Stuff Michael Meeks is doing

Chewed mail, it seems Jacob is burning away in the snapshot stakes, excellent.
Back to reconciling gal diffs, sigh; still, could be worse. Committed the first sed job, updated my version - hacked out scads of conflicts.
The Mono project seems to be coming along really nicely, the MSIL emitter is coming along well I understand, operator overloading getting sorted, class handling falling into line, all bringing the possibility of bootstrapping on a free system much closer.
Committed the gal stuff to tag 'gal-2'.
J' phoned up to say Duncan had changed his mind wrt. dinner tonight, so I loose the girl until very late.
Started struggling with python, trying to learn the language, persuade emacs to indent it sensibly, and fix the libglade2 translator. Made glade2 build again.
Spoke to Colin McCormack on the phone about Gnomes, Basics, and Monos - and about his gigabyte scale object database thing, on sourceforge somewhere.
Managed to get the libglade-convert script a lot more up to scratch in several areas, the gnome-terminal dialog now has an almost sensible GtkNotebook. It's lovely to hack on libglade though - very sweet stuff.
Knocked off for some theology and food ! wrote up Gorden's sermon on War; a lengthy read or listen but I found it very rewarding.
We agnoize as to what an appropriate response to this is. The President calls for a 'war' against Terror.
We must surely pray for our those in uniform that God might protect them, strengthen and encourage them and allow them to do what is right. And also to protect them from adding to the wrong by taking yet more innocent life.
The scriptures enjoin us to pray for peace, and so we do. But what does the scripture have to say about this war or indeed any war. What does the Bible say ?
So, everything hinges on the Old Testament, and the exegetes attitude towards it, there being two seemingly equal and opposite errors into which excellent, wonderful Christians have been apt to fall.
- The old testament is virtualy 100% applicable, the 'everything carries over' position. Which further splits into two schools:
  - Palestine is the holy land and
  - America is the holy land - or whatever nation you call home.
- Or, the old testament is virtualy entirely inapplicable to modern warfare.
Firstly, the school of thought that some small chunk of land in the middle East is uniquely 'holy' ground, and thus the ownership of it is non negotiable, The West Bank can never be on the negotiating table. This was the pre-supposition that inspired the crusades 11th->13th Centuries, which eventualy cost ~5 million lives. It began with the offence taken when the Turks took over the holy land.
Exodus 32 was invoked to justify the cleansing of the land, even with the sword. Moses called to his contemporaries when they were wallowing in idolatory and said "Who's on the Lord's side" and the Levites repented, and in the first 'ordination' of what became the priesthood ran among the people and cut down all the unrepentant Israelites. Serious about keeping defilement from the presence of God.
The transferal of the Old Testament precedent willy nilly to the modern day started with the supposition that the 'holy land' was still over there, the holy city still Jerusalem. In Judges 5:23 the people are condemned for not fighting to cleanse the holy land - it's not optional for the people of God.
The problem of course is that that bit of territory in the middle east stopped being the holy land even in the old testament. What makes the land Holy is the presence of the holy God, and the visible manifestation of the holy spirit.
Sinai was originaly mount Zion, but God's spirit went ahead of the people into Jerusalem.
In Ezekiel 10:18 the prophet sees the spirit of God departing from the city and the temple, leaving it defenceless. When the holy spirit leaves, it's no longer the holy land, because he is the one that makes it holy. God promises to be with his people where they are instead.
Jeremiah counsels the Israelites to surrender since God's spirit had left, and they would die by their own sword.
So the question is now what is the holy land? has the kingdom been forfeited ? is there now another Jerusalem to look for ?
Even in our own day although no one is calling for a crusade there are some who have made the same mistake, imagining that some land in the middle east is uniquely holy land, some city that has a right, a title for Israel, for the people of God, that is non negotiable, land that would include parts of the west bank, that must never be put on the negotiating table, because God says it's holy land.
The new testament tells us that there is a holy land, a mount Zion, a city of God - but it isn't there!
