Politics

Credimus

~ admin ~ Leave a comment

Words which are familiar

If you were born before 1965 or sing in a choir then these words may be very familiar to you. They form the core of many a choral work. But did you know that a similar set of words is used frequently but for a far different, yet incoherent, purpose? First of all, let me turn you to what the Bible says: There is no god, so says the fool in his heart.

What does this lead the fool to do? To live as if there is no accounting for his behaviour, to live as if there is no meaning (or at least attempt to do so as some apologetics for atheism try to say) in life, and to say that we are nothing more than a chemical factory which operates for a time on this planet along with many others and eventually wears out. It leaves morality as a mere construct of social normality or expectation and to, as many have noted, a breakdown in society. It is strange to Coco that it cannot clearly be seen that if it is society that defines morality and then it is that same society that conforms (or deviates) from it that this is an iterative process and, as experience has shown, results in positive feedback causing the expectations of morality to be lowered further. It is a dangerous road to follow.

The alternative is to say that there is at least one god. This provides accountability, meaning and morality. But if you get the character of the one god wrong, or if you have many gods who are in competition with each other, or who behave in the same way as men and women only with greater power, then the morality that is approved, or the accountability and meaning are at best questionable, and at worst more dangerous than not having any at all.

The fool then is content to remain in his ignorance, but the one who is not a fool must seek out to know who the god is who exists, and then choose whether or not to believe in him. Many quickly make their own impression of what the god is like, and fill in the bits that are not clear by their own imagination. They then decide that they do not want to believe in this god, for the god they imagine for themselves is not attractive to them. Still others produce the picture of an indulgent grandfather type figure, in whom they would quite like to believe and hope is true, but provides no basis at all for the morality that they would like others to hold. Neither results in the gain of any real understanding of the character and nature of the true God, because these efforts stem from a misguided understanding. A friend, having being told by a stranger I don’t believe in god, replied: Tell me about the god in which you do not believe. I probably don’t believe in him either.

We are also not helped by these efforts to answer the question whether there is a god. But experience may help us to do so for we know that there is a god as we consider next.

During the course of each day we hear many confessions that there is a god in which to believe, for the name of this one God is often taken in vain, exclamation or as blasphemy. If there is no god in which to believe all such things are empty nonsense, meaningless and not worth the breath which was used to give them utterance. But the fact that those who do speak in this way use these words intentionally and with effect shows that although they may say ‘I do not believe in god’ they do not say that a god does exist. The common understanding of man, notwithstanding the words of the fool, is that there is a god.

Secondly, a British prime minister recently replied to a journalist using the text with which I started The foolish man has said in his heart, there is no God as his reply. It was not a confession I believe in God as if to take a different position to the leader of the opposition party who had said that he did not believe in God*, but rather saying to the journalist who had asked it: You are asking the wrong question. It is not a matter of whether you believe in God or not, but whether there is a god in which to believe or not believe.

The statement I do not believe in God is as much a confession that there is a god in which to believe as the statement I believe in One God. The unbeliever may take pride in his confession I do not believe in God but it is nevertheless as much an affirmation that he believes in the existence of the god in whom he does not believe as a believer’s confession I believe in God. Neither statement addresses the existence of God, but rather the attitude and leaning of the person making the statement.

What then, if there is a god? Should we not discover who this god is? We must one day answer to him. But if there is a god, and that god is God, then he is beyond our understanding: the word for this is ineffable. If we are to know him, then we must rely upon his own revelation of himself to us. In other words we cannot work out ourselves what he is like, we must listen to what he has said about himself. When we look we find that he has not been silent, he has not left himself without witnesses, he has spoken, in times past in many divers ways but at the last in his Son, the Lord Jesus Christ. Philip asked him, Show us the Father and we shall be content. The Lord replied: Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. We are then without excuse if we ignore what he has said to us, and continue to try to do it our own way.

Credimus in unum Deum, Patrem omnipotentem, factorem coeli et terrae, visibilium omnium et invisibilium, et in unum Dominum Jesum Christum, Filium Dei unicum.

