Saul. The suitability of David to be king of Israel does not rest in his stature or prowess, but in the will of God alone. This chapter heightens the tension between the outgoing and incoming kings by showing the intersection of their paths as David soothes the tormented Saul by his music. The affirmation that God sees not as man sees, with his eyes, but with his heart (16:7) [6] is foundational to interpreting the significance of the events in chapter 17. The reader is being prepared to look for a theological angle in contrast the anthropological perspective of most of the characters in the chapter. We will discover that David, himself, carries this perspective.

5. 1 Samuel 17 in view
1-3 Setting the scene
Chapter 17 moves us from the court of Saul to the battle front between the Philistines and Israel. The Philistines have been described throughout 1 Samuel as the main enemy of Israel, and now they are encroaching into Judah. Saul was given the mandate of saving God's people from the Philistine enemy (9:16), but proved to be unable to bring about their defeat (14:52). Saul is poised to make another attempt, but the reader should not be expecting much, given the context of Saul's regal deposition and personal disarray.

4-11 Enter Goliath
The Philistine champion, Goliath, is given a long introduction. Attention is drawn to his awesome size and the weight of his armour and weaponry. However, it is his arrogant bravado that dominates this section, as he defies and mocks the ranks of Israel. This derision is repeated often throughout the narrative and invites us to see these events as a challenge to the honour of God. [7] The reader has already been warned not to take too much notice of the outward appearance of this challenger (16:7). If the appearance of Goliath directs us anywhere, it is to Saul who stood taller than all Israel (9:2), and should be considered the match for Goliath. However, Saul and his people only look upon their predicament with their 'eyes' and are left in fear and dismay (17:11). Saul's failure is confirmed again.

12-24 Enter David
David's reintroduction in 17:12ff does more than repeat his family and place of origin. It reminds the reader that we are meeting again God's anointed. The reference to Eliab and his warrior brothers emphasises that David is a different kind of Messiah. Verse 15 is described by many commentators as a variously successful or unsuccessful attempt by the redactor to harmonise the accounts of chapters 16 and 17. However, this is to ignore the integration of this verse in its context. The three brothers are described twice as 'following Saul', whereas David merely goes back and forth to feed his father’s sheep. Goliath is described as taking his stand for 40 days, which is a holy and complete number emphasising the total humiliation of Israel. [8] Significant in this section, and throughout the chapter, is that Goliath is only named twice. On every other occasion he is described as 'the Philistine'. This man is the representative of God’s enemies, and not a lone nemesis. Likewise, the attention has now shifted from Saul and his armies to the one young man who will represent God and his people. Once David has heard the Philistine, this section concludes as the previous one, with the fear of Israel.

25-27 David speaks
David has now become engaged in the conflict and the reader hears the voice of David for the first time in the narrative.

Alter identifies David's first words as being 'in biblical narrative convention, a defining moment of characterisation'. [9] However, Alter's explanation in primarily political terms is inadequate. Rather, David provides a theological injection through which to interpret the scene. David is able to 'see' as God sees, in contrast to his countrymen. They see a formidable giant, whereas David merely sees an 'uncircumcised Philistine', representing dead idols, who opposes the representatives of the living God.

28-40 I'll do it God's way
The exchange with Eliab resonates with all who have older brothers, but its place in the narrative warrants more than psycho-social explanation. Again, chapter 16 prepares the reader to view Eliab as a mirror of Saul, and indeed Goliath. Yet, it is not only his appearance (16:6), but his contempt of his weakling brother that corresponds to Goliath. In fact, Davis suggests that 'David has to fight three Goliaths in this chapter', adding Saul, who also shows contempt for David's youth and demonstrates the same warrior mentality as the Philistine. [10]

The progression of the narrative is very slow as the conflict edges closer. Again, the reader pauses to hear the words of David that will provide the right understanding of the impending conflict. Each of David's speeches are theologically loaded. 'It is as if the writer makes David his expositor.' [11] David describes his credentials for battle in terms of his responsibilities as a shepherd. However, even his victories over the wild beasts are not cause for pride, for it is God who was and will be the deliverer (17:37). Once more, David affirms that the real issue in this conflict is the honour of the living God (17:36).

In his final preparations, David refuses to wear the armour of Saul. On the surface it could be argued that it was simply too big. However, the ill fit is ultimately of a different kind. How can God's anointed wear the battle clothing of the one whom God has rejected? How can he fight the enemy using the enemy's strategies? The messiah will win the conflict, such that it will be clear that the LORD is the deliver. The reader has been prepared for this since chapter 2, and David marks himself as a king according to God’s heart.

41-54 David versus Goliath
Once again, the Philistine's disdain for God's people is vented, but now focused toward God’s chosen representative. Goliath's words drip with irony as he is in fact a 'dog', who like the lions and bears, will be destroyed by David. Again, David's commentary reminds the reader that the conflict is over God’s honour and that God alone will be the deliverer. God's power will be demonstrated through weakness and so his glory will be manifest to all the earth. Each of David's speeches and his actions demonstrate the reality of his faith in the LORD to deliver him, and his people.

The battle is over almost before it has begun. With very few gory details, the emphasis is given to the fact that the Philistine was not killed by the military methods of the Philistines, or of Saul for that matter. The reader is repeatedly told that it was not the sword that killed Goliath. He is dead before David takes up the Philistine sword. [12] This completes a contrast with the ways of Saul, who sought to conquer the Philistines on their own terms. [13] Finally, the representative nature of this victory is established as the Philistines flee and their camp is plundered.

However, this is more than a conflict between David and Goliath, or even David and Saul. It is ultimately a conflict between the living God and idols. Hence, Goliath’s collapse face down is reminiscent of the twofold falling of the Philistine god, Dagon, in chapter 5. This is further confirmed as Goliath is beheaded (5:4).

Verse 54 reveals another chronological difficulty in the text, for Jerusalem was at that time still a Jebusite city. Perhaps a time adjunct is imagined, such as 'Much later David…'. [14] At any rate, its theological significance will become clear in 2 Samuel, and it is poignant that the victory of David is here connected with the city of David.

55-58 A question of identity
This chapter closes with the puzzling questions from Saul about whose son is David. This is enigmatic, given Saul’s previous awareness of David and his family in chapter 16. Whatever explanations are given must account for the fact that the redactor records Saul questioning three times. Has Saul’s mental illness made him forgetful? Is there a flashback being offered that is chronologically prior to 1 Samuel 16:14? It is beyond the scope or purpose of this paper to resolve the historical chronology question. However, this can be explained in narrative terms as directing the reader back to chapter 16, to be reminded that the victorious youth is none other than God’s messiah.