In Hebrews 12:18-25 we read But you have come to Mount Zion, to the heavenly Jerusalem, the city of the living God. if you're a Christian the city of God where he lives with his people in his midsts is where we are. ... You have come to God, the judge of all men, to the spirits of rightious men made perfect, to Jesus the mediator of a new covenant
But you say; I want a Zion that can be touched, not this spiritual nonsense; Great ! there is a Zion to fight for, a holy city; the new Jerusalem - problem is, it's coming out of heaven Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth ... I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God Rev 21:1-2. You're welcome to go to battle for that. No defiling presence will be allowed in that city; we'll be thoroughly sanctified then.
Well the other mistake, is not to equate it with something in the middle east, but say no - it's America.
Ever since John Winthrop in 1629 pronounced that the Mass Bay Colony was "the city opon a hill" this has been entrenched in the thinking of many, especialy the Mass Puritans, equating America's body politic with the Israel of old.
Because of that some odd things happened.
Indeed, there are many promises that God makes to Israel that it would be just wonderful to have today.
- God promises his protection over Israel, unless the people sin. Leading to the misguided assumption that somehow he has 'removed his protection' now for whatever reason.
- Exodus 34 promises that whenever God's people would go to worship all the soldiers could leave their fortifications because on those days God would protect the borders without them.
- Here in Massachusets, were convinced of this view would leave their guns at home when they went to Church. Unfortunately the Indians hadn't read those passages, and they didn't seem to hesitate to attack on the sabbath.
- One of the earliest laws was enacted so that you had to bring your musket to church so that at least even if you had faith enough to believe God would protect you the state would overrule that, and your submission to the state would mean we wouldn't all get wiped out.
- Other similar uses of the sword. A law in 1675 dealing with people leaving church in the middle of the service. It was the law, you had to go to church - the sermons were 2-3 hours, as you went out of the door it became just unbearable. So the good commonwealth passed an order to lock the doors, and post marshals at them, guarding them so you couldn't leave.
All of this happens when you have the crazy notion that our nation is Israel. We have to give greater account of the difference between the old and new testaments.
Israel was a Theocracy - America is not.
Jesus said - My kingdom is not of this world, if it were my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place John 18:36. In just saying this, Jesus prohibits us from resorting to the power of the sword to impose biblical precepts on one another, that would have been appropriate in the old testament Israel but are certainly not appropriate now.
The opposite view of course is the one to which many christians are attracted. Nothing, or virtualy nothing carries over.
After all didn't Jesus say to Peter "Put your sword back in it's place ... for all who draw the sword will die by the sword" Matthew 26:52.
It's assumed that nothing carries over, Jesus in his sermon on the mount says I tell you, love your enemies, do good to those that hate you, bless those that curse you, pray for those that mis-treat you ... If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also Matthew 5. and so on.
This seems to tell against an overly facile assumption that everything carries over from the Old Testament, it seems we're being called to a sort of personal pacifism.
Tolstoy argued from this that we should get rid of our judges, magistrates - unless they just forgive, and likewise there must be no armies. An attractive view, but is that the point ?
We have to avoid excessive literalism here as in many other texts. This verse is in the context of passages of if your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away.
We want to know what does he mean ? In the context most commentators have argued that he is condemning not self defence but a spirit of revenge.
Indeed in John 18:22-23 Jesus is struck on the cheek by his captor, and does say here you missed the other one ! but ... why did you strike me did he ask us to do something he didn't ?
Also, it is not asking us to turn our neighbours other cheek, not legislating bystander apathy - if you see your neighbour about to be raped raped; you don't yell to them "turn the other cheek" you intervene because you are to love your neighbour as yourself, and you love a God that loves Justice, and if he does that ought to be exhibited in our passion to see that right be done.
So how are we to enterpret the scriptures on this.
Ultimately both camps are wrong, and both are right. What has confused the issue is the failure to notice what is so unique about the old testament law on war, and particularly a vital distinction that many readers miss.