The creed tells us who this God is: I believe in one God, the Father almighty, the creator of heaven and earth, of all things visible and invisible, and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten the Son of God according to his own revelation to us.

It is quite unexpected to be able to add to this after only one week. That the self-same prime minister has had to back track on proposals to modify his own construct of morality as a consequence of them not being quite aligned with the self-defined moralities of others, thus precipitating the obviously required, whether innocent or not, resignation of a fellow MP serves well to illustrate that those who build their morality upon the shifting sands of opinion, shall, in this quickly, fall upon the rocks making shipwreck of their unbelief.

We were reminded of Paul’s discussion with the Epicureans (the ‘awkin’ (D…s and H…g) of his day) and the Stoics (fatalist, whom I shall fail to identify, but if the cap fits, let them wear it) in the Athenian intellectual market place, where he addressed and undermined the issues which afflicted them and us today, pointing them to the God who made the heavens and the earth, who has appointed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness, not by a mere social construct, but by Jesus Christ. And what is the proof of this some may ask. He raised Jesus from the dead, as is well attested.

So if this market place is able to transform itself (metamorphose), let us listen to the command to transform ourselves (metanoö – repent) and believe.

COP26

~ admin ~ Leave a comment

Call Coco picky if you will but the COP26 globe which has been chosen by many to illustrate the opening of the summit looks as if someone has tried to wrap Mercator’s projection of the globe back onto a globe. This is truly flat earth thinking, however not quite so bad as the hexagonal football of British road sign infamy. Coming back to the COP26 globe, Coco does wonder how the young man at the front managed to get his head in front of the globe which is being held by a hand in front of him, and what is on the other side of the globe. Is the Pacific really that big?

More astonishingly even, the image came from Getty images. What else might one find there, a picture of Celenites perhaps?

Offended?

~ admin ~ Leave a comment

Why academia is offensive – when difficult questions offend

The BBC article here set Coco wondering. First of all why the inhabitants of Britain have never had an apology from the Danes for the way they treated them a mere 1500 years or so ago when they repeatedly invaded those islands and badly treated the natives. Or perhaps it might be better to ask the French, though perhaps they would claim that the invaders were not in fact French, for an apology for the harrying of the North after the Norman conquest, which is very much closer to the present time than the Danish incursions. But an apology cannot expected for both, as it was the united English and Danes who suffered under the Norman [mis]treatment. So, rather than expect an apology Coco turned his head to a question instead, which is intended to provoke an active, careful, critical discussion of both sides of the argument.

Here there is an invading people who wish to inhabit peacefully the land which they have ‘inherited’, though there was some doubt at the time concerning the claim to the inheritance, and the people were unwilling to co-operate in their subjugation. The question is first of all a setting out of facts, presenting some interesting descriptions of the events and some opposing opinions on the matter and asking the student to weigh up the strengths and weaknesses of the arguments and the opportunities and threats that faced the opposing parties.

To what extent do you believe that the treatment of the native British has been exaggerated?

Now, in the context of the question it may be clear what is meant, but the context is a little lacking here so let Coco state the question again, this time in full:

To what extent do you believe that the treatment of the British people by the Norman French after the invasion of 1066 in particular during the period known as the harrying of the North has been exaggerated?

Are you offended by the question? Does the question trouble you? Coco thinks it is an excellent question, if it were not for some linguistic bungles, to provoke in the student the best use of his critical skills to present the arguments for and against the proposition that there has been exaggeration, to produce an analysis and critique of the arguments from both sides and to hone his skills of debate and argument.

Coco recalls one of his English teachers once explaining to the class how important it was in a debate to understand the other side. He went so far as to say that if you cannot accurately and faithfully represent the position with which you disagree, then you cannot argue against it. He meant of course you cannot successfully argue against it.

Now concerning the linguistic bungles, whilst they may give the less diligent student cause for celebration, it is obvious that they are bungles and the diligent student will not rely upon finding a loophole in the question in order to avoid the trouble of answering it in the proper manner.

