THE SPIRITUAL STATE OF EGGS AND RABBITS AND WHETHER CHRISTIANS SHOULD CELEBRATE THE PASSOVER

The rabbit gets enough criticism at Easter time, but I thought I'd add the Christmas controversy to the table. Photo by yours truly at Cincinnati Zoo and Botanical Park, Oct. 22.

It's that time of the year... well, one of the times. Let me share three concepts I saw on one FB thread, from different authors:

• Rabbits and Eggs are pagan.
• Rabbits and Eggs are Biblical.
• Christians should observe the Passover, since Jesus did.

If you're a regular reader of the blog, I have at least one installment each year dealing whether Christmas and Easter are holidays Christians should observe. Well, when I saw this, I thought it was time for another.

Anybody besides me crack up (pun unintentional) about the two statements about rabbits and eggs? Both hit the edge of credibility. 

Given, pagans use rabbits and eggs as fertility symbols. But does that mean they're pagan? Uh, no. Who created the rabbits and the eggs? Sorry, but I think it's ridiculous to call rabbits pagans. Same with eggs.

So are they Biblical? Well, if you look above, I gave all the Biblical references that the authors gave on the rabbits and eggs quotes. What? There aren't any Scripture references? No, they didn't give any. A commenter noted that the one who said rabbits and eggs were Biblical gave NO references to prove his point. My hunch is he's one of the troublemakers who make a ridiculous statement to start heated debate and disappears. (By the time I got to it, the comment option had been turned off for that thread.) 

I'm one who prefer using the term "Resurrection Sunday" instead of Easter. There is an instance in the KJV where "Easter" appears in Acts 12:4, but the Greek Word is pascha, the word elsewhere and in all other versions is translated passover. I also don't think Easter eggs and bunnies have a place in the church. However, Paul states that he who observes the day does so to the Lord, and the one who does not observe the day, to the Lord he does not observe it. (Romans 14:6). Why can't we aceept those who disagree? Maybe because we like disputing doubtful things (Jubilee Bible says "doubtful discernment) (Rom. 14:1).

Let's move from Resurrection Sunday to Passover. I read that in the Nicene Council one other item decided on was to separate the dating for Easter from the Passover, in spite of the fact that they're connected together. But should a Christian celebrate the Passover? Or should he abstain? Or is it another of those things that we shouldn't divide over?

I'll definitely go with it not being something to divide over. But let me deal with some arguments.

First, dealing with those who say Christians should observe the Passover. I heard a conversation where someone used 1 Corinthians 5:7-8 to say it commands Christians to observe the feast. Here's the passage: "Therefore purge out the old leaven, that you may be a new lump, since you truly are unleavened. For indeed Christ, our Passover, has been sacrificed for us. Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with unleavened bread of sincerity and truth."

To me, it's obvious it's not talking about the official celebration of Passover and the Feast of Unleavened bread. Thus, it's not a command for Gentile Christians to act like Jews. 

Now, Christians often say that Passover has been replaced with the Eucharist/Communion/The Lord's Supper. Sorry, I don't see that in the text. They are two different events observed differently. Passover is an annual event, starting a week of celebration. Communion is offered with differing frequency. Becky and I both grew up in churches that observed communion weekly. When we got into Baptistic Churches, it was observed on the first Sunday of the month. I attended a church that at first had communion irregularly, but realized it was so rare they celebrated it on the first Sunday. Another decided to go from monthly to quarterly. None of those options are commanded or condemned in Scripture.

A couple of years, though, I was reading through Exodus, and there was something that hit me when God was giving instructions for the Passover (Exodus 12:43-49). Participation was limited to households where all the men have been circumcised. Is that a law we should observe? It does make me question whether Gentile Christians are to observe the Passover. On the other hand, one can try to argue that in the Age of Grace it refers to the circumcision of the heart, though it sounds like the argument of someone who wants to keep the Passover because he has the freedom to.

But I will again put in a plug for Easter caroling. One book suggested it, and I thought it sounds great and uplifiting.

BOOK REVIEW - "CHRISTMAS K-9 PATROL" (DAKOTA K-9 UNIT BOOK 9) BY LYNETTE EASON AND LENORA WORTH

Who has placed a bounty on Dakota K-9 Unit's Tech Specialist Cheyenne Chen? Can her co-worker and friend Jack Donadio and his K-9 keep her safe? Meanwhile, back on the ranch, how will U.S. Marshal Lorelai Danvers and her Austrailian Shephard K-9 partner survive the triple threat of a blizzard, a murderous fugitive, and a crochety widower who isn't sure he wants a pretty law enforcement official interfering as he faces a familiar foe?