Conclusions
Chapter 17 is a highpoint in the narrative of the books of Samuel. The honour of the living God is declared. He is affirmed as the true king who brings deliverance for his people. However, he is shown to do this through his chosen messiah, who wins the victory through his faith in God and by means of weakness. David's actions acclaim him as the rightful king (see 18:7) and so make public, what has already taken place in private through David’s anointing by Samuel.

While David can be shown to be a model of faith for all who will follow God, it is the significance of David as God’s messiah that shapes our Christian understanding of this chapter. David becomes the prototype of Jesus Christ who maintains his faithful obedience in God unto death (Philippians 2:6-8). Like David, we meet a messiah who will be God's representative to deliver many (Mark 10:45; Romans 5:19). Jesus will be tempted with alternative means to take his place on the throne (Luke 4:1-13). In the very event that brings salvation, Jesus will be mocked and ridiculed (Luke 23). His method of bringing deliverance will be a scandal to his fellow Israelites and foolishness to the nations. However, in both David and Jesus Christ, we see the power of God and the wisdom of God at work through human weakness (1 Corinthians 1:24).

Praise be to the LORD!

ENDNOTES
[1] Robert Alter, The David Story: A Translation with Commentary of 1 and 2 Samuel. (New York: W.W. Norton, 1999),104. Alter sees the story of David and Goliath as a folk tale, which has been included in the narrative. Without prejudging the historicity of 1 Samuel 17, it is fair to say that this story has captured the imaginations of many, in a manner similar to more recent folk tales.
[2] Robert Alter, The Art of Biblical Narrative. (USA; Basic Books, 1981), 147-154. See also J.P. Fokkelman. Narrative Art and Poetry in the Books of Samuel. Volume II: The Crossing Fates. (Dover, New Hampshire: Van Gorcum, 1986), 201-203.
[3] Walter Brueggemann, First and Second Samuel. (Interpretation. Louisville: John Knox Press, 1990), 120.
[4] R.P. Gordon, 1 & 2 Samuel: A Commentary. (Exeter: The Paternoster Press, 1986), 64-66.
[5] Gordon, 66.
[6] "…man looks on the outward appearance, but the LORD looks on the heart" 16:7b (ESV). The Hebrew for 'outward appearance' literally means 'eyes'. It makes more sense to understand this as a contrast between the means of looking rather than the object looked at. Thus, we follow Alter’s translation: "For man sees with the eyes and the LORD sees with the heart.” Alter, The David Story, 96. This verse, then is seen to be describing how God sees David, not what God sees in David.
[7] Dale Ralph Davis, 1 Samuel: Looking on the Heart. (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1994),144.
[8] J.P. Fokkelman, Reading Biblical Narrative: An Introductory Guide. (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1999), 29.
[9] Alter, The David Story, 105.
[10] Davis, 149.
[11] Davis, 152.
[12] Contra Alter, 109. ‘The gigantic Philistine is stunned but perhaps not dead….’ Alter's choice to ignore the explicit affirmation of the text ignores the significance of victory without the sword.
[13] See especially 13:19-22 & 14:20.
[14] Fokkelman, 205.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Alter, R. The Art of Biblical Narrative. USA; Basic Books, 1981.
Alter, R. The David Story: A Translation with Commentary of 1 and 2 Samuel. New York: W.W. Norton, 1999.
Arnold, B.T. 1 & 2 Samuel. NIV Application Commentary. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003.
Baldwin, J. 1 and 2 Samuel. Tyndale. Leicester: Intervarsity Press, 1988.
Bruggemann, W. First and Second Samuel. Interpretation. Louisville: John Knox Press, 1990.
Davis, D.R. 1 Samuel: Looking on the Heart. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1994.
Fokkelman, J.P. Narrative Art and Poetry in the Books of Samuel. Volume II: The Crossing Fates. Dover, New Hampshire: Van Gorcum, 1986.
Fokkelman, J.P. Reading Biblical Narrative: An Introductory Guide. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1999.
Goldsworthy, G. Gospel & Kingdom: A Christian Interpretation of the Old Testament. Homebush: Lancer, 1981.
Gordon, R.P 1 & 2 Samuel: A Commentary. Exeter: The Paternoster Press, 1986.
Gordon, R.P 1 & 2 Samuel. Old Testament Guides. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1987.
Hertzberg, H.W. I & II Samuel. OTL. London: SCM Press, 1964.

A Busy Sunday and Not Making the Bible Relevant

Because on Sunday morning after service at ARPC is over, there are giggling babies to tickle, young parents to catch-up with, serious conversations about loving and helping the psychologically-troubled, sports in the sun, attempting to read Nigel Beynon & Andrew Sach's masterful "Dig Deeper" together and being distracted by the unique voice of a Bishan busker.

Because in the afternoon when journalists gather for tea, there is chocolate cake on an old stand, a bowl of buttery puff pastries, piles of otak and belachan/haebi sandwiches, spiked iced tea in an heirloom pitcher, sniffing mint and basil plants, laughing at Mickey Mouse platies, looking for a pair of Ghost Fish, disabusing pirate algae-eating catfish of their ferocity, gloriously messy bookshelves interspersed with bottles of malt whiskey, lemongrass oil in burners, wild gesticulating, simultaneous industry gossip and loud cackling.

Because in the evening when old university mates meet up [*waves*], there is attempting to order steamboat ingredients in Mandarin, shovelling down a good plate of Hainanese pork chop, running away from a murderously roaring fire, an actressatheart studying for the New York Bar, a piano teacher with OCD, taking surreptitious photos of a creature in a white translucent dress, catching Eleanor Wong's "Second Link" and, thereafter, tales of blood-drawing braces and insidious American margaritas.

So the question was how we could make the Bible suit Distracted Christians, Worldly Journalists and Weird Arty-farty types?

The thing is: we don't.

We don't change what the Bible says to cater to different groups of people. We don't major on what the Bible does not emphasize to be relevant to the different times of Man. Says old Charles Spurgeon on preachers and preaching:

I am bound to say...that our object certainly is not to please our clients, nor to preach to the times, nor to be in touch with modern progress, nor to gratify the cultured few. Our life-work cannot be answered by the utmost acceptance on earth; our record is on high, or it will be written in the sand. There is no need whatever that you and I should be chaplains of the modern spirit, for it is well supplied with busy advocates. Surely Ahab does not need Micaiah to prophesy smooth things to him, for there are already four hundred prophets of the groves who are flattering him with one consent. We are reminded of the protesting Scotch divine, in evil days, who was exhorted by the Synod to preach to the times. He asked, "Do you, brethren, preach to the times?" They boasted that they did. "Well, then," said he, "if there are so many of you who preach for the times, you may well allow one poor brother to preach for eternity." We leave, without regret, the gospel of the hour to the men of the hour. With such eminently cultured persons for ever hurrying on with their new doctrines, the world may be content to let our little company keep to the old-fashioned faith, which we still believe to have been once for all delivered to the saints. Those superior persons, who are so wonderfully advanced, may be annoyed that we cannot consort with them; but, nevertheless, so it is that it is not now, and never will be, any design of ours to be in harmony with the spirit of the age, or in the least to conciliate the demon of doubt which rules the present moment.