So firstly, the question is badly phrased as it is a question that does not beg a reasoned argument but merely an expression of opinion ‘What do you believe?‘, but in the context of the use of the weighing scales it is very evident that the examiner is expecting a presentation of the arguments for and against the proposition that there has been exaggeration and to produce an analysis and critique of the arguments from both sides, but he did not ask for it.

‘I believe that there has been exaggeration to the extent of deliberate outright lies.’ is as valid an answer as ‘I believe that there has been no exaggeration in any of the reports’, for both are correct. They tell us what the student believes, but neither answer is that for which the examiner is looking.

Secondly, the question asks: Has the treatment of the natives been exaggerated? Surely it should be asking about the reporting of the treatment. The treatment itself does not have a quality which can be qualified by exaggerate, but the reporting of the treatment does. Of course the treatment does have the qualities of goodness and badness, which brings me to the third objection.

Thirdly, the original question is ambiguous. Is the reference to treatment here a reference to the good things that were done for the native Americans (David Brainerd, albeit in a much earlier day than under consideration here, did much good among the natives of New England), or to the bad things? The question does not ask about the mistreatment of the natives.

It seems to me that the ambiguity of the question is deliberate, so that the student is left unsure which side of the arguments may have been exaggerated, if any. In this context although the ambiguity is a weakness in the question, it will make the answers more interesting and provide greater scope and freedom for the student when preparing his answer.

So then to correct his question further Coco needs to ask:

To what extent has the reporting of the treatment of the British people by the Norman French after the invasion of 1066 in particular during the period known as the harrying of the North been exaggerated? In your answer you should provide a critique of the available reports, and a reasoned argument leading to and supporting your conclusions.

The words after the question should strictly be taken as read by our hypothetical student, but they are included here for the avoidance of doubt.

Coco considers this to be a good and valid question, a legitimate question, which should provide significant opportunity for an A-level student to demonstrate his analytical, debating and logical skills to the examiner regardless of whether either the student and the examiner actually agree with the conclusion drawn in the answer.

So then, why is the question, in a given context:

To what extent do you believe that the treatment of the native Americans has been exaggerated?

not an acceptable question to ask?

As Coco has set out above, there are linguistic problems with the question, but these do not detract from the usefulness of the question for the instruction of students, as the meaning of the question and the kind of answer that the student is expected to give can be clearly seen from the context in which the question is asked. Apparently there were some who did find reason to complain. It seems to Coco that the complaint was ill-founded and unnecessary. Whilst the wording of the question may leave a little to be desired, the question itself is quite valid.

Finally, the question will be asked of course, and if it is not answered and debated in a public forum, then it will go underground and be answered without any peer review, and probably be answered badly.

And post-ultimately, Coco mentioned David Brainerd. He worked tirelessly among the native Americans to show them their worth, to show them that they had inestimable worth in the sight of the one true God who gave his Son for them as a propitiation for their sins, and not for theirs only but for the whole world. In his short life he saw many come to faith, abandoning the false gods and idols which had previously enslaved them and finding freedom in Jesus Christ.

☺





With apologies in advance for errors of syntax, orthography and grammar which may be found embedded in this document whether arising from oversight, incorrect application of language packs or generally any other misadventure; and in general for any offence given inadvertently or inappropriately or both taken or not taken by those whose sensibilities, whether grammatical, orthographical, moral or simply personable, have been offended whether, not or if you have not incorrectly misunderstood the content, intent, meaning and purpose of this article, and to those whose copyrights may have been inadvertently or wantonly infringed, but never as to cause damage the copy holder’s rights, and, if you have managed to read this far, for any errors or omissions whether wilful, unintended, innocent or deliberate in the content of this polemic, and with thanks to you who have made it thus far for your patience.

Stereo typing

~ admin ~ Leave a comment

In the eyes of the ARC and others It is impossible to get it right. If you choose the image of a white man you can be accused of racial bias, if you choose the image of a black man you can be accused of racial bias. If you choose the image of an oriental you can be accused of bias even if the image is of the person you are actually representing. What are we to choose when we want to depict a man doing something? Coco was going to suggest that we use a monkey instead, but then, if the experience of Hartlepool is anything to go by, we shall only end up annoying the French even more than they are already. I suppose someone will consider that to be racist too. Hey-ho, Boney was a warrye, way, aye, yah. A warrye and terrye, John France, wah!