There are two kinds of wars;
- Holy wars - wars of Infinite Justice and
- Wars of defence - just Just wars.
Every war fought by Israel in the OT. was a holy war, what does that mean ? It does not mean it was for religious reasons ? it doesn't mean that wonderful 'belivers' were getting all worked up about something and said "lets go kill 'em".
A holy war is when God is fighting. As our text (Deuteronomy 20) verse 4 he is the one who goes with you to fight for you against your enemies. It's his war, it is where he goes, because he is behind it and personaly present in it.
It was the norm in the OT to make it clear to everyone that a holy war was being waged because you fight with inferior weapons and reduced man power.
You want a situation where it's David vs. Goliath, (1 Samuel 17) so it's clear that you come against me with sword and spear and javelin, but I come against you in the name of the LORD Almighty...
Israel was prohibited alliances, they didn't want England or anyone else joined with them, because they wanted it clear that the LORD can save whether by many or by few.
When Gideon was called to holy war with initialy 32,000 men against 135,000 enemies, God said you have too many men for me to deliver Midian into their hands Judges 7, there's only a 4:1 disadvantage - we've got to get it up to 35:1 so it's clear it was God's victory.
In Deuteronomy 20 we hear the whittling down, after being reminded that the LORD was going to fight, the officers, the generals the macho men vs. 5 say to the army:
- Anyone who got engaged but not married let him go home
- Anyone who has built a house and not enjoyed it should go home
- Anyone who has planted a vineyard and not enjoyed it's fruit ( 5 years from plant -> enjoy ) should go
- you can almost hear "Anyone who'se favoirite TV program is on tonight" ... We don't need you - go home ! we don't need anyone but God.
- And particularly anyone afraid, should not fight because faith and fear are antithetical.
That is what a holy war looks like.
No-one in their right mind ( you might think ) would try to apply this to today.
As you might know the Childrens Crusade tried in in 1212 AD, all little children, girls and boys age 12 thereabouts. Felt God's call to wipe out the Infidels on the holy sites in the middle east.
They marched defenseless, with no weapons, they came down to southern France and stopped at the shore and expected God to open the waters - but he didn't. Instead Kidnappers were present by the dozens who took them by the thousands and sold them into slavery in Egypt.
See, we're not fighting a holy war; that would have worked fine back in the days of David an Goliath. It's garenteed to fail in our time, other than when we're talking about spiritual warfare, then the weakest of us is a mighty man or woman of God.
In the handout we have the sermon Gordon didn't preach, in which he sets out the distinction between the unique wars that Israel fought (of infinite justice) and other wars.
The Canannites had been sinning for 400 years and the land was ready to vomit out it's inhabitants. He didn't flood them but appointed his people as judges, and though they held no animosity for these people they were to eliminate them, to wipe them out. No terms of peace, any more than a judge offers a murder terms of peace.
It was Israel's job to see to God's justice. It wasn't their idea. How is this any better than a bunch of fringe crazies in some movement of Islam believing that God is happy with them terrorizing the rest of the world and taking innocent life.
To make a parallel this is what it's like; you don't have Moses and Joshua having a little prayer meeting and God speaking to them in their hearts; and us having to believe that God said it.
Instead what you have to have is Allah or God appearing in a pillar of fire, that causes water to divide, that destroys all of it's enemies and utters in all of our hearing his commands and authorises this battle of conquest and dispossesion. Not subjective, objective.
Secondly, you've got to have the pillar of fire be so objective that he feeds you while you're making your way to the battle front, water out of a rock etc. and just to make clear - well if we apply it to the modern situation: if the terrorists had not hijacked planes, but instead had had a prayer meeting at the base of the towers, and a prayer walk around the towers once a day for 6 days and on the 7th day 7 times, and then - to our horror - we saw on live TV the towers collapse without any use of explosive, then, then we better get very serious with God. Then we better repent and listen to the message.