Brethren, we shall not adjust our Bible to the age; but before we have done with it, by God's grace, we shall adjust the age to the Bible. We shall not fall into the error of that absent-minded doctor who had to cook for himself an egg; and, therefore, depositing his watch in the saucepan, he stood steadfastly looking at the egg. The change to be wrought is not for the Divine chronometer, but for the poor egg of human thought. We make no mistake here; we shall not watch our congregation to take our cue from it, but we shall keep our eye on the infallible Word, and preach according to its instructions. Out Master sits on high, and not in the chairs of the scribes and doctors, who regulate the theories of the century. We cannot take our key-note from the wealthier people, nor from the leading officers, nor even from the former minister.

How often have we heard an excuse for heresy made out of the desire to impress "thoughtful young men"! Young men, whether thoughtful or otherwise, are best impressed by the gospel, and it is folly to dream that any preaching which leaves out the truth is suitable to men, either old or young. We shall not quit the Word to please the young men, nor even the young women. This truckling to young men is a mere pretence; young men are no more fond of false doctrine than are the middle-aged; and if they are, there is so much the more necessity to teach them better. Young men are more impressed by the old gospel than by ephemeral speculations. If any of you wish to preach a gospel that will be pleasing to the times, preach it in the power of the devil, and I have no doubt that he will willingly do his best for you. It is not to such servants of men that I desire to speak just now. I trust that, if ever any of you should err from the faith, and take up with the new theology, you will be too honest to pray for power from God with which to preach that mischievous delusion if you should do so, you will be guilty of constructive blasphemy. No, brethren, it is not our object to please men, but our design is far nobler.

To begin with, it is our great desire to bear witness to the truth. I believe — and the conviction grows upon me,—that even to know the truth, is the gift of the grace of God; and that to love the truth, is the work of the Holy Spirit. I am speaking now, not about a natural knowledge, or a natural love to Divine things, if such there be; but of an experimental know ledge of Christ, and a spiritual love to Him: these are as much the gift of God in the preacher, as the work of conversion will be the work of God in his hearers. We desire so thoroughly to know, and so heartily to love the truth, as to declare the whole counsel of God, and to speak it as we ought to speak it. This is no small labour. To proclaim the whole system of truth, and to deal out each part in due proportion, is by no means a simple matter. To bring out each doctrine according to the analogy of faith, and set each truth in its proper place, is no easy task. It is easy to make a caricature of the beautiful face of truth by omitting one doctrine and exaggerating another. We may dishonour the most lovely countenance by giving to its most striking feature an importance which puts it out of proportion with the rest; for beauty greatly consists in balance and harmony. To know the truth as it should be known, to love it as it should be loved, and then to proclaim it in the right spirit, and in its proper proportions, is no small work for such feeble creatures as we are. (from "Chapter 11: The Preacher's Power, and the Conditions of Obtaining It", "An All-Round Ministry: Addressed to Ministers and Students")

Three Days Of Reading Haruki Murakami

Not having the benefit of frequent London transportation strikes unlike some, we made do with the National Day holiday and the recent weekend to get stuck into a certain much-feted author. Besides, Borders was selling 3 Haruki Murakamis for the price of 2. Would have preferred the ones with John Gall's cover art. But a discounted book is a discounted book.

[Sidenote 1: Yes, I'm very left in the dust behind the Murakami fan-wagon. ;-). Aiyah. Haven't read much fiction since secondary school.]

[Sidenote 2: The Red Dot Traffic Building houses a nice quiet Pacific Coffee Company outlet with cushy red plush armchairs, leather sofas and Vietnamese paper lamps that is highly conducive for long-term Murakami reading.]

On a blasphemously quick read of many of his books within 3 days, the catchy universality of Murakami, it seems, stems less from his Western cultural references than his realistic portrayal of urban malaise in many works ("A Wild Sheep Chase", "Dance Dance Dance", "Hardboiled Wonderland and the End of the World", "Norwegian Wood", perhaps "The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle", maybe "South of the Border, West of the Sun", "Sputnik Sweetheart" and "Kafka On The Shore"). Quite a few of his male protagonists are passionless loners, unaffected by their wives' betrayals (if any). They are alienated from their families. They are individualistic outsiders, disengaged from community and self-sufficient: able to cook, clean and iron their own clothes. They are disconnected from the girls they sleep with, having sex without emotion or guilt. They had no interest in grades at school. They intentionally avoid the Japanese culture of joining a company and clawing their way up the career ladder. They may be unemployed because they find no interest in work, or, to survive, they may "shovel cultural snow", doing the lowly, thoughtless, thankless tasks that need to be done in society. They keep their heads down. Life to them is pointless and meaningless. They are aimless and irresolute. They have no special talents. We never know their true names nor the names of some of the women that disappear "like smoke" on them. They are suffused with the bittersweet smell of loss. In a Philip Marlowe-ish way, there is a sense that even though they may be unaware of it, their emptiness and cynicism, their thick psychological shells, their chain-smoking coffee-glupping and hard drinking, their distractions of music/food/books, are defensive reactions to some dark past, some unnamed pain. The narrator of "Sputnik Sweetheart" says:

(I) draw an invisible boundary between myself and other people. No matter who I was dealing with. I maintained a set distance, carefully monitoring the person's attitude so that they wouldn't get any closer.

Into this banal mundanity is frequently introduced the fantastical: hard-boiled Raymond Chandler and Dashiell Hammett, suburban Raymond Carver with a sort of dreamscape that is very different from the humour of Neil Gaiman or the horror of Franz Kafka but somewhat similar to the permeable Shinto worlds of Hayao Miyazaki (and we like Miyazaki). Kazuo Ishigoro calls it a "deadpan, surreal-verging-on-absurdist comic tone, a willingness to bend the edges of reality in stories set in an otherwise mundane setting". There is a pinch of film noir and David Lynch and a grain of Thomas Pynchon. There is a dash of the metaphoricalism of Richard Brautigan and determinism of Kurt Vonnegut - the characters do not control their own lives (express Sophoclean prophecy as in "Kafka On The Shore" or otherwise), passive recipients of what life deals them. Stylistically, "Hardboiled Wonderland" resembles Philip K Dick, of whom I'm fond, Lewis Carroll and fantasy of the David Eddings garden variety. Some of "The Elephant Vanishes" is more Raymond Carver short stories-ish but lacks its minimalism. Bits of "The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle" are quite Giovanni Boccaccio and Ernest Hemingway simultaneously. In "Kafka On The Shore" Murakami suggests the packed knowledge of Jorge Luis Borges, my all-time top ten favourite fiction writer (yes, should lay off the Nick Hornby) and expressly quotes Borges in "Hardboiled Wonderland" (so Murakami can't be half bad?).