But at the end of the day who got the best job?


With thanks to Wikipedia (and the East India Company 1832).


Was the artist our friend James Gilray – but it lacks colour?

Original article at this cleverly disguised URN [] sorry for black drug dealer image in appeal leaflet: They said it accepted it used a poor choice of image in the leaflet.

One wonders what choice of image would have been acceptable.

Rapid Alter[c]ation

~ admin ~ Leave a comment

Change comes quickly and unexpectedly

The remarkable speed with which the recent changes have taken place in Afghanistan reminded me of words spoken 2500 years ago in Israel:

For indeed I am raising up a bitter and hasty nation which marches through the breadth of the earth, to possess dwelling places that are not theirs. They are terrible and dreadful; their judgment and their dignity proceed from themselves. Their horses also are swifter than leopards, and more fierce than evening wolves. Their chargers charge ahead; their cavalry comes from afar; they fly as the eagle that hastens to eat. They all come for violence; their faces are set like the east wind. They gather captives like sand. They scoff at kings, and princes are scorned by them. They deride every stronghold, for they heap up earthen mounds and seize it. Then his mind changes, and he transgresses; he commits offence, ascribing this power to his god.

The description of the warfare may be different, but the swiftness with which the forces moved is described for us quite vividly. It is also to be noted that the same attribution for their success is made.

The prophet was speaking about the shortly to follow invasion of Isreal by the Chaldeans, whom perhaps I should mention came from an area, at least in geographic Asian terms, not far removed from Afghanistan, though in historic and cultural terms quite distant.

It is a fascinating prophecy. The prophet goes on to say about the victors: They (the victors) take up all of them with a hook, they catch them in their net, and gather them in their dragnet. Therefore they rejoice and are glad. Therefore they sacrifice to their net, and burn incense to their dragnet; because by them their share is sumptuous and their food plentiful.

Of course the victors rejoice and are glad. Their victims see the matter quite differently however.

But there is much more going on than the prophet can see. And in our days too there is much more going on than we can see. I shall come back to this. Did you notice the opening words? I am raising up. This was preceded by: Look among the nations and watch – Be utterly astounded! For I will work a work in your days which you would not believe, though it were told you.

The Chaldeans thought that they were in control. But no, it was God, the Lord who had raised them up, and it would be an astonishing work. Indeed it was as history records for us. The Chaldeans came across the land as if they were locusts devouring everything. But look at what the prophet said about them: O Lord, you have appointed them for judgment; O Rock, you have marked them for correction. You are of purer eyes than to behold evil, and cannot look on wickedness. Woe to him who builds a town with bloodshed, who establishes a city by iniquity! You are filled with shame instead of glory. You also (they had made others drink their wrath) – drink and be exposed as uncircumcised! The cup of the Lord’s right hand will be turned against you, and utter shame will be on your glory.

When the Lord stood before Pilate, having been asked whether he was a king, replied: My kingdom is not of this world. Those whose kingdom is of this world fight for it. They go to war. They attribute their success to their god, but their gods are false gods. They fall under the judgement of the God who made the heavens and the earth.

The King of kings does not command his people to fight in this way against flesh and blood, but rather commands all men to repent and believe the Gospel and in this way, through the blood of Jesus Christ, to enter the kingdom which is not of this world, for he intends that the earth will be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea.

In the meantime there will be wars and rumours of wars, for the end has not yet come. But one day it will come, and the kingdom which is being built, as it were invisibly, by the Lord Jesus Christ shall be revealed and his glory shall fill the earth.

Diversity increases?

~ admin ~ Leave a comment

There was a school class which comprised only fifteen boys – it was a privileged area and the boys, unable to cope with competition from hard working girls, had been segregated – one of whom had black skin and two had brown, the rest all had white, perhaps you could say albino, but that may be misunderstood. The class was therefore racially diverse.

