“Don’t blame me! The virus is called covid-19 not corvid-19.”
Until a few weeks ago the idea that a virus outbreak would close churches was unthinkable in this country, but now it has happened. True, many churches are now trying to meet online but there are many older churchgoers who have no internet connection, and they are the most likely to be the ones most vulnerable with underlying health conditions. The reaction of Christians to the pandemic varies according to their views with Charismatics reciting healing Scriptures, so far without great effect. There were those who claim to be prophets claiming that the epidemic would be broken at Easter/Passover whose claims were then quietly forgotten about when this did not happen. Those who are into eschatology are looking into potential end time scenarios and seeing the virus as an end-time pestilence or look at the draconian measures introduced by governments to control the virus as a prelude to persecution of Christians and the introduction of the “mark of the beast”. Though what non-Christians think of those who give the impression of being gleeful as the death toll rises because they see parallels with the Book of Revelation is a moot point.
However, the crisis has brought about great financial uncertainty which affects those who are Christians as much as the rest. Various financial measures are being drafted to help those caught up in the crisis but many of them are either loans or just deferred payments that will have to be paid back sometime. At the moment money seems to be no object for the Government here when it comes to expenditure to tackle the virus. But what will happen afterwards when the purse-strings will have to be drawn back in. Many businessmen will be saddled with debt and red-tape with little hope of recouping their lost earnings. This might affect those Christians who because of political correctness in the public sector have decided to become entrepreneurs instead. One of the consequences of this is that being in debt might result in their faith being compromised so as not to offend those they owe money to.
Short-term measures may have unexpected long-term consequences. Most people are familiar with the story of Joseph in Egypt coming from prison to being Prime Minister and the reconciliation with his brothers. But there is a postscript about Joseph’s dealings with the Egyptian peasants. The first year of the famine they paid for their food, the second they sold their livestock to the state for food and the third year they sold their land for food. To this day few Egyptian farmers own the land they farm. Instead they farmed the land for Pharaoh giving him a large percentage of the crop. Because the Hebrews were not affected by this they became the cause resentment. It would appear that when they complained to a future Pharaoh, he decided to oppress the Hebrews rather than give the peasants their land back. Was it any coincidence that when the Israelites were to enter the Promised land they were to observe the Year of Jubilee when debts were cancelled and land restored. But no Pharaoh thought to relinquish the power that ownership of the land had given them. After all there was no concept of redemption in the pagan religion of Egypt, it is only the God of the Bible who redeems. So we should not expect our secular authorities to be forgiving of our debts. This may be bad in the West but in those countries where modern slavery is a problem the situation is liable to be much worse. Several Christians charities/churches have set up funds to help those in the severest financial circumstances.
The first steps are now being made to return to normality, though there are many conflicting views as to how this can be safely done. Suffice to say there will be many twists and turns along the way.
David Rose, 2020.
I suspect most people have received gifts they did not appreciate. This year I decide to give the birds that visit my garden a new nyger seed feeder as my original one was getting quite tatty with one of its perches missing and its top held together by glue. So on Christmas Day I filled up the new feeder and put it out. Only to find that the birds that used to feed on the old took one look at it and flew away. They obviously did not appreciate what I believed to be an improved service. True, the weather since Christmas has been relatively mild for the time of year so they are not forced to use the new feeder. Maybe they will return and try again to obtain the seeds from it if there is a cold snap. Until then the variety of birds in my garden has somewhat decreased. Since then there have been a few birds at the feeder but none of the species that were so regular at the old feeder. There have been times when I have considered putting out the old one instead.
At this time of year at Carol Services and other Christmas events the prophesies of Isaiah in chapters 7 and 9. The first being the sign of Immanuel and the second being the one with “for unto us a child is born.” Let us put them in their historical context. In chapter 7 Isaiah confronts King Ahaz of Judah and the prophecy concerning Immanuel is given after Ahaz refuses to ask God for a sign. Isaiah then rebukes him by saying “hear now the house of David! Is it not enough to test the patience of men? Will you test the patience of my God also? Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.” Now Ahaz was one of the bad kings of Judah and because of that we tend to forget about him and concentrate on the good guys whom we can use as role models. So let us step back and consider what else Scripture says about him.