But being neither a besotted fan, a studious student of literature nor a contemptuous literary critic, what was of interest to me wasn't Murakami's writing style nor the fresh tactile perkiness of his descriptions nor his characterisation nor his plot layout nor primarily, his observation of modern consumerist societies, nor the metaphors of subterranean spaces, shadows and telephones nor, err, that obsession with beautiful female ears, but the conflicts in the stories and their resolution. If the common problem with the protagonists is that they are emotionless and so less than 100% human, struggling to live in a chaotic unknowable world, then we expect that it is through their encounters with enigmatic vanishing women and their own fantastical experiences that they remember their pasts, rediscover their sense of self and humanness, and figure out how to get connected again, to work their way out of the labyrinth.

Are the fantastical aspects of the characters' experiences real? Or are they tales they tell themselves, parallel worlds, splintered psyches, doppelgängers, that they create, to sort out their present? Are they journeys of self-exploration that take place in states of consciousness? Are they Heinrich Zimmer-Joseph Campbell type mythologies that provide the individuals the roadmaps to navigate the complex modern world? "The best way to think about reality," declares the narrator of "The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle", is "to get as far away from it as possible".

And what comes of all this thinking about reality? The words "reconnect" and "rediscover" imply solutions that are neat, tyingupoflooseends, satisfying. But with Murakami, there are no fully-flowered bildungsroman conclusions. The most the characters learn is how human beings must survive on their own, how they must cope with their hollowness, their distance from others, in this meaningless world as they hurtle, silently, stoically, towards certain death and oblivion. There is no going back. The best they can do is to accept things they cannot understand and leave them that way, keep dancing, keep spinning, in the here-and-now, to survive in this hostile world where there are neither safe havens nor stable relationships. The idea is almost Taoist (that is, the original Taoism, not the animistic one commonly practised in South-East Asia).

Christian novelists should have in their hands a fair better answer to this pomo existentialism and alienation of self that besets the modern society, more satisfying than advocating the flimsy merging of the Jungian conscious and unconscious worlds or forced engagement with a valueless purposeless universe. But if a Christian wrote such a beautifully-worded novel, would it be globally panned by the literary critics for being unspeakably, well, regressive?

As a kid, I read fiction voraciously, hoping to find in stories the meaning to non-fictive life. Now that I have the truth about real life, these stories yield 2 layers of fiction: the first being the fictive narrative itself and the second, the message behind that narrative, the ontology of that fictional world. Hmmm..it'll be interesting to do a prose piece on that. Very Russian-dolls-like.

*************

Some other Murakami short stories may be accessed online:
"The Folklore of Our Times"
"Hunting Knife"

The typeface for the "Kafka On The Shore" hardcover is apparently Electra (hurhurhur).

Is it just me or does the black cat on the paperback cover of "Kafka On The Shore" look like Jiji in Hayao Miyazaki's "Kiki's Delivery Service"?

Israel-Lebanon Conflict: Fourth Generation War

"You, Christian. Can you smell the stench of Lebanon burning?" he hissed.
"No," I said politely,"I think that's the Taoists burning joss paper for the Seventh Month."

But still, the current Israel-Lebanon (or should it be Israel-Hezbollah?) conflict is of interest on 3 major fronts:

1. it disrupted a planned trip to Israel at the end of the year;
   
2. it is the very model of a Fourth Generation War whose evolution is fascinating to observe; and
   
3. the suffering that is an inevitable consequence of any war surely affects any member of the human race, any citizen of this earth and any Christian living in this world. (See "Justice and Hate" by Andrew Cameron & Tracy Nodder.)
   

Fourth Generation War
Fourth Generation War is (in Wikipedia style but obviously, since I am no military theorist, to the best of my knowledge) a term coined by civilian defence theorist, William S. Lind.

In his theory of the framework of modern war, the First Generation ran roughly from the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648 to 1860. It was characterised by conscription (and the decline of mercenaries), Napoleonic line and column tactics, where battles were formal and the battlefield was orderly. The Second Generation, developed by the French army around the time of World War I, was still essentially linear but characterised by centrally-controlled, synchronised firepower ("the artillery conquers, the infantry occupies") with the goal of attrition. Command was top-down and strictly-enforced. The uncontrolled initiative of individuals was highly-discouraged because it endangered synchronisation. The Third Generation, developed by the Germans just before World War II, was characterised by manouevre (rather than attrition) and encirclement tactics, decentralised command (very Liddell-Hart-ish Mongolian mobility, whatwhat?) and armoured warfare. Blitzkrieg. The orders specified the result to be achieved but never the method. Initiative was encouraged.

Unlike the other generations of modern war, one of the major participants in a Fourth Generation War (the most recent (and ongoing) example being the Iraq War) is not a nation state but is frequently a violent ideological network like the Al-Qa'ida (in fact, an Al-Qa'ida writer has explained that 4GW strategy will be why the Al-Qa'ida will be victorious).

The technical/operational advantages of a 4GW network to 2GW (which US had until the 1980s (and some say till the present day)) or 3GW soldiers of a nation-state are many:

• small groups of combatants make an ideological network almost resilient to attrition;
• small units are also able to make decisions quickly and autonomously, adapting and innovating without referring back to a central authority, enabling faster decision cycles and response times;
• not being bound by international treaties and human rights conventions;
  
• integration in the enemy society make 4GW fighters more difficult to detect, and even if detected, harder to prove to the population as "terrorists";
• an open-source community approach allows quicker technological and tactical innovation cycles without the need for topdown approval...
  

In 4GW, there is the blurring of boundaries between war and politics (and not blaming it on poor old Clausewitz for once), soldier and civilian, and battlefield and safety. The methodology of 4GW is characterised by undermining, rather than directly attacking, the enemy nation's strengths and by asymmetric operations where weaponry and technology differ substantially from the enemy state. 4GW fighters do not confront the enemy nation's armed forces head-on. Instead, they use the enemy's society as its battlefield, striking at cultural, civilian, political and population targets.

The aim of 4GW is to destroy the moral bond that allows a nation-state to exist; to destroy social cohesion. Menace attacks, like bombs in public transportation, put the population on the edge by threatening basic survival instincts. The creation of divisions within the enemy society, whether racial, religious, political or between economic classes, easily generates mistrust that leads to the unrivalling of community ties, especially in non-homogenous states. And all this builds an environment of fear and uncertainty, decreasing economic confidence and undermining financial activity.

