Returning to the earth

 

Today the weather was wonderful.  Mid-60s and sunny.  Not a lot of wind.  I decided to finally begin a task my wife and I have been talking about for a number of years.  I pulled out my electric tiller, and proceeded to ‘break ground’ and prepare it for a small garden.  When I started the tiller and began the process of breaking through the grass and moss, I was no longer a 41 year old but a 16 year old tilling the family garden. 

Growing up, my family was part of a co-op of sorts.  There were 3-4 families who all worked together on the garden.  Over the years, the other families stopped but my family continued on.  The warm weather was a signal to us to go out to where the garden was (it was on the property of one of the other co-op families.  They continued to let us garden there after they stopped actively working the garden in return for a small amount of produce) and begin preparing the ground for another season.  We would till and rake the ground.  We would then come out later and begin the planting.  We would grow green beans, peas, potatoes, peppers, tomatoes, squash, zucchinis, carrots, and beets.  After planting (in northern Minnesota that would be Memorial Day weekend), we would go out every two to three days to check progress, weed, and when the time was right to harvest.  The season would end with another tilling, to prepare for the next year.

This process was much more exhausting, even though the area worked was significantly smaller.  Part of this of course is due to age.  Part of this was no doubt due to the fact that the electric tiller is smaller and less effective than the gas tiller I used growing up.  The other part if it was I had never done an actual breaking of ground like that before.  The years gardening growing up I was always working on land already broken.  This spot (you can see tires in the front – it was a garden at some point) has been overgrown with grass since we moved in twelve years ago (has it been that long already?).

I have hopes for this area.  The soil is darker and appears to be richer than what I grew up with, and it’s early in the growing season.  I know since this is the first year it’s tilled for growing it’s going to be difficult.  We’ll see how it goes.

One of these verses is not like others

 

     One thing I mentioned in my last post was that I thought about doing a blog post dealing more in the theological realm.  The reason is Theology and Religion are two things I find very interesting.  For me, it’s not just the idea of looking at/reading/hearing what someone believes, but also the foundation for that belief.  For example, if you believe in a literal 6 day creation, what you use to prove that can be more important than the belief itself.  For those whose basis of life and everything else is only the Bible, it may be comforting to point to something solid as your basis.  The comfort level can go down considerably when you begin to consider the many versions/translations/variations of the Bible currently in print (and online).

     Certain denominations may choose one version over the other (There are ‘King James only’ groups as an example).  If you dare go poking around the different corners of the internet (they’re not dark or bad corners, they just may not be very heavily traveled), there are websites whose sole purpose is upholding or putting down different versions/translations of the Bible.  Apparently, the ‘bad’ version(s) don’t support one or more of their particular theological positions.  How do you view the Bible?  Is it the sole source of your theology?  Or is it a single supporting part of a greater system?

     Why are there so many different versions of the Bible (especially in English)?  One of the simplest explanations is that each version uses a different Greek and/or Hebrew text as the basis of their translation.  Another reason is translating a Greek or Hebrew word differently into English.  Sometimes the difference is a small as an article (‘a’ or ‘an’ instead of ‘the’), or it may be a different word (‘maiden’ instead of ‘virgin’).  Each difference can cause significant theological upheavals, because as we are often told, ‘words matter’.

     Anyway, as an Orthodox Christian, the version of the Old Testament we use is called the Septuagint.  For those who do not know, the Septuagint is a translation of the Old Testament from Hebrew into Greek.  The oldest version found is from the late second century BCE (BC).  This is the text used during Christ’s time.  Most Bibles today use the Masoretic Text for the Old Testament.  This is a Hebrew text of which the oldest is from the sixth century CE (AD).  You can find a number of websites discussing (in great detail) the differences between the Septuagint and the Masoretic text.  There are many who do not use or trust the Septuagint because it is ‘a translation of a translation’.  I’m not a textual critic, so I’m not going to try and defend or attack one school of thought or another. 