During the year a Chinese boy joined the class and so it became more racially diverse than it was. It then represented four different races. Seven more boys joined the class later but the racial diversity did not change: some of the new comers had black skin and some brown. The class still only represented four different races. Taking a very simplistic view of the world and the number of races that there are Coco supposes that only if a Red Indian had joined the class would the racial diversity have increased from a representation of four races to a representation of five.

So how does they conclude that racial diversity has increased in the USA?
‘US census data charts increasingly diverse America ‘Population shifts revealed by the 2020 census herald changes to come in US politics as the country becomes more diverse.’’ Coco knows that they do not say racial diversity here, but in the context of the article you try to fit into it a different adjective which does not imply a connection with race. Let Coco know by the comments box if you succeed.

It is clear from the article that there has simply been a change in the relative proportions of the different races, so that the proportion of ethnic minorities (Coco does not like that description but uses it here because you understand it) increased relative to the majority ethnic group. So this is not racial diversity that is at work but a dilution of the white majority.

Is that not what happened in the school class? There was a dilution of the representation of white skinned boys from 12/15 to 12/23. This was quite a significant change, but it did nothing to change the racial diversity. Nor indeed, Coco might add, did it happen to do anything to reduce the representation of the majority ethnic group, as the school, which is postulated and was not previously revealed, is situated in a majority Chinese enclave in a different oriental country whose ethnic identity is not Chinese. Coco struggles to work out which is the majority ethnic group in such a location.

So, commentators when they need to describe a spade they should not call for a shovel. Coco considers that they make more of the material at hand than they should.

By the way, and it is probably not the BBC’s fault that, though it is not so easy to read, the aggregate of the proportions of the different groups identified on the chart appears to exceed the maximum possible proportion of the whole.

US census: Hispanic and Asian-American driving US population growth

There is some recognition of this in the last words referenced by the BeeB: ‘We’re in an age where there’s a lot more suspicion about all sorts of stuff, and data is one(sic.) of them.

When the Athenians heard the truth they were told: ‘The God who made the world and everything in it .. made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling places.’ There is only one race (unless by race we mean a synonym of breed as used for cats and dogs) which is the one Paul goes on to describe which is ‘that they should seek God and perhaps find their way towards him and find him’. God has himself provided the way to run this race now commanding ‘all men to repent because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by the man [Jesus Christ] whom he has appointed.’

His coming has heralded a far greater change than that posited by the article, which we shall see when he comes again to judge the world. Are we ready for that day?

Questions

~ admin ~ Leave a comment

that should not be asked

You have noticed that the French do not ask questions

Vous mangiez ici?
Vous alliez au football?

unless you see the sentence written down, or have a good ear for the French inflexion? This is because of a certain authoritarian regime, a republic ruled by an emperor, rather like an earlier Latin republic, from whose language the language of the French was derived, in which the asking of questions was a thing to avoid?

It is considered perhaps that if you are able to instil subservient fear into a rebellious people they will obey you. A certain oriental businessman* spoke about that before his recent detention. It is also clear that if you can be inhibited from asking questions, then the authority, or indeed anyone, need not answer and so cannot ever be accused of telling a lie?

A start must be made to this process of course, and there is no better start than to strike at a question which we must all ask ourselves and each other almost everyday of the month. The date used to be ubiquitous. It was printed on every sheet of newsprint, so half of the litter in our streets would display it to you. It would be seen on calendars hanging in almost every place you visit, and the desk of everyone in the office. Such things have all but disappeared, and now you might have to resort to a visit to the bank, if you can find a nearby branch which is open, or a post office. It is there on your computer screen, often in its default position of the bottom right hand corner of your screen, but, oh, the default view is not to display the date only the time, and the default status is, well quite naturally, the default status. So it is only natural that we should ask the question:

What is the date today?

Perhaps it is only the French who would escape republican ire and justice if they ask the question on the fourth of June. I should also remember that the fourth of July is also a day of disgrace and dishonour but for a different reason, you understand?