The picture that you see is of a bollard that was hit by a reversing vehicle. It is located at a supermarket, an articulated lorry delivering fresh food was just about to reverse into its delivery bay when a smaller truck, belonging to a laundry, entered the car park and noticing that the other vehicle’s reversing lights were on concentrated avoiding the other vehicle’s route the driver omitted to notice the bollard behind him. In trying to avoid one danger he ran into another resulting in a loud bang. Just like a golfer who hit a ball into a bunker on the right-hand side of the fairway last time he played a hole, over compensates and lands in a bunker on the left instead.
Have you ever noticed that when demons encountered Jesus in the Gospels they actually spoke the truth. Considering that the devil is the father of all lies, there must be a reason for this. Equally, in the book of Job when the devil is summoned into the presence of God, he does not lie. There is obviously something governing this that is not directly referred to in the text. However, I think there is a clue in the wording of the Lord’s prayer where is says “Your will be done on earth as it is in Heaven.” Therefore when Satan was called into God’s presence to discuss Job he was unable to overrule the will of God and therefore had no option but to speak the truth. Equally, when Jesus walked this earth he often said that the kingdom of God (or Heaven) was near. Though humans were not usually aware of this, when demonic forces came into contact with Him the same rule applied, so they had to state that Jesus was “God’s Holy One,” or “the Son of God,” they were unable to deceive people by telling lies about Jesus in his presence. The last thing they wanted to do was to proclaim Jesus as the Messiah, but they could not help themselves when they came into contact with Him. True, Jesus silenced them, but I believe this was more because he was concerned about the crowd’s reaction to their acclamation rather than he was concerned about the demons going on to spout untruths. Jesus knew that the Jews were waiting for a messiah that would fight and overthrow the Roman empire, and on several occasions He had to take steps to avoid being hijacked as a figurehead for a Jewish revolt. Of course once he had moved on they would have been free to lie again if they had not been cast out. Sadly, though, spiritually blind humans who encountered Jesus were not always as obedient as these demons. Such as the time in the synagogue in Nazareth when the people rioted and tried to throw Jesus over a cliff.
When we read 2 Timothy chapter 3 verse 16:- “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,” it seems self-evident to everyone who comes from a churched background. We have heard it said, no doubt, that, of course, when Paul wrote this the Scripture he referred to was just the Old Testament. We should ask ourselves the question:- “Who in Paul’s day would dispute that?” The answer is the Sadducees, who believed that only the Pentateuch or the Torah, as the first five books of the Bible are known, were truly inspired. Paul as a Pharisee had been taught that all of the Old Testament was inspired. The problem was that when Pharisees debated with Sadducees they had to include some quotes from the Torah in order to win their arguments, but in doing that it gave the impression that the Torah was always trumps. But Jesus quoted most from the book of Isaiah (admittedly there is a lot of it to quote from), not from the Pentateuch. However, as the Gentile proportion of believers increased these arguments paled into insignificance. But today there has been a growth in the number of Jewish believers in Jesus, if they have come from a secular background to Christ they do not seem to have much of a problem accepting the New Testament as the inspired Word of God. Others that have been brought up in the “Torah is trumps” mentality seem to have more of a difficulty. They have an affinity to the Judaisers in the early church even if they deny it. Especially, with regards to Paul being the Apostle to the Gentiles, most first century Jews believed that God made Hell for the Gentiles so there was no point in evangelising them, and their modern counterparts ascribe everything to do with Gentile Christianity as being pagan. When other Christians refer to the fact that Christ fulfilled the Law they take as Jesus obeying the Law and living a perfect life as an example of how to live. The idea that in doing so that the New Covenant replaced the Old Covenant is anathema to them because it undermines their distinctive Jewishness. The problem the church has today with this kind of argument is that is so afraid of being accused of antisemitism, that it is does not know how to counter it effectively. Either it goes down the replacement theology route which risks denying the Jewish origins of Christianity, or it becomes too sympathetic and uncritical to anything Jewish and that includes the state of Israel. Just because “God blesses those who bless Israel,” does not mean that we should be blind to its faults.
cairngormmusings 