In other words, ana to xeno

• anadiplosis, noun. Rhetorical repetition at the beginning of a phrase using the word or words with which the previous phrase ended.
• brinkmanship, noun. The art or practice of pushing a dangerous situation or confrontation to the limit of safety. especially to force a desired outcome.
• claustrophobic, adjective. Relating to or suffering from claustrophobia, a fear of narrow or confined spaces.
• dispositive, adjective. Relating to or determining the outcome of a case or decision.
• froyo (also fro-yo), noun. (Informal) Short for frozen yogurt.
• imbroglio, noun. A difficult or intricate situation; an entanglement; a confused heap.
• ignominy, noun. Disgrace; dishonor; public contempt.
• infamy, noun. Extremely bad reputation, public reproach, or strong condemnation as the result of a shameful, criminal, or outrageous act.
• interlocutor, noun. A person who takes part in a conversation or dialogue.
• inveigh, verb. Speak against in an impassioned manner; complain bitterly.
• jaggery, noun. A coarse, dark sugar, especially that which is made from the sap of East Indian palm trees.
• janiform, adjective. Two-faced; resembling the god Janus, having two faces looking in opposite directions (also Janus-faced).
• mellifluous, adjective. Sweetly or smoothly flowing; sweet-sounding; flowing with honey.
• osmosis, noun. A subtle or gradual absorption or mingling; (Science) the diffusion of fluids through membranes or porous partitions.
• palaver, noun. A conference or discussion; a parley or conference between persons of different cultures; idle chatter.
• repatriate, verb. To restore or return to the country of origin, allegiance, or citizenship.
• superfluous, adjective. Being more than is sufficient or required; excessive; overflowing; unnecessary.
• tamalada, noun. A tamale-making get together or party.
• xenophobic, adjective. Suffering from xenophobia, a fear of strangers or foreigners.

Parallels between Adam and Noah

Interesting commentary.

Parallels between Adam and the Original Creation and Noah and the Re-Creation.

The Flood defaces the original creation headed by Adam and cleanses the earth for its re-creation headed by Noah. Warren Gage notes striking parallels between the prediluvian and postdiluvian worlds, making Adam the father of all humanity and Noah its father in the postdiluvian world. (1) Both ‘worlds’ are created out of a watery chaos in closely parallel acts (see phases of re-creation below). (2) Both Adam and Noah are uniquely associated with the ‘image of God,’ ‘in the Adam narrative as the basis of man’s identity and in the Noah narrative as the basis of man’s protection’ (Gen. 1:27; 5:1-3). (3) Both ‘walk with God’  (3:8; 6:9). (4) Both rule the animals: Adam by naming (2:19), Noah by preserving (7:15). (5) God repeats almost verbatim his commission to be fruitful, to multiply, and to rule the earth (1:28-30, 9:1-7). (6) Both work the ‘ground’ (cf. 3:17-19; 9:20). (7) Both follow a similar pattern of sinning, the former by eating and the latter by drinking (3:6; 9:21). (8) The immediate result of their sin is shameful nakedness (3:7; 9:21), connected with ‘knowing’ (3:5; 9:24) and being clothed by another (3:21; 9:23). (9) Both have three named sons (4:1-2, 25; 6:10). (10) As a remote result from Adam's sin, judgment falls on all; from Noah’s, a curse on Canaan. (11) Among their three sons is judgment and hope, division into elect and nonelect. The conflict between the seed of the Serpent (i.e., the curse-laden Cainites) and the seed of the woman (i.e., the Yahweh-worshiping Sethites), is now carried on between the cursed seed of Canaan and the seed of Shem, whose God is the Lord. In addition, in both halves of the Prehistory (books 1-3 and 4-6), human disobedience impinges on the heavenly sphere and God responds using the first-person plural (‘like one of us’; ‘let us’; 3:22; 11:7), and alienation is part of his judicial sentence (from the Garden of Eden and from Shinar; 3:24; 11:9; cf. 4:12).”

Bruce K. Waltke, Cathi J. Fredricks, Genesis: a Commentary, Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2001, pp. 127-128.

[Note: Waltke’s commentary says that his parallel list is a modification and supplementing of Gage’s parallels, p. 127).]

Seven progressive phases of renewing creation in Noah’s day parallel the first week of creation.