There was another day of disgrace and dishonour when the late Latin empire crucified a man for no wrong that he had done, indeed his judge acknowledged as much: I find no wrong in him. But that day was the day when God revealed his glorious grace towards a rebellious people in such a way that he had never done before nor shall ever need to do again. On that day the man upon the cross died for all who questioned his right to rule over them, paying the price himself for their rebellion. God has therefore raised him from the dead and given him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee shall bow and every tongue confess that he is Lord to the glory of God the Father.

* Xiaohongshu social media account blocked after Tiananmen post
E-commerce app Xiaohongshu’s social media account disappeared after a post on the sensitive date.

Of the burning of books there is no end

~ admin ~ 1 Comment

It is not a new phenomena

Did you see it? Yet again a modern man extracts words from an ancient poet and is vilified: better be careful then when we quote Shakespeare, who did not mince his words but it must be said was careful in his allusions, or even our more recent Gilbert of G&S fame, who was certainly more colourful in his language than we would be permitted to be. We must not of course forget the villainous John Green who in the middle of civil conflict was unable to quench his patriotic fervour when he wrote his Babylonian work.

But such things are not new. The first burning of books, of which Coco is aware, please let me know of any earlier, took place around the time of the events related in Green’s opera. Nabucco had invaded Judah, as foretold by Isaiah, and left Jehoiakim as a vassal king in Jerusalem, and probably at this time had taken away Daniel when returning to Babylon as emperor. Jeremiah had spoken many true words to the king, but the king hated him, but there were still some in the city who afforded protection to Jeremiah. Jeremiah had his secretary Baruch to write down his words on a scroll. Some months later in 604 BC the opportunity arose to read the words in the temple to the people and some of the leaders, who decided that these words must be heard by the king. They were afraid of what Nebuchadnezzar would do, he having returned to receive tribute from his vassals. King Jehoiakim not being impressed, ordered in vain that Jeremiah and his scribe be abducted, but they were already well hidden. He did however allow the scroll to be read to him, and as it was read he displayed his contempt of it by cutting off the scroll each section after it had been read to throw it into his fire pot.

We are aware of the trade routes across Asia, which existed at this time. The words which Jeremiah had spoken were taken by Nebuchadnezzar’s captives to Babylon. His empire stretched afar to the east and his successors were influenced by the Jews who lived in the empire, some attaining exceedingly high rank in its government. It is not unreasonable to consider that something of these things would be taken outside the empire. However perhaps the book burning that we find in China by the king Qin Shi Huang is altogether uninfluenced by the history of another king in Jerusalem some four hundred years earlier.

We must not forget however that the burning of books has taken place in our own land and much more recently. Just as Jehoiakim showed contempt for the word of God spoken by Jeremiah, the bishop of London did also in 1526 AD. There was a fear of the word of God. Reading it would expose the cracks in the religion of the day, actually I would like to suggest that it would expose the shroud over the true religion which had been hidden under precept upon precept of man in a rather similar way that the true faith of Abraham and the prophets had been hidden by the rabbis and teachers of the law in Jesus’s day. William Tyndale had completed his translation of the New Testament into contemporary English and it had been published on the continent. When the books became available in England the Bishop bought up the books to burn. They were dangerous books. If the people read them they would see the errors that were being taught in the church, and understand what true religion is all about. This would upset the status quo and the authority of the leaders. Coco reckons it was the similar for Qin Shi Huang though for somewhat different reasons. Coco would like to suggest that this book burning continues today, but some would say that Coco is then being uncharitable to do so, perhaps as we do not see the literal burning of the Book, but the ignoring of its teaching is the first step towards the book burning pit.

The burning of the books did however have a number of good effects. It brought attention to the availability of the translation and secondly the price paid could finance a new edition to remove the errors of the first. The burning of the scroll by Jehoiakim also had similar benefits. Jeremiah and his scribe wrote the content out again on a new scroll with many similar words added to it. So we are able to read today the words that Jehoiakim burned.