4GW's judo concept of warfare seeks to turn the strengths of the enemy against itself. So terrorists easily use a free society's freedom and openness, its greatest strengths, against itself. For in a democratic society, political leaders remain in power only by the vote of the people, and media opinion influences the voting population. A distracted politician with one eye on the popularity polls will not act entirely for the good of his country: he will act in accordance to popular opinion but not necessarily in wisdom. So specific insurgent tactics would include heavy use of the enemy media to destroy popular support in the enemy's society for the battle against 4GW insurgents by:

• portraying the enemy nation-state as heavy-handed and a big bully, a typical David-and-Goliath angle with photos of little boys throwing stones at heavily-armed men;
  
• highlighting perceived nation-state violations of human rights;
• underlining terrible civilian casualties in areas where the insurgents had previously hidden their weapon caches or where they had used the indigenous population as human shields;
• misdirecting the fears of the enemy's citizens to, for example, violations of their own privacy;
• err...just basically controlling what the media sees (it's easier to do this when you're NOT a nation-state, even though the journos should have been suspicious that you had your own press officials)...
  

Ehud Olmert, the current Israeli Prime Minister has already attracted both international and domestic criticism for his role in the Israel-Lebanon/Hezbollah War. Unlike Ariel Sharon or Yitzhak Rabin, neither Olmert nor his Defense Minister, Amir Peretz, have the benefit of extensive high-level military experience. Apparently, Olmert "didn't have any kind of strategic plan, it was a very instantaneous reaction".

Will Israel's change of strategy from heavy firepower, long-range bombardment to small, fastmoving units with lighter equipment will turn the tide of the Israel-Lebanon/Hezbollah War? What new FIBUA guerilla-on-guerilla tactics will emerge? Will John Boyd's OODA Loop (that is, "Observe Orient Decide Act" Loop) be put into use and how will it fare? How will Israel deal with the main dilemma of 4GW, that victory on the physical level (killing people, destroying objects) usually works against the victor (seen as the big bad bully) politically, culturally and morally in the hearts and minds of the people? How will Israel deal with the ongoing hijacking of the media?

If and when Israel succeeds, it'll be interesting to think how these lessons can be translated to our local urban environment.

NB1: This Draft Manual on Fourth Generation War makes interesting suggestions how a nation-state could win a 4GW. Ongoing commentary at Global Guerrillas, International Relations and Security Network and StrategyUnit.

NB2: If a 4GW does break out on our doorstep, via Jamiah Islamiah or otherwise, will our local intelligentsia continue to fête the vocal disgruntled who whine about a strong one-party government or about racial prejudices as daring, witty and refreshing, or will they see them as subversive betrayers bent on destroying the fragile harmony of our community from the inside?

NB3: 4GW strategy and tactics sound like the sort of Screwtape Letters that a senior devil might write to a younger one: How To Defeat The Body of Christ, How To Divide and Conquer God's People, How To Turn Strengths Of The Chosen Ones Against Themselves.

NB4: Update - 14 August 2006: Olmert is now slated to be challenged at the Knesset for accepting the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701 for a ceasefire.

Picnic at the Botanics and 1 Samuel 11-12

Saturday morning, at the end of the work week, is glorious skies and cloudless sunshine. We bounceburst out of our homes, happy and free, shouting,"A picnic! A picnic!" ("Vacate! Vacate!", yells someoneelse,"Fire in the hole!", just to be different and retain some semblance of macho-ness*. But we think, instead, that he means his morning toilet was somewhat explosive.)

(The soundtrack for the car-ride is this:
Jane Herships "Don't Be Afraid, I've Just Come To Say Goodbye (The Ballad of Clementine Jones)"
Mary Lou Lord "I've Figured You Out"
KT Tunstall "On The Other Side Of The World"
Imogen Heap "Hide and Seek"
Imogen Heap "Speeding Cars"
Snow Patrol "Chasing Cars"
Quite a bit of estrogen, no wrinkly Leonard Cohen. So somehow, despite the morose lyrics, the songs sound quite cheerful if chorused at the top of one's voice on a sunny day with the wind in our hair and a well-stocked picnic basket on someone's lap. A VW camper van with red plush upholstery, without Bob Dylan and his garish harmonica, would be a nice extra.)

(Too many estrogen-y singers also gives us this StrawberryShortcake descriptive:)
At the Singapore Botanic Gardens, butterflies dance ahead of us, past the bushy-tailed squirrels rustling in flowering bushes, past the lush morningglory-trellised walkway heavy with fleshy purple, past the fragrance of frangipanis hanging in the air like a thick pink cloud, and onto our usual spot on the undulating lawn, where there is shade under great palm trees. There, there is the laying out of mats and food and drinks. There are straw hats and sunnies. There is a bronzed barechested man, his baseball cap set jauntily, juggling, the red and white skittles winking in the sun. There are rosbif beetroot brie sandwiches wrapped in paper and packets of crisps. There are children running after excited puppies. There are children running away from excited puppies. There are copious amounts of icy drinks. There are lazy games of crocker. There is more cheese and chilled Misiones de Rengo Sauvignon Blanc. There is a contented breeze and quiet reading. There is the faint soundwall of cicadas in the rainforest nearby.

And when the ants find us, by the nasty black battalion, we leave.

*************

Salvation from External Enemies
While we (and the rest of Israel) are wondering at the end of 1 Samuel 9-10 if Saul will fulfil his role as king to save Israel from external enemies and from themselves, Nahash the Ammonite thoughtfully provides Saul with the opportunity to prove himself by besieging Jabesh-gilead (1 Samuel 11:1).

The people of Jabesh-gilead are so certain of defeat, so sure of death at the hands of Nahash that as a last resort, they offer themselves as his vassals (1 Samuel 11:1). But cruel old Nahash wants more than their servitude. He wants to rub salt in their wounds; he wants, literally, to put out their right eyes and thus bring disgrace to all of Israel (1 Samuel 11:2).

Faced with a fate worse than slavery, the people of Jabesh-gilead ask Nahash for a 7-day grace period to find for themselves a saviour. So complacent is the Ammonite that he grants their request, thus making him the forefather of all loser evil dudes in movies who exhibit great reluctance to kill the captive hero/heroine while they can, and instead waste time boasting about their own cunning clever evilness, allowing the heroic sidekick ample opportunity to rescue the captive.

The camera pans to another town, where Saul is coming in from the field behind the oxen (1 Samuel 11:5). He hears of this outrage, and the Spirit of God rushes upon him and he rallies 330,000 men to the Jabesh cause (11:6-9). Together, they overrun the Ammonites and save the people of Jabesh-gilead from their enemies.