     I have found in reading through the Septuagint Old Testament that the differences from the Masoretic text bring entirely new meanings to passages.  There are also times when the Septuagint Old Testament doesn’t match the Masoretic Old Testament.  Sometimes, the Septuagint version has additional text in the verse.  Other times, the verse is completely different.  One interesting difference I found recently has to do with a well known verse in Proverbs.  The verse in question was Proverbs 22:6.  The Masoretic text version has ‘Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.' (King James Version).  The Septuagint version (from the Orthodox Study Bible) has the following for Proverbs 22:6 ‘The rich will rule over the poor.  And servants will lend to their own masters.’  I tried to look through the rest of Proverbs, to see if the verse was in a different place, or perhaps the versions were numbered differently.  I could not find it.

     Why is there the difference between the texts?  Why was the version regarding child training added (or removed depending on your perspective)?  I really don’t have an answer for that.  And I don’t really need to have an answer, as the Bible for me is a single part of a greater theological whole.  These things may pique my interest, and cause me to consider the deeper meanings of the passage, but they do not ‘shake’ my faith, or cause me to doubt what I believe.

Not Just Reading, but Understanding is Fundamental

 

Oh my. What an interesting time we seem to be living in. There appear to be a recent proliferation of concerns about a number of different issues (gun violence/control and economy/taxation are a couple of examples). One thing I have noticed while perusing the many different opinions is the use of the word ‘fundamental’. Whether it’s a fundamental right, or a fundamental liberty, it’s used as part of an argument to bolster an individual’s assertion or position. Maybe it’s just me, but simply describing something as fundamental doesn’t immediately or automatically make it so.  I guess people presume you’ve done the research because they don’t back up this assertion with any evidence.  I may not be from Missouri, but I do tend to follow the state’s motto ‘show me’.

A very recent example of this use of fundamental is the to a certain degree implied argument that people around the world have a fundamental right to homeschool (my children are homeschooled, and I greatly value the opportunity given – full disclosure). I’ve looked at the situation which brought this out. To (greatly) summarize the situation:  a German family began homeschooling their children in 2006, in violation of German law. After being fined (and nothing I found says they paid the fines), and having German authorities come to their house and take their children to public school, they were asked by Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA) to move to the United States in 2008.  Once they arrived they applied for asylum (they had other countries in Europe they could have chosen). The basis of their asylum application was they were being persecuted for homeschooling in accordance with their religious beliefs. The asylum case is now in front of a federal circuit court. An immigration judge in January 2010 granted them asylum, an immigration appeals court judge denied it in May of 2012.  The case is currently in front of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals with oral arguments in April 2013. The United States government is arguing against granting asylum. The government’s argument is: the family isn’t being persecuted or singled out for their religious beliefs by the law, as Germany does not allow anyone to homeschool their children. HSLDA is providing legal representation for the family and puts forward the following counterargument: the family is being persecuted because homeschooling is a matter of individual liberty and is therefore a ‘fundamental right’. Now, I’m no lawyer (and I don’t play one on TV), but the issue here is the application of the asylum law. In short, people are granted asylum if they can demonstrate they are being persecuted for religious reasons or because they belong to a particular social group.

Now, please keep in mind I am a homeschooling father so I am approaching this from a pro-homeschooling perspective. Here is how I see homeschooling involved in this situation: Both the United States and Germany (as well as a number of other countries) have addressed the issue of homeschooing in their laws. The United States allows it, with each individual state applying its own requirements. Germany (I know the German homeschooling law was made in 1938, so please don’t use the Hitler argument. Please?) forbids it. I know the law in my state, and I follow it. Maybe I disagree with it, but I still follow it. I have difficulty believing one of the rights upon which all other rights are built (which is one of the definitions of fundamental) is to homeschool. There may be (I can’t think of any off the top of my head) countries where there is no educational system whatsoever (there are most certainly communities where this is the case).  Are we to provide those communities with homeschooling curriculum, because it’s a fundamental right? That might be akin to that community being Eve, and we are the serpent providing them with the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. It’s an application of our culture and beliefs without consideration of their culture.

Another argument is that homeschooling is essential to freedom of thought. This argument assumes the parents cannot tell their children what the school is teaching them goes against their religious beliefs. I cannot count the number of times my wife or I have commented to our children (either during an event or after) we did not believe something presented because of our religion. We also explained to our children WHY we didn’t believe that idea or concept. Yes, it’s work. It can be difficult. But sooner or later, our children leave us and they will encounter these things through their interactions in society. When we take the time to explain why we disagree with something, we are teaching our children freedom of thought. We are also teaching them logic and apologetics.