That's what happened at Jerico - to make it clear it wasn't someone's figament of their imagination. That's what wars of judgement were like, and incidentaly no innocent people were killed, no collateral damage. All repentant people saved. Otherwise the fire falls only on the guilty, that's God's judgment, that's what wars of 'infinite justice' look like.
The other kinds of wars are wars of defence, and wars of defence are Just wars if the provocation is just, no. 1, namely self defence period.
No wars of agression were allowed. Verse 1, when you see horses and chariots - the offensive weapons of the ancient world, when you see them you're being attacked. Then you are authorised to carry out just war, a war of self defence.
The prosecution had to be just, only target combatants and their willing acomplices: when you go to attack a city offer terms of peace.
Finally, the objective of Just war in the bible, is not justice, it's peace.
The wars of conquest had justice as their objective, and God is the only one that is able to judge between the nations and authorise such a war - and he isn't doing that now, and he hasn't done that since the conquest of cannaan.
Any other war is a Just war, if it is anything the Bible would approve at all, and if it is a just war, the objective is just the cessation of hostilities.
You don't say "you destroyed one of our cities, we'll have one of yours", you don't say "you took 6500 lives of ours, we'll take 6500 of yours to make it even". Human beings are not capable of exacting justice, and certainly not on their own behalf. When you are a victim, you cannot be the judge.
But we have a God who has the requisite authority and ability to judge, and he will judge between the nations and command peace, even to the ends of the earth.
So what are we do to ? well, it's no comfort to anyone who doesn't believe in God's justice, but if you do - you're great comfort is that God will secure justice in the last day. Nothing has been missed.
Do not repay anyone evil for evil, but be careful to do what is right. In so far as it lies within you, live at peace with everyone, do not take revenge my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, "for it is mine to avenge, I will repay" [says the Lord] (Romans 12).
God's wrath can be counted on. What is our job ? it is to pray for Kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness.(1 Timothy 2)
Pray for the city into which we've been sent in exile (Jeremiah 29) for the peace and prosperity of that city.
We pray for peace, but you say "What good is this !?" - "These terrorists are religious fanatics who will stop at nothing, they hate us !, they think they're doing God a favour when they wipe us out, whom they call Infidels!". Don't you know the story of the apostle Paul ?
Paul started as a religious fanatic, who hated Christians, he thought he was doing God a favour every time he wiped another one off the face of the earth. God turned the enemy of the faith into it's most self sacrificing friend. Even though I was once a blasphemer and persecutor and a violent man, I was shown mercy because I acted in ignorance and unbelief. The grace of our Lord was poured out on me abundantly. Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance, Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners - of whom I am the worst; but for that very reason I was shown mercy, so that in me - the worst of sinners - Christ Jesus might display his unlimited patience, as an example for all those who would believe on him and receive eternal life
You think God can actualy change a personality that radicaly ? from someone given to violence - a religious fanatic, and turn him into an apostle of love. Jesus did it, and so we pray with confidence to the one who places a table before us in the presence of our enemies, and we commit ourselves to lives of those who overcome evil with Good.
Martin Luther King said "If we give into hate we'll be no better than our enemies"
Abraham Lincoln said "The best way to destroy your enemy is to make him your friend".
The LORD God says Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

My content in this blog and associated images / data under images/ and data/ directories are (usually) created by me and (unless obviously labelled otherwise) are licensed under the public domain, and/or if that doesn't float your boat a CC0 license. I encourage linking back (of course) to help people decide for themselves, in context, in the battle for ideas, and I love fixes / improvements / corrections by private mail.

In case it's not painfully obvious: the reflections reflected here are my own; mine, all mine ! and don't reflect the views of Collabora, SUSE, Novell, The Document Foundation, Spaghetti Hurlers (International), or anyone else. It's also important to realise that I'm not in on the Swedish Conspiracy. Occasionally people ask for formal photos for conferences or fun.

Stuff Michael Meeks is doing

2001-10-05: Friday