This is a great start. Saul shows that he can and will deliver the people under his care; he will go out and fight their battles for them (1 Samuel 8:20).

Salvation from Themselves
What is better is that Saul gives credit to whom it is due. It is the LORD, says Saul, who has worked salvation in Israel today (11:13). For it was the Spirit of God who first moved Saul into action (how different he is from the mousy man hiding amongst the luggage (10:22) or the one who wanted to crawl back to the comfort of home without finding his lost asses (9:5)). It was also the dread of the LORD that fell upon the people so they responded to Saul as they did, turning out as one man to save the people of Jabesh-gilead (11:7-8).

And the people, acknowledging God's ultimate kingship, make Saul king before God. Things are indeed looking up. It looks as if God's people and their king are finally living in a right relationship with God.

But Samuel reminds them of the dark cloud hanging over their heads: in asking for a human king in place of God the divine king, they have rebelled against him. And the judgement for rebellion against God is death and destruction. Oh, perhaps the reason why the people sinned is because Saul was a stumbling block to them. Or was it because, really, God wasn't worthy of his kingship and if the incumbent was of no use, then a revolution, understandably, was in order; a human king would do better than a divine one?

Unfortunately, Saul himself was not the stumbling block. The people agree that since he was a young child serving at the temple, he had neither defrauded the people, nor oppressed them, nor taken anything from any man's hand (1 Samuel 12:3-5).

Even more unfortunately, God was far from unworthy of his divine kingship. Saul reminds the people of the righteous acts the LORD did for the people, of his power and his faithfulness to them: whenever they cried out, whether they were under their Egyptian oppressors or hardpressed by their enemies, it was the LORD who had the heart and the ability to deliver them, so that they could dwell in safety (12:6-11).

The problem is neither with Saul nor with God. The problem is the people themselves: their rebellious hearts, their ungratefulness, their myopia. Time and again, they forgot what God had done for them, and how he had punished them for previous sins and yet, how in great mercy, he delivered them from their enemies when they cried out to him (12:8-11).

So the whole of Israelite history was repetitive cycle of sin, punishment and grace on a linear timeline. And in that cycle, the Israelites, just having rushed past the Sin platform having rebelled against God by wanting to replace him with a human king, are hurtling towards the next stop: Punishment.

Do the people doubt that God is able to punish them? God demonstrates his ability to do so by sending a thunderstorm to destroy their harvest (12:16-17). If the people thought that the growing of the crops, the sure harvest, their daily lives were in their own control and were a matter of no concern to anyone else but themselves, they were surely disabused of that idea in a hurry. God's ability to send thunder and rain in the driest season show that the people are completely dependent on God for everything for he alone controls the world. They, mere creatures, are at his mercy. God is not impotent or ignorant or imaginary. He is very real, omniscient and omnipotent. That is a Very Good Thing To Remember.

The horror of what they've done, their faithlessness despite God's faithfulness, their distrust of God's proven trustworthiness cuts them to the heart. Face to face with the enormity of the evil they perpetuated, the people greatly fear for their lives (12:18). What terrible punishment surely awaits them.

Yet Samuel says,"Do not be afraid" (12:20). Even though they have done this evil, there is a way to escape what they rightfully deserve: fear the LORD and serve him (12:14), follow the LORD their God (12:14) and obey his commandments. God is merciful and patient, not destroying completely like he easily did to the harvest. Because grace is pardon freely given, there is no need for prior punishment, no requirement for purgatory.

However, warns Samuel, if they continue on their current path, if they continue not to obey the voice of God, if they continue to rebel against his commandments (12:15), then there will be no hope left for them. They and their king will be swept away (12:15).

Perhaps this time the people would save themselves much grief and obey God? Perhaps their new king will be able to lead them well and restrain them from doing evil?

See 1 Samuel 13-15.

*************

*A picnic, a picnic
The Smurfs are on their way
To go and have a picnic this bright and breezy day

A picnic, a picnic
We're bringing drinks and food
All Smurfs are in a happy mood

Upfront goes Papa Smurf and then the other Smurfs
And there they all gather merrily singing along
Oh this is such a happy day
[Or something similar. If anyone has the definitive lyrics, please let me know.]

1 Samuel 9-10 and Superman mp3s

Much port was spilt over our 1 Samuel 9-10 discussion, and later, tea and ink too which led to dodgy doodling.

The Neverending Cycle
From the Book of Judges (actually, from the Fall lah), we have seen a frustrating cycle: the demonstration of the greatness and goodness of God, the unthinkable sin of God's own chosen people in rebelling against him, so the rightful punishment of God on such people, but still just when you'd expect God to wipe this ungrateful and really rather daft lot (so much for survival of the fittest, Mr. Darwin) off the face of the earth, God exhibits an enormous amount of grace in continuing to preserve them. Of course the people keep "repenting" of their ways but then, only a chapter later, we see them going back to their old ways. Time and time again. The setting, scenario and characters might change, but the plot is always the same.

God's Replacement?
Now we thought 1 Samuel 8 might have been the last straw. Israel was unabashedly wanting to exchange God for a mere human king. But the great wonder is that God does not speak the word and cause them to de-exist. Instead, he actually gives them a king! What's this? Is the Creator condoning his replacement by a mere creature?

Nope. The human does not replace God as king, for the human king is also subject to God. He will be God's "prince" (1 Samuel 9:16; 1 Samuel 10:1). He will be an instrument of God: saving the people from external enemies (1 Samuel 9:16) and from their worst enemies - themselves (1 Samuel 9:17).

A Suitable Candidate
We've been conducting interviews recently. There is a job match when a applicant's expertise, experience and character fit the job scope we have in mind. The jobseekers are polite. They make it a point to maintain eye contact like those getanyjobyouwant books tell them to. They come carefully groomed with good CVs and testimonials. They give their nicely-prepared speeches when asked about their strengths and weaknesses. But even though we get vibes and hunches, it is difficult to suss out a person out conclusively at just an interview. So there are interview tactics. There are ways of creating stressful scenarios to see how the candidate copes. Sometimes, there is a good cop and a bad cop. Sometimes, for variation, there are only bad cops.

Fortunately, Samuel didn't have to go through this hassle to find a suitable candidate for the brand new opening - God's Prince Over Israel. The day before Saul came, the LORD had revealed to Samuel:"Tomorrow about this time I will send to you a man from the land of Benjamin, and you shall anoint him to be prince over my people Israel". And when Saul made his appearance, the LORD told Samuel, "Here is the man of whom I spoke to you!" (1 Samuel 9:15-17). Easy-peasy, cos God's still in control.

Saul
How is Saul looking as God's prince over Israel?