Since religion has been introduced as an issue, let me put this forward.  From a religious perspective, the imperative to ‘be subject to the governing authorities’ stated in Romans 13:1 appears to be ignored in this situation. Not paying the fines levied (bad law or not) is not being subject to the governing authorities.  Not only this, but we are to live peaceably with our neighbors.  How peaceable were they being towards their neighbors when they brought the authorities into their neighborhood?  Or with the media attention they brought in with their cause celebre? Before you respond, I know the counterargument is from Acts chapter 5 where Peter tells the Jews they must obey God rather than men.  I haven’t found a passage in the Bible where it commands us to homeschool our children. 

I understand there are those who are concerned that this case shows the U.S. governments ‘anti-homeschooling’ bias and this is a harbinger of coming persecution against American homeschoolers.  As I stated above, the case involves granting asylum, not whether or not one of the questions on a future immigration form will be ‘do you intend to homeschool your children?’ Maybe I’m a Pollyanna, or I’m stupid, but I just don’t see persecution coming because of that particular choice. Maybe because my reason for homeschooling is about the quality of the education my children receive instead of being based on a moral imperative. Please let me reiterate:  I’m thankful for the opportunity and the ability to homeschool, and do not want that taken away.  On the other hand, I’m not going to be a ‘chicken little’ responding with fright just because the government mentions the word ‘education’.  If I did, I will miss situations that are or will be a matter of concern.  But hey, what do I know?

It’s not personal, it’s just politics

 

     It has been over two months since I last put something on this blog.  I wish that I could blame my life and my schedule for my lack of posts, but I can’t.  These two months really been a struggle for me to determine when I should write and what I should write about.  On the one hand, I could go on a somewhat theological tangent.  That would be interesting to me, but I’m not sure anyone else would enjoy it.  On the other hand, I could be like so many other people and rail on about the current state of affairs in this country.  But even with that topic, there are so many possibilities.  One thing that seems to hinder me is:  by the time I finally figure out how I feel and what my true position is about a particular topic or issue (not sure if it’s paralysis by analysis, or truly trying to wade through the nuances), it’s well after the swell of emotion and discussion of that issue, and anything I put together comes off as ‘Johnny come lately’.  But, now I feel called to comment on our current mess dealing  with the economy.  So:  late, early, or on time, here goes nothing (or something, we’ll see when I’m done).  I will be up front and state that I do have a personal stake in this situation, and I am trying to keep the personal out of this post as much as possible.  It is ultimately very difficult, so if I fail at being impartial, you at least know why.

    As I write this, America seems to be on a road similar to what I mentioned with Hostess.  Both sides (and please look it up.  One side may have proposed this madness, but both sides latched on and agreed to it) signed a sort of ‘mutual suicide pact’ for the American economy.  The ‘sequester’ as it has come to be known, was supposed to be something both sides wanted to avoid at all costs.  What we have seen is that this was the case, until both parties saw the opportunity to gain a political advantage.  Now, both side are alternately trying to tell themselves this isn’t as bad as they said, or it is that bad and they’re blaming the other party for the mess.  In the meantime, the rest of the country gets to find out in an ‘up close and personal’ fashion what these arbitrary cuts will mean to both personal and federal/state/local economies (unintended consequences, anyone?) 

     I looked through all this and I have come to the following (somewhat disturbing) conclusion.  This marks (to me and I may be wrong) the first time the politicians and/or government have OVERTLY done something, either through omission or commission, not in the best interest of the country.  It’s finally gotten to the point where scoring political points with their supporters is more important than the good of the country, and they don’t care whether people know it or not.

     I believe this is something we as a country and a society need to ponder.  Now, I will say this is not a ‘throw the bums out’ type of general grumpy comment.  This is more of a ‘wow, have we really gotten/sunk to this point?’ kind of concerned response.  We as a country need to take a serious look at where things are going politically and thoughtfully consider whether or not we like it.  If we don’t, then we need to use the legitimate tools at our disposal to make it known we don’t like where things are and are going.  We also need to start trying to change who we have in government.  Let me state clearly right now, I don’t advocate overthrow or revolution.  I don’t think it’s necessary.

     There, I’ve said my piece.  Now, I’m going to stand back and see what the future holds.