As usual, December sees a two-novella edition to give a denouement to Love Inspired Suspense's 8-novel, multi-author K-9 Unit series. "Christmas K-9 Patrol" fills this role for the Dakota K-9 Unit series with "Deadly Christmas Trap" by Lynette Eason and Lenora Worth's "Dangerous Holiday Manhunt." By the way, is it my imagination, or does the first of the two novellas feature the tech analyst? (Well, one of the four I've read technically deals with the rookie sister of the tech, but still...) 

Both stories have their twists and thrills, as well as compelling main characters and adorable K-9s. If you're a mystery lover, neither are who-dun-its, but the first is one where you see the chess game between good girl and bad guy, and the latter has you guessing the motivation until the climax.

The Dakota K-9 Unit was the best series I've read. These stories - especially "Dangerous Holiday Manhunt - seem to be tied only by common characters but not by plot. Still, they are enjoyable, and I recommend both the series and this pair of novellas.
 

BOOK REVIEW AND CRITIQUE - "THE THIRD CONVERSION" (A NOVELETTE) BY R. SCOTT RODIN

 

Were Fundraiser Walter  Rodgers' apprehensions about the new employee he was training relevant? Was the completely different approach Rodgers and the ministry Hands Of Love International promoted something Carl Burns could comprehend, let alone accept?

R. Scott Rodin poured out his heart and convictions in the  novella "The Third Conversion. He clearly had the aim to win the reader over to his conclusions, and he made a good case. Rodin wrote two other novelettes "The Million-Dollar Dime" and "The Seventh Key." He also has written and co-written non-fiction books dealing with the same subject.

The scenario is a worker nearing retirement is training a young man in the fund-rasing part of a Christian ministry, and is more concerned with the development of the lives of the donors to the ministry than on getting sizeable contributions.

This is a thought provoking book. It does have some preachy parts in this book: this novelette is clearly written for a Christian audience. The title "The Three Conversions" is from a quote by Martin Luther: "There are three conversions necessary for every man: the head, the heart, and the purse."

I recommend this book for those looking into fundraising and an overall one-kingdom theology (as opposed to a two kingdom view where an individual has one set of standards for Sunday and another for the rest of the week).

Allow me to also offer up a critique. When reviewing fiction, I usually award the author a five star review, because they have put in a lot of work developing characters, plot, and maybe going a little deeper. However, I struggled reading this book, and partly because there are certain practices usually done that Rodin didn't do. None of this takes away from his theme in this book, but it could be difficult for readers.

The first thing is point of view. I've learned through my studying in writing that the preferred approach is to have a single point of view character. It could be a first person or third person narration, but in the latter, the author would keep everything from the perspective of a character until either the end of a chapter or a line dividing up the chapter. Sometimes, we would see the perspective change from Walt's to Carl's without a dividing line.

A second thing are tagline when people are speaking. You may see tags like "said," "thought," "declared," "questioned," etc. Rodin used these and others. In writing classes, however, I've seen two basic views: 

1. The only acceptable tags are "said" or "asked." Anything else is an unnecessary elaboration.
2. The only acceptable tag is "said." If the sentence ends with a question mark, "asked" is redundant. 

With such a limited choice, writers often use non-verbal tags to help identify the speaker. So you have characters drinking coffee, rolling eyes, scratching their heads, and things like that to make things more interesting. 

One problem I see in Rodin's writing -  a common problem among authors - is telling instead of showing. For example, once Carl says something that suprised himself. What does that look like?

Again, none of these complaints take away from the value of the book. I highly recommend it.

MOVIE REVIEW - "LINCOLN"

 

This is the 13th Steven Spielberg movie I've seen. True, most of the ones I saw were the typical summer blockbusters with this and "Schindler's List" being the only Oscar season historical films I've seen. But I find it one of the most unique and unforgetable. 

First, I left feeling like I just had a history lesson. In High School history, the 13th through 15th amendments were covered basically in a paragraph, leaving me to think these passed post-Civil War. In watching this movie, I realized that it passed Congress as the Civil War was ending, before the Southern states were able to block it. The movie made it clear that Lincoln was trying to end two things (slavery and the War) at the same time without sabotaging the other. 