Precreation

• 1:2 earth, deep, Spirit, waters
• 8:1b-2 wind, earth, waters, deep

Day 2

• 1:6-8 waters, firmament (sky)
• 8:2b heaven (sky)

Day 3

• 1:9 water, dry land, appear
• 8:3-5 water, tops of the mountains, seen (appear)

Day 5

• 1:20-23 fowl, above the earth (in the open firmament, sky)
• 8:6-12 raven, dove, off the earth (no need to renew water creatures)

Day 6

• 1:24-25 living creatures, cattle, creeping thing, (wild) beasts
• 8:17-19 every living thing, fowl, cattle, creeping thing

“the appearance/reappearance of the nuclear family”

• 1:26-28 man, image of God, male and female
• 8:16, 18 Noah and his wife
• 9:6 man, image of God

The blessing of God on his family/creation

• 1:28 blessed, be fruitful, multiply, replenish the earth, subdue it (rule…every living thing)
• 9:1-2 blessed, be fruitful, multiply, replenish the earth, fear and dread on every living thing

Waltke, pp. 128-129

Acts 26:30-32

30-32 the verdict rendered

Verses 30-31: After Paul expresses his desire that Agrippa and all under the sound of his voice were in the same position as he, except for being in custody. Agrippa, Bernice, Festus, and the others present went aside and conferred about Paul’s case. The conclusion is the same as it has been: “This man doeth nothing worthy of death or of bonds.” Not only has he done nothing to deserve a death sentence, he should not even have been in custody.

Verse 32: Agrippa’s verdict is the same as the rest. Since it is specifically Agrippa who was hearing the case, Luke specifically records the words of Agrippa: “This man might have been set at liberty, if he had not appealed unto Cæsar.” In one sense, Agrippa’s words condemn the entire process from Felix forward. Paul should have been released. However, once he appealed to Cæsar, it became necessary to allow that appeal.

As with the Richard Longenecker doubts on Acts 25:13, Darrell Bock notes about this:

“Some scholars challenge this part of the passage and its credibility. How could this conversation be known?”[1]

Bock concludes that “the results of the hearing would have made the view of the governor, Agrippa, and Bernice evident” and that the explanation could have been communicated to Paul (who could have then communicated it to Luke, who then included it in his communication to Theophilus). While those means may be used by God, they seem to be necessary explanations for those who do not receive and rest in the inspiration of the Bible. For the Bible-believer, “God revealed it to him” is a simple and satisfactory answer to the question, “How could this conversation be known?” Do not discount divine inspiration.

---

[1] Bock, Acts, p. 724.

Danbury Baptist Association to Thomas Jefferson

The letter of Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Association – with the phrase “separation between church & state” – is oft-mention in both historical and political discussions. The letter from the Danbury Baptists is not as well known. A transcription of it can be read at the National Archives online.

Danbury Baptist Association to Thomas Jefferson, [after 7 October 1801]

“…though our mode of expression may be less courtly and pompious than what many others clothe their addresses with, we beg you, Sir to believe, that none are more sincere.”

Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Association, 1 January 1802

“The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction.”

Interestingly, there is also a Draft Reply to the Danbury Baptist Association, showing how Jefferson started and then edited the letter to be more concise.

“I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection and blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves and your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem.”

Give me that Book!

God himself has condescended to teach the way; for this very end he came from heaven. He hath written it down in a book! O give me that book! At any price, give me the Book of God! I have it: here is knowledge enough for me. Let me be homo unius libri.*

*A man of one book.

John Wesley, “Preface,” Sermons on Several Occasions, Volume 1, Thomas Jackson, editor. London: J. Kershaw, 1825, p. vii

Salvation, O the joyful sound

Below is Hymn 88 from Hymns and Spiritual Songs In Three Books, by Isaac Watts, which he titled simply “Salvation.”

To the believer, the word “salvation” is pleasing music to our ears, healing ointment for our wounds, and stimulating medicine for our fears. May we who have arisen by and appreciate grace divine echo its sound around the earth. In The Sacred Harp (47a) we sing this hymn with the wonderful old tune Primrose, by Amzi Chapin.