Physical Appearance
Well, at first glance, he appears to have the outward tokens of leadership: he is physically-capable and aesthetically-pleasing. "From his shoulders upward he was taller than any of the people" (1 Samuel 9:2, 10:23): not that Saul has an unusually long neck or a cone head or incredibly poofy hair, but that he was, err, just head and shoulders taller than anyone else. And the author of Samuel goes on to gush what "a handsome young man" Saul was. And just in case you thought he was only passably handsome, the author adds:"there was not a man among the people of Israel more handsome than he". The Midrash Shemuel suggests that the hamsumness of Saul was the cause of the young women's garrulousness at the well, so smitten they were by his beauty.

Election
But supermodel looks aside, he is more importantly elected, chosen by God. God identifies him to Samuel (1 Samuel 9:15-17). God gives Saul signs that he has indeed been chosen as the prince over Israel (1 Samuel 10:1-13). And as extra confirmation, it is Saul the son of Kish who is chosen as king by lot in front of all of Israel (1 Samuel 10:17-21)

Empowerment
Saul is empowered by the Spirit of God. He rushes upon Saul and Saul prophesies (1 Samuel 10:10). But we soon see that the Spirit's work in the Old Testament was not for the same length of time as in the New. The Spirit comes and goes. And when Saul is to be presented to all of Israel, we find the tall handsome young man hiding amongst the baggage (1 Samuel 10:22).

Eh?
This puts a bit of a damper on things. Why is the king elect cowering behind the luggage? And we remember that this was the man who wanted to give up looking for the lost asses and who needed to borrow money from his own servant to pay Samuel (1 Samuel 9:5-10). Saul's lineage is a bit sus as well, coming as he does from the tribe of Benjamin, from the town of Gibeah, infamous in Israelite history for its astounding act of lack of hospitality (to say the least, see Judges 19-21) that caused the other tribes to attack her. So unsurprisingly, there are doubters (1 Samuel 10:27) and a spectacular downfall would certainly satisfy their desire for some small town schadenfreude.

But the author of Samuel doesn't empathise with these doubters. Instead he calls them "worthless fellows" (1 Samuel 10:27). For Saul has been elected and chosen by God himself. And the people need not fear: dodgy lineage and past nambypamby-ness are of no consequence if Saul obeys God, for it is God, ultimately, who will save Israel from her enemies and herself.

So we end off 1 Samuel 9-10 wondering whether now, with a king over Israel (cf Judges 19:1; 21:25 - in the days when there was no king in Israel, everyone did whatever he pleased), things are looking up for Israel. We wonder whether, with this fresh beginning, Samuel will fulfil his kingship duties set out in the book (1 Samuel 10:25) and so lead Israel in proper obedience to God and end the terrible cycle of sin and punishment.

Akan datang 1 Samuel 11-12.

Meanwhile, the saviour/onemansavestheworld concept continues to this very day with some silly Superman-related mp3s:
13 & God "Superman On Ice" (mp3)
AC/DC "What's Next To The Moon"
American Hi-Fi "The Rescue" (mp3)
Atmosphere "Superman"
Black Lace "Superman" (mp3)
Blindside "Superman" (amazon)
Brad Street Band "Am I Superman Yet" (mp3)
Bush "Superman" (mp3)
Cafe of the Gate of Salvation "Superman's Prayer" (mp3)
Catman Cohen "Superman (It's Not Easy)". A Five For Fighting Cover.
Crash Test Dummies "Superman's Song" (mp3)
David Bowie "The Superman" (mp3)
Don McLean "Superman's Ghost"
Donovan "Sunshine Superman" (mp3)
Down By Law "Superman" (mp3)
Eminem "Superman"
Firewater "So Long, Superman"
Five For Fighting "Superman (It's Not Easy)" (mp3)
Genesis "Land of Confusion"
Goldfinger "Superman" (mp3)
Good Charlotte "Superman Can't Walk"
Hal Ketchum "Hang In There Superman"
Heaven 17 "The Contenders"
Ingram Hill "Superman"
Iron & Wine "Waiting For A Superman" (mp3). A Flaming Lips cover.
Jim Offerman Band "Like Superman" (mp3). From a father to a daughter.
Killing Heidi "Superman Supergirl"
Kissing Book "Superman vs Lloyd" (mp3)
Laurie Anderson "O Superman" (mp3)
Lazlo Bane "Superman" (mp3)
Lucian St. John Lumeire Scot "I Saw Superman" (mp3). He was driving in a Hyundai.
Luna Halo "Superman"
Matthew Clay "I Killed Superman" (mp3)
Maxeen "Save Me"
Miguel Bose "Super, Superman"
Musical Schizophrenia "Not A Superman" (mp3)
Nightmare of You "Waitin' For Superman" (mp3)
Our Lady Peace "Superman's Dead" (mp3)
Paramore "My Hero" (mp3). A Foo Fighters cover.
Pillar "Original Superman". How Jesus is better than Superman. ;-)
R.E.M. "Superman" (mp3). A Clique cover.
Receiving End Of Sirens "Superman"
Robert Pollard "Red Ink Superman"
Spin Doctors "Jimmy Olson's Blues"
Stephen Grayce "Superman For Free" (mp3)
Stereophonics "Superman" (mp3)
Stone Temple Pilots "Silvergun Superman"
Sufjan Stevens "Man of Metropolis Steals Our Hearts" (mp3)
The Academy Is "Superman" (mp3)
The Clique "Superman" (mp3)
The Films "Sunshine Superman"
The Flaming Lips "Waiting For A Superman" (mp3)
The Kinks "(Wish I Could Fly Like) Superman" (mp3)
The Matches "Superman"
The Robies "Superman"
The Sun "(Wish I Could Fly Like) Superman"
Three Doors Down "Kryptonite"
Throw Rag "Superman"
Victor Scott "Superman" (mp3)

GEP/CAP Alumni and Christian Fellowship

After the wedding that scored one for Uncle Harry's eugenics, an old schoolmate pounced on me whilst I was somewhat distracted by the punch bowl. I haven't spoken to you for ever so long, he said still high, in drama queen mode, a perfumed arm around my waist, ditch your dinner plans and let's catch up. Don't worry, he said to the 3 strange men following in his wake, this one's "one of us". By which, it was hurriedly clarified, he meant a GEP and CAP alumnus, not a member of the tight-t-shirt brigade.

Having hitherto studiously avoided all contact with both the GEP and CAP Alumni Associations, I was caught, unceremoniously, like a tired overused deerintheheadlights.

However.

