The Rabbi

Deuteronomy 32: 46,7 Torah is your life
so what is the life for the christian?
Jesus>Torah?
God's Word>God's word?
Do Jesus' words become our Torah,
and, as in the OT, the rest of the NT is comment?
But maybe more, John equates Jesus with the living word,
thus his very life, as the prophets, acts out, displays God's message
So, do what he says, and do as he did

Why isn't the bible good enough?
because no one ever reads it
too much counseling
too much theology
too much worship
not enough Jeremiah
not enough Psalms
does anyone read and weep anymore?
does anyone weep and read anymore?
does the church need a prophet?

A great read, though the early history dragged, or perhaps confused, as I was not able to keep all the dynasties straight. Interestingly, Beijing and Washington commonly share the purpose behind their selection as capitals. It's all politics, not economics; keeping both the northerners and the southerners happy requires geographical compromise, same for David's selection of Jerusalem.
The authors captured my attention in three areas: the red guard revolution, the tiananmen square incident, and the current economic boom.
The red guards destroyed, one way or the other, all progressive thought, setting the country back 10 years, if not a whole generation. I am challenged here, how does an organization allow for liberal thought, while concurrently keep the system moving in the "right" direction. To deny questioning dooms to failure, to follow leads to heresy. It's a risky business that our God is in, when he gives responsibility over to man. Yet he does, and somehow we are going in his direction in spite of ourselves.
Li and the others concisely described the tiananmen incident, rebels following in Mao's footsteps but yet murdered by the party; again, the system is always right. We may rebel against others, but you may not rebel against us. It's sad that the negotiators were not able to work out the necessary compromise, so that so many young people did not have to lose their lives. This reminds me of Jesus on the way to cross, no compromise here. There is a lot going on here that needs discussion. Perhaps someday.
The authors fascinated me no end as they transitioned from tiananmen square to prosperity. I guess I missed the glue; how do the two relate? Did the first influence the second? Is China better off now than then? Money, certainly it has filtered down farther than ever, more cars, more toys, more pollution, more corruption. wow reminds me of the good old usa.

Jill Jones describes a, if not the, major civil engineering feat of the 20th century as if writing an adventure novel. It was difficult to put down. At the height of USA railroading the largest, and one of the most powerful corporations in the country, the Pennsylvania Rail Road, could directly access the burgeoning city of Manhattan, but was relegated to use ferries to transport its passengers and goods the final mile from NJ to NY. Conceived by Alexander Cassatt, the enlightened president of the rail road, the project consisted of two tunnels under the Hudson, connecting underground to the largest terminal in the world, and then continuing under the East River onto Long Island, all $100,000,000 privately funded.
The description of the political maneuvering, Tammany's desire for graft that is, reads life a Times report on the Middle East peace process. How the project obtained all necessary permits, without recourse to under the table payments, belies the persistent and effort put forth.
But then the tunnels under the Hudson rose and fell with the tide, scared them to death. Fix or allow to move? Perhaps the heavy trains would overload the tunnels in a matter of several trips; up and down the line the issue was discussed, finally a decision--hardly any data to bear on the issue--go ahead, no collapse. Engineering can be quite suspenseful.
I could go on and on, but it's Jones' coda that makes the book extraordinary. The western half of the project was ill timed; the long island portion remains a success. The car soon replaced the train. The government fought the railroads while subsidizing highways. No wonder no one rides the train. Perhaps someone may a major blunder for which we will all someday pay.

is it I?
why does the rain not fall?
O LORD, are you really god?
if so, where lies your mercy?
are you so small as to react to my sin?
sin remains, do you?

Thus says the LORD
you hypocrite
what boldness in worship, especially from an idolater

But LORD so I have been taught
I listened well, how was I to know?

Thus says the LORD
I cry for my people
tears to rain on them
if they would listen

G-d, hear my plea
in spite of our behavior
we sin, we are yours
forgive
that is who you are

Perhaps the greatest chapter in the book, the entire book that is. I have spent much time here lately, though not yet in Hebrew, as its passion may just overwhelm. The following, several thoughts attempt to understand the relationship among G-d, his people, rebellious though they be, and the prophet, whom G-d stuck in between.

I, Jeremiah, have seen G-d
I, Jeremiah, suffer with my people and because of my people
The drought, of course from G-d, seeks not just to get our attention but to affect our behavior
It has our attention, not our behavior
We cry to G-d
of course he hears, but he does not respond
I, Jeremiah, confess these sins
LORD, we are your people
You brought us up from Egypt
Continually forgave our wilderness complaints
Feed us, clothed us, though we rejected your land
You sent us the corrective prophets, the penitent priests
You let us hear David's heart
learn from Solomon's wisdom
But we became a rebellious house
Baal, Asherah, the Queen of heaven
these gods are ours
Yet we worship you at your house
Our sacrifices go up to you daily
Do not our prayers even now fill your ears?

Rejection, rejection, rejection
I confess LORD our sins
You name, and only your name, lies close to my lips

The master at his best. A must read, although many will not understand, for all in christian leadership--from one perspective, and the marginalized--from the other. The prophet plays a unique role in the biblical story: he is the one who voices the imagined what could be as opposed to the what is. Same old, same old certainly does not represent the prophetic message, rather the representation of the voice of God articulates hope for the disenfranchised--does not deliver the hope, but present it as possible, as real, as if it were, but not yet.

Brueggemann certainly is right on here, as difficult as it sounds, the bible is inspired, not the events that it portrays. He more than most writes this so well. Of course Paul would agree; faith and hope are foundational biblical vocabulary that we claim but in reality do not practice. Take away the words leaves not much concrete to the christian religion. We want proof: see, feel, experience, hear the great testimony. God rather has given us words, with great claims, but only faith in them and hope through them produces.

Ratzinger, aka Pope Benedict 16, writes, this is only the first half, from a stance straddling scholarship and the pew relating the life and purpose of Jesus of Nazareth, the son of God. His familiarity with the work of the Jesus seminar evinces his scholarship, but his desire extends to a broader, less "educated" audience. Therefore within the book lies not just a historical Jesus, one detheologized prior to being recast by the drafters of the church, but the divine son of God, who came to seek, to save, and to set the model for christian living.
Ratzinger's work on the sermon on the mount, both Luke and Matthew's versions, excels, particularly as he interacts with Jacob Neusner's A Rabbi Talks with Jesus.
The book is well worth the time to read. So much so, that it would be interesting in an evangelical setting to examine what he writes toward determining what if anything would not be acceptable. My reading would say most, if not all. Which leads to my next point, it's not the bible that fractures christianity, it's "doctrine," or "theology." Since I am far to unlearned to work in the theology sphere, I will stick with the bible with the result that I can benefit from reading the pope's take on Jesus. Hopefully this does not put me into McLaren's generous orthodoxy camp--he the great ecumenist--but I would rather read Moses and Jeremiah than Calvin or Aquinus.