1. Salvation! O the joyful sound!
’Tis music to our ears;*
A sov’reign balm for ev’ry wound,
A cordial for our fears.

2. Buried in sorrow and in sin,
At hell’s dark door we lay,
But we arise by grace divine
To see a heav’nly day.

3. Salvation! let the echo fly
The spacious earth around,
While all the armies of the sky
Conspire to raise the sound.

* “pleasure” in The Sacred Harp

The author of the hymn, Isaac Watts, is called the “Father of English hymnody,” so accorded for his vast production of good and great hymns, which solidified their places in English language churches.

Amzi Chapin, the composer of Primrose, was born March 2, 1768 in Springfield, Massachusetts. He was the son of Edward Chapin and Eunice Colton. By trade he was a cabinetmaker, but he was also an itinerant singing master and composer, teaching singing schools in Connecticut, Virginia, North Carolina, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, and Ohio. By denomination he was a Presbyterian. He married Hannah Power in 1800, and they had at least seven children. Amzi Chapin died in Northfield, Ohio, February 19, 1835. He and Hannah are buried at the Northfield Macedonia Cemetery in Northfield, Summit County, Ohio.

---

Note: a cordial is a food, drink, or medicine that stimulates and invigorates the heart and circulation – either literally or figuratively.

Cordial (adjective and noun)

c. 1400, “of or pertaining to the heart,” from Medieval Latin cordialis “of or for the heart,” from Latin cor “heart,” from PIE root *kerd- “heart.” Meaning “heartfelt, proceeding from the heart as the supposed seat of kindly feelings” is from mid-15c.

The noun meaning “something that invigorates” is from late 14c., originally “medicine, food, or drink that stimulates the heart.” Meaning “sweet or aromatic liquor” is from 1610s.

It is my profound conviction, and other quotes

The posting of quotes of human authors does not constitute agreement with either the quotes or their sources. (I try to confirm the sources that I give, but may miss on occasion; please verify if possible.)

“It is my profound conviction that all of us [preachers] are in danger of fussing around speaking against the fruits of sin and never touching the roots.” -- Richard Owen Roberts

“The difference between teaching and preaching – teaching is aimed at the mind and preaching is aimed at the heart. The teacher prepares by discovering the mind of God in Scripture; the preacher prepares by discovering the heart of God in his prayer closet.” -- Richard Owen Roberts

“Love has grown out of control when pleasing children is more important than leading children.” -- Adam Griffin

“Every Christian has a ‘used-to-be’ story.” -- Larry Wade, Jr.

“Your boos mean nothing, I’ve seen what makes you cheer.” -- Used in a cartoon; sometimes attributed to Kelly Hynam 

“If you want to conduct the orchestra, you have to turn your back on the audience.” -- Attributed to Aristotle, Max Lucado, James Crook, et al.

“There are people out there who are committed to misunderstanding you, and misrepresenting your position.” -- Allie Beth Stuckey

“Discipleship is not about information; it’s about imitation.” -- Dallas Willard

“We’re afraid of the dark because we were made to live in the light.” -- R. C. Sproul

“The Ephesian church in Revelation 2:1–7 crossed all their doctrinal t’s and dotted all their ecclesiological i’s—but they lost their first love.” -- Juan Sanchez

“The Lord has established for salvation to precede identification through baptism into membership and then for those identifying markers to precede the ongoing celebratory act of the Lord’s Supper.” -- Nate Akin

“It’s not enough to be fans of Jesus. We should be followers of Jesus.” -- Kevin Lake

“When God has done something for you, let him do something with you.” -- Johnnie Johnson

“If God is pleased, it doesn’t matter who isn’t.” -- Unknown

Debaptism; who knew?

Debaptism, noun. The (so-called) practice of “reversing” a baptism.

I guess on this I’ve been living under a rock, ignorant in my bliss. Who knew “debaptism” was a thing? You probably did. I didn’t. I read about some nuts going through a blow dryer ceremony. I would suggest that if they were immersed they need to get in an oven!

To me there is some irony here, in a person thinking they need to be debaptized. Part of the craziness of modern society, perhaps? It seems that the folks who are being debaptized are in effect saying that de baptism dat dey had actually did something dat dey must undo. But their other testimony is that God and Christianity is nothing. If it is nothing, why undo nothing?

Finally. Do the debaptized join De’Baptist Unchurch?