We drove out somewhere and sat for hours and hours, nursing drinks and faffing about and gabbing with an incredible ease not expected amongst perfect strangers, yabbering on about matchmaking at poetry readings at Borders, stinkingly bad postcolonial Singaporean plays (let's not name names here, hey), dissecting Bob Yeo and Kuo Pao Kun and Fast Cars, Fat Virgins, recalling a time when the only drama company in Singapore was Act 3(!), wondering where Theatreworks was headed, enquiring after Haresh Sharma, Alvin Tay (whom somepeople scared away from his day job) and The Necessary Stage (where everyone used to lodge themselves after scaring Alvin away from his day job), resurrecting banned plays, getting excited over Ivan Heng's W!ld Rice and the Singapore Theatre Festival, bemoaning bit parts in the New York theatre circuit, dissing method actors who forgot the outside-in bit of Konstantin Stanislavski, accusing someone of sounding like Ovidia Yu, cackling over the offstage antics of the Ronin boys and KK Seet's sailor boy suit and specialoccasion kimono, and finally and frankly (probably the fault of KK Seet's aforementioned getups) excogitating each other's sexualities and pornographic preferences (during which, though I neither care for it nor indulge in it, I demonstrated knowledge of far more categories of pron than the others even imagined were in existence. Scary. I blame the altar boys of years past and certain people who are now wrist-slapping members of the judiciary).

Isn't it great, someone said as we were winding down for the night, that somehow, something binds "people like us", whole generations of GEP guinea pigs and CAP riffraff? The devastatingly lowbrow humour, the ability to sprout absolute nonsense in the most interesting and persuasive of ways, the deerlike adroitness, chasing each other up pointless but entertaining craigs of increasingly dangerous heights, the givenness of knowledge of certain items of general knowledge like the natural occurence of Fibonacci numbers and the properties of Red Dwarves so that tedious explanations (and accusations of atas-ness and elitism) don't get in the way of good stories...

But laterthatnight/earlythenextmorning, whilst thinking about my DG and commiting them to God, I realised that comfortable (and comforting) as friendship with people of the same background is, Christian fellowship is much much more.

[At this very point, another GEP/CAPper whom I haven't met for eons enters from the wings. I punch him, he pulls up a chair, demands updates, comments on the incompatability of the zodiac signs of certain newly-weds and, in more or less the same cheeky abrasive breath, proceeds to diss cheap Singapore plays, pretentious soundscape sessions, members of our old group who've betrayed the brotherhood by getting hitched and the cowardly sexuality of mutual friends. He also manages to sprout effusive praise for his own poetry and his literary wannabe Moleskine.]

But back to Christian fellowship. The prayer that Jesus sent up to his Father before he was betrayed is instructive:

"I do not ask for these only, but also for those who will believe in me through their word, that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me. The glory that you have given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one, I in them and you in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that you sent me and loved them even as you loved me. Father, I desire that they also, whom you have given me, may be with me where I am, to see my glory that you have given me because you loved me before the foundation of the world. O righteous Father, even though the world does not know you, I know you, and these know that you have sent me. I made known to them your name, and I will continue to make it known, that the love with which you have loved me may be in them, and I in them." (John 17:20-26)

He was praying for not just the infant church, but also the church for all generations. And he had 2 main requests: (1) "that they may all be one" (v21); and (2) Father, I desire that they also, whom you have given me, may be with me where I am" (v24).

In his masterful book, "Understanding The Church", David Jackman points out that what Jesus is asking for is spiritual unity among all of God's people, based upon their individual union with Christ:

Spiritual Unity is a Unity of Believers
Spiritual unity is the unity of believers. It is a given unity among those who have heard the Word of Christ, the Bible – God's ordained means of bringing people to spiritual life and who have built their secure foundation on the rock of Scripture. This is a unity that goes far deeper than styles of church government, methods of worship or denominational labels. We are one in Christ (Galatians 3:28). This oneness in Christ unites the members of God's family in their confession that Jesus Christ is Lord, and a resolve to practice his lordship under the authority of his Word that nothing can destroy.

Unity with God
In v21, Jesus prays that "all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me". The pattern of Christian unity is that deep union between the Father and Son. It is one of the deepest mysteries of the Bible how the Son on earth and the Father in heaven could be one, but we do know that the closeness of union between Jesus, the Son of God on earth, and his Father in heaven was the common life that was in them.

Although Jesus Christ was man, we know too that he was nothing less than God. The life of God was his life. He was not God dressed up in human clothes. He was not a Godlike human as though he were not truly God; nor was he a man who although greatly inspired was not truly God. In Christ, the two natures – divine and human – are found forever in the one person. He was and is both truly God and truly man. This means that there never was a time when Jesus did not exist; from before the creation of the world he was, because he is God from everlasting. Moreover, there never was a time when he was not God. Always, he was the eternal Son of the eternal Father.

We cannot begin to get our minds around this. The amazing thing is that v21 says that this life of God is to be within every individual Christian as a personal experience:"May they also be in us". Who are "they"? Clearly, the Christians who are going to believe in him. Who is "us"? the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, united in the Trinity. Jesus is saying, therefore, that spiritual unity is unity with God, or, deeper than that, it is a unity in God. If we are a Christian, we are in Christ, in the Father and the Son, and that means that the life of God flows into us and from us into the world through the Spirit.

Someone who lives in God has the same desires that God has. Christians long to win a lost world back to God, because that is their Father's heart. Someone who is living in God is becoming more and more like him, in a life of love and holiness. Wherever we go in the world, wherever we meet other believers, we can recognize the family likeness, so that however different Christians may be, in all sorts of ways, there is still a depth of fellowship and unity that has no other explanation than that all share the same life. They are one in Christ Jesus because they know and love the same Saviour. Therefore, spiritual unity is not achieved by commissions, synods, or committees; it is achieved by the Holy Spirit in each one of God's children, knitting their hearts together in love and uniting their minds in God's truth. It is a unity with God that nobody can create and nothing can destroy.

Unity for the world
At the end of v21, Jesus prays,"May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me". Jesus is saying that the spiritual unity of Christians has an evangelistic effect. When the world sees Christians as one, the result is that the world will believe that the Father has sent Jesus. When the world sees Christians quarrelling and divided from one another, defensive and critical of others, they will conclude that our gospel is a fiction. It cannot be real because it does not work.

Real heart unity between believers shakes the world because there is nothing like it anywhere else in human society. Where you find a group of Christians who love one another and are united to one another you will find something that is unique to the church. The world cannot begin to copy that in any way.

True spiritual unity is powerfully evangelistic; it is a unity for the world to see.

So more than any unity that a common educational backgrounds, value systems, thought patterns and quirkiness can bring, there is a real organic unity of believers which is created and grounded in God. It is a unity for the world to see, a unity which will one day find its completion in glory; but here and now it is a unity of Christian love which is unlike any other quality of human life. If, in the closing hours of his earthly ministry Jesus made this desire the great substance of his prayer, should we not make its fulfillment the great passion of our lives?