Second, while there were plenty of characters that could be labeled antagonists, there wasn't anyone who would be designated as a villain, in my opinion. 

Daniel Day-Lewis deservedly won an Oscar, but he had a cast of peers to work with including Sally Fields and Tommy Lee Jones, both of which earned at the least the Oscar nominations they received.

Again, not a typical Spielberg movie. But one I feel better off having watched.

BOOK REVIEW: "DVORAK'S PROPHECY, AND THE VEXED FATE OF BLACK CLASSICAL MUSIC" BY JOSEPH HOROWITZ

 

You might be familiar with Dvorak's Symphony "From The New World" (9th). With luck, you might even be aware that Jeanette Thurber established a National Conservatory to encourage a uniquely American classical music, other than parroting the German style. She considered Czech Antonin Dvorak and Finn Jean Sibelius (composer of Finlandia, which is the music for the hymn "Be Still My Soul"), both cultural nationalists, and selected Dvorak. Besides his "From the New World Symphony," he's best known for His Slovenik Dances, capturing the Bohemian sound of his homeland.

The composer created "From the New World" while in America from 1892-95. The debate is if the 2nd movement Largo was an African American gospel song given a classical arrangement or if Dvorak actually composed which had lyrics set to it. The third movement also had American influence - in this case, native American influence. In New York City, they loved the symphony because of the African American and Native American influence, and in Boston, they hated it for the same reason.

The focus on this book, though, was not on Dvorak's stay here but on the composer's thoughts about the future of classical music in America: "I am now satisfied that the future music of this country must be founded upon what are called the negro melodies. This must be the real foundation of any serious and original school of composition to be develped in the United States....These beautiful and varied themes are the product of the soil. They are American."(p. 7).

Horowitz observes that "Dvorak's prophecy" did not come to pass, and the rest of the book deals with the issue. The classical community did not, for the most part, welcome the African American influence, and musically the African Americans focused more on popular music, including jazz. The author deals with several influences on the culture, such as Frederick Douglas, Mark Twain, and Gershwin.

I found the theme and direction of this book interesting. For those who have an interest in the evolution of music styles, I would highly recommend this book.

WHICH TRANSLATION DO YOU READ? AN ARTIST'S LOOK AT TRANSLATIONS.

 Q. How many English translations of Scripture are there?

How many shouted out, "Too many!"

I'm not going to disagree. But allow me to share my thoughts.

First, let's fly to Fullerton, California of almost 60 years back. I forget when I received it, but I was given a Revised Standard Version from the Disciples of Christ church I attended. I was curious on what "Revised Standard Version" meant, both as individual words and as a combination. I wasn't aware what a translation was, nor was I aware there were any others.

Then, I moved to Skull Valley, and there received a Christian Life New Testament and Psalms, King James Version from Skull Valley Community Church, which was followed by the Gideons visiting the school I attended, where I got another KJV, this time New Testament, Psalms, and Proverbs. 

I'm not sure if it's when I moved from Skull Valley to Prescott and attended a Free Methodist Church, or if it was sometime later, but I then received a Bible that did not use "Bible" in the title, but rather was titled "Good News For Modern Man." I eventually figured out it was a Bible (make that New Testament), and that it had interesting stick figure illustrations. I wasn't aware the real name for the translation was "Today's English Version" (TEV).

Another move, another treanslation. I spent most of Junior High and all of High School in Cottonwood, Arizona, and while there I received first the Living New Testament (titled "Reach Out) and then the whole Bible (or "The Way").  I also picked up a Spanish version of "Good News for Modern Man."

After graduating high school, I spent a year at community college, and mostly studied art and writing, but also took a class on "Literature of the Bible." There were a lot of new things I never heard of (e.g. JEPD method, 2nd Isaiah), but what makes this part of the story is that I received yet another translation, this one being "The New English Bible."

Allow me to interject a thought. I still wasn't clear that the Bible was translated from Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. I didn't really know what the differences between them, let alone if those differences had any affect on theology.

Hallelujah! I started going to Southwestern Conservative Baptist Church. My first sememster included a class titled "Doctrine of Scripture and God," and learned how off the JEPD method was. I learned that the Living Bible was not a translation but a paraphrase. I got introduced to more Bible translations: The pastor of the church I attended did a series on the 23rd Psalm, each week dealing with half a verse, and he selected a different version each week where the translation brought something out of the text for the week. By the way, that Pastor could be called "King James Only. 