Returning to the poem written by Zhang Jie briefly,
焚書坑
竹帛煙銷帝業虛，關河空鎖祖龍居。
坑灰未冷山東亂，劉項原來不讀書。
Coco was unimpressed by the translation offered, though it seemed literal enough, and Google did no better, which was somewhat shocking as Coco would have thought that such a famous text would have translation already stored: ah, well. So here is another, based purely upon a single commentary on the words:

 It was books in the burning  That destroyed the Qin. 
 In vain flood and pass were guarding  As the Dragon fell in. 
 Before the ash cold had turned  Shandong’s riot burned. 
 To illiterate peasants now  The people all must bow. 

Coco is sure fault may be found with it, and you can do better, but it serves its purpose. There are many today who would suppress free thought, as there were in the past. Rome sought to suppress the truth. A simple ‘Caesar is lord’ would save many a life, but many died. The Lord taught us that his kingdom is like yeast in bread, it will as it is mixed in fill every part, and just so his kingdom will fill every part of this world. Rome fell in. Other empires will fall in under the sway of the King of kings.

Jehoiakim tried to destroy the word of God; The bishop of London tried to do so; Men still do so today; The grass withers, the flowers fades away but the word of our God stands forever. (Isaiah 40:8)

The Book Burning Pit
By Zhang Jie, a poet in the late Tang Dynasty (618–907AD)

Fasting in the new normal

~ admin ~ Leave a comment

The new normal: a new perspective

Thinking about the new normal again (oh dear, did you say, we would prefer that you did not think too much): we have had a year of, in alphabetical order, Zoom, Webex, Teams and other rooms’ meetings. I suppose we are getting used to that by now. We can meet anyone, anywhere at almost any time. Some have become so accustomed to this kind of meeting that they even say, ‘Let’s meet for coffee’. The virtual room is set up and wonderful face to face chat takes place over the coffee at the your own kitchen table. Then of course are the long and tedious lunch time office meetings with bacon and avocado, ham and pickle, cheese and tomato sandwiches laid on. At least in the virtual room it is easier to pretend that you are paying attention. And the committee meetings, all day or evening, which you can now do in the comfort of your own armchair. But no matter how heavily your own table is laden with caviar, smoked salmon, trout, olives, cucumbers, garlics, brie, mozzarella, cheddar, brioches, croissants, fruited breads and oysters you cannot but yearn for the dried up ham sandwiches and soggy cheese and tomato just to be able to be with your colleagues, peers and committee members, to be able to hear their real voices instead of replicas emanating from the inside of a loudspeaker. As one of my colleagues said as the others were glued to the admittedly much better pictures on their computer screens, whereas we had simple rigged up a pinhole camera to display the event on a sheet of paper, at the transit of Venus: Come and watch the real thing. You can see the missing photons. We were watching the real shadow cast by the Sun of Venus as it happened.

But I thought, there are some good things about this virtual world, and this thought was inspired by a lady who always liked to make sure she would be on night duty at this time of the year. We have become, as we said accustomed to it. It no longer feels as unnatural as it did before. We can join in with people anywhere in the world, or even out of this world if you count the ISS among your contacts. It is good to join in with things. The physical limitations of our being have meant that we could not choose to do so wherever we liked, but the virtual world overcomes that. On a UK visit, one contact was not put off but continued to meet in the virtual gaming world with his companions until they banned him, as he had managed to secure a better connection from the UK to the controller than they could. But for a time he was effectively in two places as one. In this virtual world not only can you meet with people anywhere, you can yourself be anywhere. You can travel around the globe in a matter of minutes, though I would not recommend it as that would be rather like playing knick-knock on the doorbells down your street, better perhaps to spend a while with the ones whom you visit on the way. If you plan it well you can have morning coffee every hour for twenty four hours, and if by then your hands are not shaking your arms out of their shoulder joints, you could start again. I can think of a few people who would be overwhelmed by the prospect of such a thing especially if it involved chocolate with the coffee. So I thought I would modify my degustational habits, and as I have met a few people there, and for this purpose and this purpose only, I shall be in Alice Springs. I shall breakfast just after sunset.

But what is fasting?