When I started, I never heard of the New American Standard or the New International Version, which were fairly recent. In my first year, the New King James Version came out (my KJV Only pastor, unlike most KJV Onlys, had no problem with the NKJV - his concern was more textual than keeping the Thees and Thous). I saw parallel Bibles, and I saw the "New Testament from 26 Translations," which gave the text in the KJV and then shared variations from the other translations.

At this point, though, I looked at translations as an artist. I liked having a lot, so I can compare them. But then I discovered that for the most part, what the text says in Translation A is what it says most of the time in Translations B-Z. As I matured, I realized that's the way it should be. If it was paraphrases, that would be a different story, but translating done right basically agrees.

But why are there so many translations? And how do I find which one to use? 

I'm thankful to Dr. Dennis Wretlind, who taught a class on Biblical Criticism, where I learned about inspiration, canonicity, textual criticism, translations, and Bible tools. On the translation, he gave 5 things to look for.

1. Number of translators. Some are done by a committee, to make sure they have the translation correct. Others are translated by one person (e.g. Ken Taylor's Living Bible). 
2. Text used. This is more an issue for New Testaments. There are two major types of texts - those that resemble the Textus Receptus used for the King James, and those which are based on two nearly complete Greek texts dating from the 300's. The former have more texts, the latter are closer to the original. Most translators take the latter. Reality? No major and no minor doctrine is affected by thse differences.
3. Type of translation. There are formal (word for word) equivalents like the KJV, NKJV, ESV, and NASB. Others are dynamic (thought for thought) eqivalents. A verse to find the difference is Luke 9:44. Formal equivalents say, "Let these words sink into year ears." Dynamic equiavelents are more like "Listen carefully to what I'm saying." Both say the same, but one is more like how we talk today. There are also paraphrases, which the author is putting the text into his own words.
4. Modernity of text. The biggest complaint against the KJV is that me and thou speakest not in the manner our fathers didst speak in sixteen hundred and eleven.
5. Theology of translation. The Geneva Bible was an English version that come out before the King James, but a lot of church leaders felt it was too Calvinistic. More of an issue was when modernism crept into the Church in the 1800's, which is when the number of translations equipped. One example of a verse affected is Isaiah 7:14 - the King James says, "The virgtn shall conceive. The Revised Standard and others read "The young woman shall conceive." There claim is that "young woman" is a more accurate to the text, claiming there was no Hebrew word which meant virgin. The counter is that the original audience saw "young woman" and "virgin" as one and the same. It may sound like it's a textual issue, but belief in the Virgin Birth was all over this.

So now I've focused on a handful of translations when I'm studying: the New King James Version (my go to for almost 45 years), the Legacy Standard Bible, the Christian Standard Bible, the Complete Jewish Bible, and the Jubilee Bible 2000, translated into English and Spanish by a missionary to Columbia, whose goal was to go back to the reformation era.

Thank you for taking the time to read this. Hope you were blessed and that it gave you something to think about.

MOVIE REVIEW - DISNEY'S "THE GREAT MOUSE DETECTIVE"

 

It was 1986, and the summer saw not one Disney cartoon, but two. The latter was the famous (or infamous, depending on your view of it) "The Black Cauldron," the first animated non-musical with a tone quite different than what comes out of the house of the Mouse. 

Squeaking... or speaking of mice, the first of the pair was "The Great Mouse Detective," based on the Basil of Baker Street series written by Eve Titus (books 1-5, published from l58-'82). A little over three decades after the movie came out, Catherine Hapka revived the series with new stories between 2018 and 2020. No, I haven't read any of them... yet.

However, I finally watched one of the Disney movies that fascinated me the most. Two reasons. First was the mystery angle. The other was to hear Vincent Price's voice bring life to Professor Ratigan.

Does this movie reach the ranks of Disney classics like "Snow White," "Bambi, "Peter Pan," or "The Jungle Book?" No. However, I found it enjoyable. I enjoyed seeing the character development in Basil. And Price definitely sounded like he was enjoying that role. (By the way, for side trivia,  the actor associated with Holmes and Vincent Price played in at least two movies together: 1940's "The Tower of London" where Basil Rathbone had the lead, and "Comedy of Terrors" in which Price starred with Peter Lorre as his henchman - Boris Karloff also was in both movies.)

I would recommend this movie.