Fasting is a difficult thing to do, as you will know if ever you have tried it. When you fast, anoint your face, the Lord said, so that people do not know that you fast. So you go about your business as if nothing has changed, and suddenly you notice it. It seems that almost everyone has a fixation on eating, and more to the point getting you to eat. You go to the office, and on the way the free gifts are being handed out at the station: a new energy bar. As you arrive, they are handing out the croissant: a bit of an embarrassment really, the caterers delivered the clients’ breakfast to the office and not the convention centre, and so not to let them go to waste… The catering failure at the convention centre brings some back to the office early, and they want you to join them for lunch. In the middle of the afternoon, the dreadnoughts come round: but it is Tuesday. Thursday is dreadnought day. It’s a busy day, and you notice how wherever you go, people offer sweets: boiled sweets, chewy sweets, toffee to glue your teeth together sweets, chocolate – you can’t say no to that surely. And all the while you hold your tongue and do not say ‘I can’t, I’m fasting’ but you are also fast running out of other excuses, then a ‘phone call arrives from Jim who is in town just for the day…

There are the days of course when nothing happens, until one person comes by and you are caught unawares. Deeply engrossed in whatever work you had to do, there he is someone with whom you had never spoken before. He wants to talk, he has some questions but does not quite know how to begin, so to break the ice offers you a sweet; without thinking you accept and in it goes. You can do nothing. Although it is not too late to remove it from the buccal cavity to do so would not provide a propitious opening to the conversation which was about to begin. You remind yourself that fasting is not a matter of law; your attention is given over to the business that the one time stranger has brought to you.

Fasting has benefits. There are physiological benefits, but of that I shall not speak. The time that we retrieve by not eating, preparing to eat, and dealing with its effects, can be spent in prayer and meditation.

Moses fasted for 40 full days when he received the law from God and neither ate nor drank. How did he survive that? We sometimes hear what hunger strikes do to men. The Lord reminded us that that the law itself says that man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God. If the Lord was able to provide manna in the wilderness for a people numbering millions for forty years, then he was also able to sustain Moses through his exhausting fast. Remember however that the miracle of the manna ceased when the people entered the promised land. The sustention of Moses does not provide us with an excuse to test the Lord by our fasting.

The Lord himself after his baptism by John in the Jordan went out into the wilderness to fast, also for forty full days. It was at the end of this time that he was tempted by the devil to satisfy himself, test God and take his kingdom in way other than that which had been planned from the foundation of the world. He rejected these things. The temptations prepared him for the work he had come to do: ‘I have not come to do my will but the will of him who sent me. I have not come to be served, but to be a servant, to carry my cross and give my life for my sheep.’

We noted that fasting provides an opportunity for prayer and meditation, but take care: Fasting does not provide cleansing, or the forgiveness of sins. These are only available because Jesus has made the only acceptable sacrifice for sin in his own death. That you fast, pray and meditate may show that you have received cleansing but it will not give it to you. James in his letter reminds us that just as we know that a tree is living when it produces fruit, we know that faith in the Lord Jesus Christ for salvation is living (real) when it produces fruit (good works, etc). The good works do not provide salvation any more than the fruit can cause the tree to live.

So, we learn that fasting, just a physical training, has some value, but it can do nothing to cleanse the soul. The Lord told us that if our hand leads us into sin to cut it off for it is better to enter the kingdom of God maimed than be cast into hell whole. The point of this is not that it is our hands that cause us to sin; he tells us elsewhere that sin proceeds from the heart. If we would be clean in heart, we shall be clean in hand and foot as well, and if we would be clean we must look to the Lord Jesus Christ and set our hope on the living God who is the Saviour of all.

So, fast if you will, but if you do not hold fast to the Lord Jesus, there is no salvation.

It is far, far better that he hold you fast, than that you hold a fast.

Existential statements

~ admin ~ Leave a comment

Coco thought he would keep it simple in this post and just make a big existential statement, but what in reality Coco was thinking was to discover just how many characters had to be written before the ‘see more’ message appears, and to provide a short introduction to his new art work, which has not yet been refused by the Tate and goes by the same name. This is not enough, as you can see, or rather cannot see, yet. The words ‘see more’ have not yet appeared.

So let us try again:

Coco thought that this evening he would just make a big existential statement:

ie